Cowes Enterprise College

Councillors raise concerns over multi-million pound estimates for Cowes Enterprise

Several members of the Isle of Wight council Executive last night (Tuesday) expressed their concerns at the lack of precise detail in relation to the paper presented by member for Children’s Services, Cllr Richard Priest, on Cowes Enterprise College.

The paper, as reported last week, sought to gain approval from Executive members to commit to spending up to £9m on completion and repairs to Cowes Enterprise College.

Estimates not precise enough
Cllrs Stubbings, Bacon, Jordan and Hillard all expressed their concerns at the estimates for the work.

Deputy leader, Cllr Stubbings, highlighted the range of estimates given for essential completion and statutory works being somewhere between £3.4 million to £4.1 million.

He and others agreed the range (£700,000) was far too wide and with the £28m funding gap in mind, they needed more precise figures before committing to the work.

Bacon: “Too far, too fast”
Cllr Bacon added that although he supported the completion of the school project, he questioned whether the council were moving “too far, too fast”.

After almost an hour of debate, with several amendments suggested, it was agreed by Executive members that the decision to commit to the large spends would be deferred until more precise estimates were available.

Utilise existing budget for demolition
In the meantime, funds the council have available to them from the original grant – around £1.5m remaining – would be used to go ahead with the demolition of the old school buildings and essential repairs needed at the new school.

“Moving forward”
The final amendment was agreed as follows:

The existing budget allocation be utilised to progress the project by carrying out the highest priority demolition works and the design works to prepare for project completion. For the avoidance of doubt, not to let the contracts for these works.

However:

  1. The Education Funding Agency (EFA) is formally requested to provide additional capital funding to enable the project to be completed
  2. The decision to allocate further funds be deferred until the current investigations and surveys are completed and therefore more information on the likely cost is available. At that time, this decision be brought forward to the Executive and Full Council as soon as possible.

Dave Burbage, the Managing Director of the Isle of Wight council, reminded members that some of the £1.5m would need to be earmarked in relation to the possible legal action with the developer’s administrators.

All members voted in favour of the amended proposal. Papers for the original amendment can be found below. Click on the full screen icon to see larger version.


Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
79 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Black Dog
7, May 2014 10:12 am

It is about time that this administration woke up to the the GREAT ESTIMATED DEBATE. For years Officers have come up with finger in the air estimates which appear to have no bearing on reality. I will remind them again of the paper that recommended Hampshire to take over our schools http://www.iwight.com/Meetings/committees/mod-council/19-6-13/Paper%20C.pdf Item 40 makes interesting reading and given their estimates the budget is approximately 4 time… Read more »

phil jordan
Reply to  Black Dog
7, May 2014 12:22 pm

black dog: I thought our decision to defer this until we get clear figures for the costs WAS the “waking up” to estimated costs…. but there we are! Some clarification might be helpful though…..? The ‘partnership’ arrangement was a ‘fait accompli’… I’m afraid. Whatever the costs were, or were going to be, it was of little consequence since we were under a Ministerial Directive to enter into… Read more »

Black Dog
Reply to  phil jordan
7, May 2014 4:07 pm

@ Councillor Jordan Clearly you have NOT read the link as it was making a case based on estimated costs projected by the officers HENCE the ESTIMATED DEBATE. Yes it was a ministerial decision however Hampshire was not necessarily the ministerial choice. You and your administration have had more than enough time to fix things. If you took over a business and lets face it the IoW… Read more »

phil jordan
Reply to  Black Dog
7, May 2014 5:34 pm

black dog: I have read the link and indeed was part of the decision process in June 2013. You are misinformed. The Ministerial Directive identified Hampshire and indeed discussions had been going on anyway since early 2013 long before our administration was elected. This is clearly noted in the report. It will take more than a year to solve the problems we inherited. You may wish to… Read more »

derek
Reply to  phil jordan
7, May 2014 6:40 pm

Independents, You were not voted in to keep things secret you were voted in on being open. The public have the right to know.

