|
|
 |
| |
‘BACKROOM DEAL' FOR NEW SCHOOL
UCL in successful bid to sponsor borough’s first city academy
UNIVERSITY College London was last night (Wednesday) handed the keys to Camden’s first city academy in a decision mired in controversy.
Even by the admission of a senior Conservative councillor who helped make the final choice of sponsor, the manner in which the university took control of the borough’s flagship education project to build a new school in Adelaide Road, Swiss Cottage, resembled “a backroom deal”.
And only hours before the choice was announced at a cabinet meeting, Camden was warned that it could end up defending its final decision in the High Court, if it was found that UCL had been unfairly promoted as a preferred sponsor.
UCL has been courting the Town Hall for two years and took the hardline stance of threatening to withdraw its offer completely and look elsewhere, insisting that it was chosen without having to go through the trial and scrutiny of an open competition.
Its so-called ‘vision’ statement was released only at the end of last month while UCL provost Malcolm Grant has been notably absent from public discussions on the plans and turned down a request for an interview from the New Journal.
In the eyes of campaigners fighting for the new school to be a traditional comprehensive – free from any outside sponsorship whatsoever – senior councillors crumbled in the face of UCL’s demands and rashly snatched at the offer from one of academia’s big hitters without genuninely considering the alternatives.
If a competition had been held, Camden could have submitted a bid for a community school and, like the only real test case in neighbouring Haringey, may well have proved that what the public really wanted was another state school.
It would have also given the Church of England, which controls a third of Camden’s primary schools and has thousands of supporters who have already signed a petition in support, the chance to make its case. It has prepared a dossier of examples in which angry Church leaders feel they have been sidelined and ignored over the last 12 months.
Not one of the Liberal Democrat and Conservative cabinet in charge at the Town Hall voted in favour of a competition last night. Many said that the offer from UCL was too attractive to risk.
The closest any of them came to dissent was Conservative councillor Mike Greene who said that he was only reluctantly approving the choice of UCL.
He said: “I am personally and politically geared towards the idea of competition and against backroom deals or what appear to be backroom deals, which this could have the appearance of.”
Cllr Greene made little attempt to disguise his concern for the process, warning that there had not been a “level playing field” and that UCL’s negotiating stance could fairly be described as “holding a gun to the council’s head”.
But, like all of his colleagues, he said that he was concerned that Camden could end up in a worse position if it delayed its decision.
The decision is billed as only an ‘indicative’ and in theory it could be reversed at a future meeting in October – but in reality last night’s (Wednesday’s) decision will more or less put in train UCL’s takeover of the project.
The only major stumbling block for the council now could be a legal challenge, the full seriousness of which was only becoming apparent yesterday afternoon. Lawyers acting on behalf of three parents sent a letter to Camden chief executive Moira Gibb, preparing the ground for a possible judical review on the basis that Camden’s consultation was skewed in favour of UCL. The letter – filed by Leigh Day and Co, recently seen tangling with the council over the King’s Cross redevelopment – said the Town Hall may have acted illegally by promoting UCL as a preferred sponsor.
Fiona Dorman, from the campaign for a Church school, said after the meeting: “It was clear that they had already made up their minds. Backroom deals and guns to the head, these are strong terms.”
As the row over sponsorship took centre stage in the council chamber last night, there was less attention on what will happen to Frank Barnes school for deaf children – the site of the planned new school – or how families in the south of the borough will be helped out in their search for secondary places for their children. Both debates are far from over and are likely to run and run. |
 |
|
| |
| Your Comments: |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
