Scrapping Building Schools for the Future hurt – but it forced Liverpool to rethink its finances

Light breaks through over Liverpool. Image: Getty.

The Labour mayor of Liverpool on life after Building Schools for the Future.

Eight years ago, I picked up the pieces of our bid to have 24 schools in Liverpool rebuilt or renovated as part of the government’s Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme.

As one of its first acts, the coalition government had scrapped the scheme. The shutters at the Department of Education abruptly came down. Civil servants we had been dealing with stopped returning our calls.

Austerity had already become Whitehall’s official religion and councils simply had to get with the programme. Cuts were coming.

Michael Gove, the then education secretary, appeared on the television and at the dispatch box making light of what, to him, was juicy £55bn slice of departmental spending he could offer up to the Treasury.

The trouble is it came at the expense of the children of Liverpool – and those in dozens of other boroughs – who were left in old, dilapidated and, in many cases, unsafe buildings that had long outlived their purpose. No-one was listening.

Left high and dry, our response was to take matters into our own hands.

We invited our various education partners to sit around the table and thrash out an alternative programme, utilising whatever council funding we could find – and all other government cash we could beg and borrow – to generate our own, localised version of BSF.

The Liverpool Schools Investment Programme was born and over the past decade, £180m has been invested in rebuilding or substantially repairing 24 schools across the city. Around 18,000 pupils in the city are now benefitting from state-of the art classroom facilities, helping with the task of ensuring our children get the best state education possible. For me, it stands as one of my proudest achievements.

However, the broader point is that we have seen public spending delegitimised over the past decade as cuts have hollowed out public services and everything from the benefits system, to the armed forces have felt the effects.


We were originally told ‘the big society’ would fill the gap. Of course, all the jumble sales in the world won’t replace the £444m taken out of our revenue support grant (RSG).

Next year’s spending review – on the back of anaemic growth and the potential shock effects of Brexit – means the situation will get worse, not better. (That’s not even mentioning the total lack of clarity about what happens when the RSG is abolished in 2020.)

There is no reprieve for local authorities, despite Tory-controlled Northamptonshire County Council actually going bust. That’s before we get onto the yawning national financial crisis in adult social care and the £2bn deficit that has opened up in children’s services.

Still, we cannot sit on our hands waiting to be rescued by a friendlier climate in Westminster and have to help ourselves. So that’s what we’re doing.

Our ‘invest to earn’ model sees us relentlessly sweat our assets in order to generate new revenue streams.

Using our capital borrowing powers, we are planning to help Everton football club build a new fit-for-purpose stadium, which will form the centrepiece of a much larger regeneration of 125-acres of our dilapidated north docks area, which have lain dormant since the 1980s. The revenue we will receive, if the deal is agreed – around £7m a year for 25 years – will be put straight back into frontline services.

A new £200m investment programme – again paid for by a mixture of savings and borrowing – will help us deliver a massive step-change in the quality of our roads network.

We have also launched a new municipal housing company, called Foundations, in order to rebalance the housing market in Liverpool. More than two-thirds of the properties in the city are in council tax Band A. This means that, for every one per cent of council tax, we raise just £1.6m. We need a better housing mix across the city to improve the sustainability of our core finances.

Our plans – although ambitious – are also prudent, with auditors from the Local Government Association recently reporting that we have a prudent level of debt and strong internal procedures for managing our finances.

Economic efficiency, then, to deliver social justice. Frankly, we have little choice but to be bold and ambitious in finding practical solutions to the problems that an austerity-led agenda has left us with, as we seek to protect the vulnerable and discharge our broader responsibilities.

For me, though, this journey began with a single, thoughtless swing of the axe from Michael Gove back in 2010.

Joe Anderson is Labour mayor of Liverpool.

 
 
 
 

Tatton MP Esther McVey thinks Leeds is south of Birmingham for some reason

Great hair, though: Esther McVey. Image: Getty.

Earlier this morning, while everyone was focused on the implosion of the Labour party, former work and pensions secretary Esther McVey decided it was the perfect moment to promote her campaign against High Speed 2.

A quick reminder of the route of the proposed high speed rail link. Phase One will run from London to Birmingham. Should Phase Two ever go ahead, it will split just beyond Birmingham to create a y-shaped network, with one arm running to Manchester and the other to Leeds.

The map McVey tweeted this morning suggests that she doesn't know this. But that is, at worst, the seventh worst thing about the map, because, look:

Let’s look at that a big more closely:

Yep. How many things are wrong with it? Let’s count.

1) Manchester is not east of Leeds;

2) Leeds is not south of Birmingham;


3) Both Manchester and Leeds are further from London than Birmingham, rather than, as this map suggests, closer;

4) To get from London to Manchester you kind of have to pass Birmingham, Esther;

5) There is no railway line that runs from London to Leeds to Birmingham because that would be a really stupid way round, what with Leeds being quite a long way north of Birmingham;

6) Should the government decide to boost the north by scrapping Hs2 and improving east-west lines instead, those improved east-west lines will not cross the proposed route of HS2 Phase One because they are quite a long way to the north of it.

Okay I'm going to stop there and get back to staring at the flaming bin fire that we loving call the Labour party. But for the record, Esther: I'm not taking advice on transport policy from anyone who doesn't know where Leeds is.

Jonn Elledge is editor of CityMetric and the assistant editor of the New Statesman. He is on Twitter as @jonnelledge and on Facebook as JonnElledgeWrites.

Want more of this stuff? Follow CityMetric on Twitter or Facebook.