Black Dog
Reply to  phil jordan
7, May 2014 6:59 pm

@ Councillor Jordan There is absolutely no structure within the ranks of the elected Independent. as my comment suggested you are a group of independents as opposed to an independent group. I think that is clear enough Your very public protest against the Independent Association together with that of councillor Stubbings was a classic display of disunity within the ranks – you know exactly what I mean… Read more »

phil jordan
Reply to  phil jordan
7, May 2014 9:38 pm

black dog: I understand that you believe there is no structure but without any attempt at expressing why that is, it is very difficult to understand just exactly what you are referring to. I see a very clear structure, by the way. We have a Leader, we have a Deputy Leader, we have Executive Members with specific portfolio roles and responsibilities. We operate without a whip and… Read more »

tryme
Reply to  Black Dog
7, May 2014 6:19 pm

Your forbearance in the face of such naivety, (fix the Council in a year? Easy-peasy!), is admirable, Cllr Jordan.

Black Dog
Reply to  tryme
8, May 2014 1:16 am

The fix is not possible in a year, the opportunity to clear the decks within six months was missed and regrettably now lost as the officers have resumed control. Contracts like the PFI should have been examined and controls set in place, as opposed to the open cheque book policy that appears to follow budget guidelines. I have major concerns about he Waste Contract which is up… Read more »

peaceful_life
Reply to  Black Dog
8, May 2014 12:01 pm

@Black dog.

You see this statement from you here….

‘ the IoW council is a £300 million pound plus business’

That’s the problem.

stephen
Reply to  phil jordan
7, May 2014 4:30 pm

Surely there is an asbestos register for all the building on this site.

Or is that something else that ‘slipped through?’

milly
7, May 2014 11:37 am

Told you so, they are going to pay it. No more consultation if it affects the decision. If the experts and politicians etc. are left in charge the taxpayer will foot the bill. Decision making and initiative has got to change. It has to come from below and not top down, people have to take a stand and step up to the mark and develop the confidence… Read more »

esmeweatherwax
7, May 2014 1:31 pm

Whilst I am sure that this is a silly question, but has anyone asked the officers and members in post at the time whether or not they can help identify records related to this project, as I am sure there would have been comprehensive survey documentation related to the old school to enable Pihl to quote in the first place.

milly
7, May 2014 2:23 pm

I’m afraid deferring and delaying is not saying no, Phil. A decision has to be taken on behalf of islanders and taxpayers. The Partnership arrangement with Hampshire has always been a wrong decision and can be rescinded even now. We might get responsibility from Hampshire but we do not have a democratic say over it and what kind of responsibility is it if we have to meet… Read more »

derek
Reply to  milly
7, May 2014 4:04 pm

Yes I agree milly.Do not forget the give away to Ormiston Academy.

phil jordan
Reply to  milly
7, May 2014 10:19 pm

Milly: I am afraid I absolutely disagree with you about Hampshire. The truth is we had neither the capacity nor the expertise to begin with sorting out the educational mess left by the previous administration. I have read the letter from the Minister personally. There was no doubt about what would have happened had we not agreed to work out a partnership agreement (with Hampshire). None whatsoever.… Read more »

tryme
Reply to  phil jordan
7, May 2014 10:30 pm

Thank goodness we have people of good calibre in office, making intelligent and brave decisions, facing up to realities on our behalf and knowing that, despite the criticism they will always get from some, they have a duty to do the right thing regardless.

derek
Reply to  phil jordan
8, May 2014 6:06 am

So the Council Taxpayer has to pay for CEC to be given away to Ormiston Academy.

Cynic
Reply to  derek
8, May 2014 8:26 am

Yes. The privatisation of education (aka “the Academy system”) works like this: 1. the taxpayer refurbishes school buildings and then hands the freehold (note freehold) over to a so-called trust gratis. 2. Subsequently the taxpayer funds the day-to-day operation of the Academy. 3. the “Trust” is under no obligation to retain the school buildings and land and can sell them for development purposes later (after obtaining the… Read more »

milly
8, May 2014 12:36 am

I am absolutely staggered at the lack of faith in the expertise of our educationalists and teachers on this island. What you talk about is capitulation.The history of learning on the Isle of Wight is not all about crisis and disaster.I suggest you ask our older teachers and their union about what has been achieved. The attack on our education, its undermining, has always come from outside.… Read more »

phil jordan
Reply to  milly
8, May 2014 8:42 pm

milly: The crisis at CEC is also to do with the actual building…. which, in turn, I’m afraid, also impacts the ability to teach within it. But, more importantly, please do follow the link both Steve and I have posted some way below here, which will take you to the Ministerial Directive from June 2013 (about 6 weeks after we were elected)and which is very clear about… Read more »

