Friday 24 November 2017
The Committee for Education, Sport & Culture is dismayed at the decision by Policy & Resources not to schedule the recommendations for the Transformation of Secondary and Post-16 Education for debate at the December States Meeting.
'I am very disappointed that despite specifically requesting that our policy letter be prioritised for debate at the December 2017 States meeting, the Policy and Resources Committee has recommended that it be deferred until January', said Deputy Paul Le Pelley.
'Far from reducing risk as Deputy Trott claims, this additional five-week delay will add significant further risk and uncertainty. The Committee is very concerned that delaying debate until January will have far reaching consequences beyond those envisaged by P&R.
'Far from ensuring value for money from the £93,000 funding for the provision of information and modelling of a two-school option as Deputy Trott suggests, this delay could end up costing the Guernsey tax payer much much more.
'The Committee is very concerned that a January debate, which is supported by P&R, risks missing key school holiday periods in the construction schedule for the new secondary school. We have carefully planned how we will move to our new structure and what this will mean for each year group of children currently in our schools. Key to this transition is the provision of the new school being built on the La Mare de Carteret site and it being ready to open in September 2021. The construction programme is at risk if the debate moves to the January meeting. Any delay in the decision beyond December delivers an unrealistic construction programme which is high risk and could lead to inflated prices. A further delay will mean pupils will have to move later and temporary accommodation on the La Mare de Carteret site would be required at considerable additional cost that is not included in our funding request at the moment. Our contingency plan would be deployed at the outset. The other alternative is to change the catchment areas twice with a less smooth transition for learners and consequent negative impact on educational outcomes, which we would not want to do.
'It's difficult to estimate but these additional costs could be in the order of £3 to 4m
'Parents need a final decision so that they can feel reassured that they will know what this means for their child's education and which school their child will attend. Children in Year 6 will be sitting their 11+ test papers in January, the first paper potentially just the day before the debate starts with the second paper a week later, and have to finalise their school choices by early February. Many parents have expressed concern that they don't know whether they want their child to sit the test papers or not because they don't know what's going to happen. They quite rightly want to have all the information available, including a States' decision, prior to the 11 + test dates. This won't be possible if the debate is deferred until January.
'The uncertainty for staff could lead to difficulties with recruitment and retention. It is well known that people, not buildings, are the main determinants of educational success. It may only be the Christmas holidays to Deputy Trott but for many teachers it's the perfect time to see what jobs and opportunities might be out there for September 2018. Not only could this continued uncertainty see good teachers leave our service it may also put off others applying for jobs here. Staff costs will inevitably need to increase through this period of uncertainty.
'I would like to confirm to members of the public that we held a workshop with all States Members in January 2017 to ask whether they wanted the two school model (and several other options) worked up in more detail. The view at that meeting, by a large majority, was that the two school model should not be considered further. We published our proposals almost five months ago on 5th July, so there has been plenty of time to prepare amendments. We have kept to the States resolution and have delivered our proposals on time and as promised.
'The Committee had already delayed publishing its policy letter to allow deputies more time to develop alternative proposals. We originally planned to bring forward our recommendations to the November meeting but reluctantly agreed to delay this until December following a request at a meeting on 22 September from the group proposing an alternative two-school model,' said Deputy Le Pelley.
'We have provided as much information as possible to the Deputies preparing the amendment on the two school model without further detail of their proposals. They agreed the brief for the £93,000 feasibility research into two 11-18 schools with two sixth forms, although I believe they haven't liked some of the results, particularly the financial implications. Another month will not change this. The uncertainty for our children and young people, parents and staff has gone on for too long; it's time to make a decision. Our recommendations optimise educational outcomes for our children and young people and also fulfil the existing States resolutions,' said Deputy Le Pelley.
'I don't feel that I'm over-stating it when I say that another five weeks won't make the huge challenges presented by a two-school model any easier to overcome.
'We will do everything in our power to try to ensure that debate goes ahead in December as planned and that this debate is as well-informed as it can be.'
