The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Syndicate contentRSS

What’s Gove really hiding?

The government still has every intention of building plenty of schools, so why the masochism?

Michael Gove, let's be honest, has had better weeks. On Monday, in a rip-roaring speech to the Commons, he announced that he was shelving Labour's £55bn Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme. Around 700 new school projects are far enough advanced to escape the axe -- but 715 more found out they'd no longer be getting the shiny new buildings they thought they would.

To make matters worse, it turned out that the government was a little hazy about exactly which schools were which. Gove made a grovelling apology, but it hasn't made a dent, and now a formidable coalition of Ed Balls and the teaching unions are planning to protest the cuts in parliament with a "Save Our Schools" rally. Even the odd Tory MP might join them.

The odd thing about all this is that Gove hasn't actually spiked plans to rebuild all those schools at all.

A lot of the cancelled projects, admittedly, aren't now going to happen. Those that do will have to wait for the outcome of another review, and are likely to be a less ambitious than anyone had hoped.

But Gove's team recognises that there are still a lot of dilapidated schools out there (not all of them in BSF, they point out). They also know we're going to need a lot more primary-school places in the near future. The government still has every intention of building plenty of schools. It just wants to find ways of spending less money doing it.

If you don't believe me, look at the figures. The amount saved by scrapping those named BSF projects should be somewhere around £7bn. The total cuts in capital spending unveiled alongside Monday's speech were £169m. If they really weren't planning on building any more schools, the deficit hawks should be shouting that first figure from the rooftops.

So, if it isn't quite the disaster it's been reported as, why isn't Gove saying so? Partly it's a reluctance to get anyone's hopes up (many of those schools, after all, really aren't going to happen). Partly, too, it's because it's not yet clear how much money will be left in the pot once the Treasury has had its say.

Some in the school sector are even speculating that it's a political move, to make Gove look tough now and bountiful later.

But the truth, I suspect, is more prosaic. Gove simply misjudged the gleeful tone of his speech. He spent too much time attacking BSF's failings, and not enough explaining his own government's plans. Worst of all, he forgot that there's no sexier headline than, "Tories cancel children's futures."

Jonn Elledge is a journalist covering politics and the public sector. He is currently editor of EducationInvestor magazine.

7 comments

Abby's picture

Gove wont'have much money left I bet. By the time he pays for:
1. Emotional and mental trauma, caused by denial of legitimate expectations, (Labour's promise), by all affected.
2. Emotional trauma caused by wrongfully raising and dashing hope/expectations, (His wrong listing), by all affected
3. illegitimate cancellations of contractual agreements between the councils and schools involved (Labour's promise)
4. contract severance claims - by all affected
5. Payments for consultations, designs, and other works already carried out.
6. Waste of time, energy, miscellanous etc, claims - by all party concerned.

That smirk will definitely be wiped off his face soon, this is a major, major error.

swatantra's picture

Tom Watts summed Gove up about right. And that would go for the lame excuse of the whole Cabinet. They simply haven't a clue about what is going on. More apologies in the offing. The only Minister with any grasp is Terresa May.

chris's picture

Firstly, Gove was playing his part in developing the LibCon narrative of what happened during the past 13 years. Hence, the endless attacks on BSF.

Secondly, the money is being cut to pay for Gove's ideological baby - free (market) schools. He doesn't want to rebuild and run state schools, he wants to pay private companies to do so with some token support from local parents.

henry1911's picture

The logical thing to would have been to announce a short term freeze on specific projects whilst a review is carried out and then present the results of the review with a different approach that is "cheaper" and offers better value for money etc. Reviews were already being undertaken in any event by partnerships for schools.

If the review he's announced comes back and reinstates some of the cancelled schools, it will look as though the opposition to the BSF cuts that Ed Balls is drumming up will have been successful.

Gove couldn't wait to make the announcement which led to the errors, the (in many areas) misplaced criticism of the programme to date and the justified anger that has been generated in schools around the country. BSF is making a difference and its value in changing the lives of pupils and communities now and in the future should have been acknowledged rather than just focus on cost.

For a Government led by an ex PR manager, this is a communications failure that could have been avoided.

Sue Davies's picture

Fantastic to hear some real anger from Tom Watson .... he says that it was Gove's empathetic puppy dog eyes that really did it.

The LP needs to get back to being authentically 'angry' but they are hamstrung by the 'Tory solutions' that Blair/Brown imposed over the past 13 years.

jonn elledge's picture

"Secondly, the money is being cut to pay for Gove's ideological baby - free (market) schools. He doesn't want to rebuild and run state schools, he wants to pay private companies to do so with some token support from local parents."

That's not quite right... Once upon a time the plan was to take 15% of the BSF fund to pay for the free schools, but the Treasury blocked that one. The only funding they've managed to identify for that project is £50m, taken from a fund to pay for school computers.

jie4v7i14's picture

Never mind Gove, what is the whole lot of them hiding?

If this is an example how they are going to carry on, it will be chaos soon. And they will not have North Sea Oil receipts to bankroll their dogma like Thatcher used and abused in the 1980s. It is not looking good, at all.

Latest tweets