Black Dog
8, May 2014 1:00 am

Regrettably for me Councillor Jordan displays all the classic signs of denial and I now regret voting for the Independents last year. I repeat again the administration is a group of independents and not an Independent Group who are in denial because they seem incapable of delivering and find it easy to play the blame game. This administration has missed and squandered the opportunity to make a… Read more »

tryme
Reply to  Black Dog
8, May 2014 8:03 am

I’m afraid, Black Dog, that you show “all the classic signs” of not letting the facts in Cllr Jordan’s posts here, get in the way of your well-worn assertions. Anyone can see that the Independents are absolutely right to point out to us what things they are legally incapable of changing because the previous administration entered the Island into binding contracts before they left office. “Funny that”.… Read more »

Black Dog
Reply to  tryme
8, May 2014 10:03 am

Facts what facts? All I hear is the same old phrases trotted out all the time. “We inherited problems, we have committees, we have structures, etc.” I personally do not want to be reminded of what I already know I want to see what you are doing about it. Lets face it given the inherited situation was so bad that the only way is up and yet… Read more »

tryme
Reply to  Black Dog
8, May 2014 10:22 am

If only the Indies would emulate your own collegial style, Black Dog!

I too am looking forward to further new decisions and contracts made by the current administration. I don’t expect them to be super-human, but I have come to expect them to behave intelligently, (a new experience after the last lot, and one that still feels novel to me).

milly
8, May 2014 5:03 pm

It is interesting why the Tories are so bad with education issues and why all of the blame for bad decisions is not just on Pugh who followed Tory privatisation policy supported by the state (OFSTED). Turner was an education advisor to the previous Conservative Government and founded the Grant Maintained Schools Foundation which he ran from 1988–1997. In 2000, he worked for the Labour-controlled London Borough… Read more »

tryme
Reply to  milly
8, May 2014 6:06 pm

What an unpleasant reference to Cllr Priest.

Paleo
Reply to  tryme
9, May 2014 12:43 pm

Though quite a good band…

steve s
8, May 2014 5:28 pm

Milly
We had no choice but to ‘go along with it’. As Phil has explained elsewhere (above?) it was a Ministerial directive, the Government TOLD us to enter into a partnership arrangement with Hampshire.
Chris Whitehouse doesn’t preside over anything. ( Except, I suppose, Whitehouse Consultancy, based in London)

milly
8, May 2014 5:59 pm

Thanks Steve, Phil Jordan said employed – you say TOLD. I feel that you need to explain how this directive works. The Government, under what powers or legislation, can tell an authority to enter into a partnership without question? I do not believe this to be the case, why not Sussex? Why not a private company? By implication being told and having a directive suggests that you… Read more »

milly
8, May 2014 6:05 pm

The use of the word ‘presides’ is probably the wrong word as you say, but he thinks he does. I don’t understand how he is there. It looks like he is pulling the strings.

derek
Reply to  milly
8, May 2014 6:23 pm

Steve,Do IW Taxpayers have to pay Hampshire for this service now we are employing them?

steve s
Reply to  derek
8, May 2014 6:52 pm

Derek.
Yes we do. Just as we would pay anybody else undertaking work on our behalf.

derek
Reply to  steve s
8, May 2014 7:03 pm

Thanks Steve. So the Government has told IWC to use more IW Taxpayers money on employing this service from Hampshire.

steve s
Reply to  derek
8, May 2014 7:06 pm

Yes. Notwithstanding the fact that we would have had to pay ourselves to do it if we had the capacity and the expertise. Clearly, the Government decided that we didn’t.

retired Hack
Reply to  milly
8, May 2014 7:37 pm

That’s exactly how Cllr Whitehouse wants it to look. It irritates me profoundly that only some, rather than all, members of the administration are prepared to put him firmly in his place.

retired Hack
Reply to  retired Hack
8, May 2014 7:39 pm

(that was in reply to Milly apropos “presiding”)

tryme
Reply to  milly
8, May 2014 9:58 pm

I haven’t seen photos of CW with Cllr Priest for some while now, and it seems to me some action must have been taken to prevent him muscling in on the education policy scene. That was giving him a platform to say ‘I’m the new face of Tories on the Island, I reject the policies of the last administration, vote for the new generation of Tories next… Read more »

Stewart Blackmore
8, May 2014 6:36 pm

Any misunderstanding could be cleared up very quickly simply by publishing the letter.

Stewart Blackmore
Reply to  steve s
8, May 2014 11:02 pm

Many thanks Steve, it appears pretty clear to me. Having read it very carefully I would suggest that the only way that it could have been challenged would be by means of Judicial Review arguing that the Secretary of State overstepped his powers, and that would be a very risky step, especially considering the IW Council’s history with JRs. The most disgraceful aspect of this is the… Read more »

milly
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
9, May 2014 12:39 am

Thanks Stewart, now we’re getting somewhere!!

derek
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
9, May 2014 5:48 am

So you can challenge this.

phil jordan
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
9, May 2014 9:04 am

Stewart Blackmore: ….and therein lies the very serious consideration that we, as Councillors, have to confront. Do we vote to borrow the money to finish this building (albeit we are also trying to get financial assistance through the EFA) and all of the wider implications that may well bring – such as not having any further money to spend on other school buildings across the Island –… Read more »

Stewart Blackmore
Reply to  phil jordan
9, May 2014 11:39 am

Phil, I think that the first thing that needs to be established, always bearing in mind that further borrowings will have to be paid by the taxpayer in the end, is whether the CEC is actually needed, or was it purely a (horrendously expensive) vanity exercise by the Tory administration. It seems that there is, at the very least, a case for no further schools to be… Read more »

steve s
8, May 2014 6:48 pm

It was covered here on OTW June 13 last year.

retired Hack
Reply to  steve s
8, May 2014 7:41 pm

It’s unsurprising that people are confused about how Hampshire came to be involved, because the Pugh administration tried to dress it up as something which was optional. It wasn’t, and the fact that it wasn’t was exposed (eventually) at the time.

steve s
8, May 2014 7:40 pm

The letter is available as an appendix (A) to the Committee Report Paper C to Full Council and Cabinet of 19 June 2013.
Sorry, I couldn’t embed the link.

phil jordan
Reply to  steve s
8, May 2014 8:13 pm

Here is the full version of the letter which is in the public domain and has been for 10 months. You will see the extent of the *Directive* and the powers the Minister has to implement such Directive. http://www.iwight.com/Meetings/committees/mod-council/19-6-13/Paper%20C%20-%20Appendix%20A.pdf I hope this not only helps but satisfies those who want to suggest this administration had any ‘wriggle’ room in this matter. I suggest all those who doubt… Read more »

steve s
8, May 2014 8:28 pm

Ah, it’s turned up now. :-$

milly
8, May 2014 8:28 pm

It is clear that this directive is arbitrary and dictatorial. The Act under which it was supposed to be invoked is in fact a misinterpretation and misapplication of a 1996 Labour Government legislation.The question remains as to why the arrangement was easily accepted. It can be argued in hindsight that the present Council had only been in position for a month and the pressure was indeed profound.… Read more »

phil jordan
Reply to  milly
8, May 2014 8:52 pm

Milly:

Please do get real…..

What on earth does …

“the direction is in conflict with the basic democratic rights of the population and no Act can contain in it violation of the fundamental principles” actually mean?

Are you suggesting…….Anarchy!!!!!

martin william wareham
Reply to  phil jordan
8, May 2014 8:59 pm

Milly you have lost the plot and I Hope your reference to CLLR Priest as Judas is removed.

milly
Reply to  martin william wareham
9, May 2014 12:52 am

It means “sell out”, Martin.

milly
Reply to  phil jordan
8, May 2014 9:16 pm

I have read the letter, thanks to Steve showing us. But you should not read a suggestion of challenge to something in law or not as anarchy. I am not suggesting that you break the law, like secondary pickets, but your reaction is hysterical. Like most I did not know about this act and the obvious affect it has had on you emotionally but don’t lie down… Read more »

tryme
Reply to  phil jordan
8, May 2014 9:20 pm

… and using the word “slyly” about hims as well.

milly
Reply to  phil jordan
9, May 2014 12:49 am

No wonder politicians are losing the trust of the electorate and are out of touch. Making accusations like “anarchy” when you suggest something different.

tryme
Reply to  milly
9, May 2014 1:02 am

And after all the time and effort Cllr Jordan has put into picking up your points!

By his obviously jovial “Anarchy!!!!!”, I took it he meant this would be the picture if they’d refused to abide by the Direction from Westminster, as seemed to be your preferred option.

peaceful_life
Reply to  phil jordan
9, May 2014 1:55 am

@Phil

Etymology for ‘anarchy’.

‘1530s, from French anarchie or directly from Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek anarkhia “lack of a leader, the state of people without a government” (in Athens, used of the Year of Thirty Tyrants, 404 B.C., when there was no archon), noun of state from anarkhos “rulerless,” from an- “without” (see an- (1)) + arkhos “leader” (see archon)’

Essentially a lack of ‘rulers’…not rules.

phil jordan
Reply to  peaceful_life
9, May 2014 8:34 am

peaceful_life:

Very happy to accept your clarification… it suits my wistful, tongue in cheek use of the word admirably. Thank you.

tryme
Reply to  milly
8, May 2014 9:16 pm

I know where my money is, for sounding “dictatorial”!

milly
8, May 2014 9:03 pm

I would like to also turn attention in this debate to the notion of expertise and capacity mentioned by Phil Jordan.This is probably behind the feeling that somehow we are inadequate on the Isle of Wight and cannot cope. The view is that the island is somehow backward or incompetent these days.I simply cannot concur with this view and undermines our present teachers and is a vote… Read more »

steephilljack
Reply to  milly
8, May 2014 9:12 pm

I vote that Milly takes the government to the High Court on this one and gets it sorted asap.
If that fails then the European Court of Human Rights will still be available…as least until 23rd May 2014. Go for it Milly !

tryme
Reply to  steephilljack
9, May 2014 9:48 am

Some kind of a wuss are you, steephilljack? Get those guns trained on Portsmouth now!

phil jordan
Reply to  milly
8, May 2014 9:15 pm

Milly: what happened after 2000….? Well, a few years later we elected a conservative administration for eight years…that’s what happened! …and history will define that forever. I’d rather not get into an educationalist debate frankly. It is not my portfolio and I am not an expert either. Clearly, as a general note, had we had capacity and expertise leading up to 2013 (say, from 2005…?) we would… Read more »

milly
Reply to  phil jordan
8, May 2014 9:32 pm

And herein lies your problem. If we are to accept that there is a management issue the question is, How do we resolve that issue? Again it is about faith in your own people. Inside the council we had to get rid of officers, not all,some on 6 figure salaries, we seem to keep some of them and rely on them. The Conservatives say that you cannot… Read more »

Albert Street
Reply to  milly
9, May 2014 10:53 am

@ Milly I have been reading your posts with interest and believe you are absolutely right. Keep going and do not be brow beaten by councillors Stubbings and Jordan. The people who know how to fix things are at the coal face and not in county hall, Hampshire (who apparently also have schoole in special measures) or with the govenors like Fiddler and formerly Wells. There is… Read more »

sam salt
Reply to  milly
9, May 2014 10:05 am

Milly, the Island is backward and our Council’s incompetent and has been for as long as I can remember. Sorry Independents you seem to be going down the same old route as the Conservatives, Island First and Libs before you. You said you would be transparent and open, you have not been and are not being. Estelle Morris was wrong in 2000 to say our schools were… Read more »

tryme
9, May 2014 10:18 am

Jalo, (do you mind that abbreviation?), you have set out your point of view with clarity and reason, so I would be especially interested in why you would say to Indies “You said you would be transparent and open, you have not been and are not being”. Specifically, regarding which matters?

sam salt
Reply to  tryme
9, May 2014 11:20 am

Of course I do not mind being called Jalo, it is better than some names I have been called in my time. Have you read the IWCP today Tryme? If so you would see an article on the front page and a follow up letter in the letter’s section from a “trouble shooter” brought into CEC. It is frightening reading and now Mr Pugh seems to be… Read more »

tryme
Reply to  sam salt
9, May 2014 11:34 am

Thank you Jalo. I’d forgotten it’s Friday, so CP here I come! I see what you mean, and I hope Cllr Jordan or Stubbings responds here to what you outline. You also make it clear (to those who might have taken it differently) that you are putting the weight of misdemeanour in the proper quarters, and it is making clear what happened in previous times that you… Read more »

Black Dog
Reply to  sam salt
9, May 2014 11:41 am

Spot on Just a Little One, you have hit the nail right on the head. I do not know who the trouble shooter is, it almost does not matter what really matters is what is his his/her brief and who wrote it. If it like anything like the consultations of the past it will be written around a pre determined answer if drafted by any of the… Read more »

tryme
Reply to  Black Dog
9, May 2014 11:50 am

As long as everyone is clear this is not a case of ‘a plague on both your houses’, resulting in throwing out the Indies for something they had nothing to do with! And replacing them with the thoroughly discredited old shower. The Indies are simply the poor so-and-sos who have had to clear up the mess *as well as* put into action a horrendous new workload! Not… Read more »

sam salt
Reply to  tryme
9, May 2014 1:19 pm

The fear Tryme is that rumours are going around already that our new Council is proving inadequate in certain circles. There is talk of us loosing a council completely and being merged with Hampshire. Unless the Indie’s are decisive and make some awkward decisions I fear these rumours could become more than just rumours. Yes the poor so-and-sos inherited a bag of worms however a year in… Read more »

tryme
Reply to  tryme
9, May 2014 1:34 pm

Well, life is full of rumours about all sorts of things, Jalo, and many of those rumours will be hares deliberately set off by very much vested and disgruntled interests, I daresay. We could easily confuse an intelligently considered approach with ‘dithering’. But sometimes, megaphone diplomacy is no diplomacy at all, and just prevents happening the most beneficial way forward for everyone, (including pupils). I have no… Read more »

phil jordan
Reply to  tryme
9, May 2014 3:05 pm

Jalo: I truthfully do not think that deferring this decision, because we want to be informed EXACTLY how much the costs of finishing this project will be, to be dithering…. Indeed, we have actually demonstrated that we are not prepared to just nod things through on the basis that there is a financial gap estimate approaching £5M. The decision we took does demonstrate that we are approaching… Read more »

sam salt
Reply to  sam salt
9, May 2014 4:03 pm

@ Phil, thank you for getting back to me. I fear I did not make myself clear when I was talking of dithering. I was talking of more than one issue and the Executive decision re spending more monies on CEC was not in the forefront of my thoughts. My dithering referred to a proper investigation as to the issues with CEC particularly as it appears to… Read more »

phil jordan
Reply to  sam salt
9, May 2014 5:51 pm

Jalo; You are most welcome. I also thank you for your efforts to engage in honest debate about important issues… May I say, that prior to May 2013 I also was a member of the public (so to speak) and remember very well being unable to discuss with elected members about issues that were very important (especially social care) to the point where replies to my enquiries… Read more »

tryme
9, May 2014 11:24 pm

I imagine I sense a stunned silence among us, after reading the CP today. Looking back over the OTW archive (briefly), I see that in November 2010 David Pugh was ‘breaking the ground’ in a ceremony at the site for the CEC-to-be. A poster at the time wrote “Does anyone know if “Building Schools for the Future Scheme” pays the whole amount [to fund the CEC] or… Read more »