Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of
the safety of school buildings, particularly in relation to the
use of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete, and what action
they are taking to address (1) current safety issues, and (2) any
disruption to pupils’ education caused by unsafe school
buildings.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for
Education () (Con)
My Lords, safe and well-maintained school buildings are a
priority. We are actively working with the sector to help
identify reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete, or RAAC. If RAAC
is suspected, we commission professionals to verify its presence
and assess its condition. We support schools, including with
capital funding, in measures to ensure that it does not pose any
immediate risk and to minimise disruption based on professional
advice.
(Lab)
My Lords, I thank the Minister for her Answer, but the Government
have already admitted that current funding will not be enough to
make all schools safe. Will she tell us how long children,
parents and school staff will have to wait for schools to be made
safe once the data on their condition is finally released?
(Con)
I want to be absolutely clear to the noble Baroness and the House
that the department is not aware of any child or member of staff
being in a school which poses an imminent safety risk. We are
working as fast as is humanly possible to identify RAAC across
the school estate. We sent out a questionnaire last year and
nearly 90% of schools and responsible bodies have sent in their
initial responses. We are working closely with the structural
engineering sector to identify accurately whether RAAC is present
and whether it poses a risk.
(Con)
Following on from my noble friend’s answer, is she confident that
there is enough capacity among surveyors to identify RAAC in
schools before, as the noble Baroness said, issues become too
serious? We have had similar problems in other parts of the
public sector estate, hospitals for instance, where there have
been safety issues because of RAAC. Perhaps she could provide us
with reassurance on this issue.
(Con)
I thank my noble friend for her question. I hope it reassures her
to know that I have met twice already the leading structural
engineering firms. We have looked at different ways that we can
accelerate the pace of surveys and are very confident that we
will have carried out at least 600 surveys by the autumn.
(LD)
My Lords, will the Minister give us an assurance that any new
school is constructed with a material that we expect to have to
pull down and will not fall down before we get there?
(Con)
I can give the House that reassurance. Not only that but any new
school we construct will be net zero in operation.
(Con)
My Lords, obviously, responsible bodies are legally responsible
for the safety of the building. They come in all shapes and
sizes. It could be a very strong, robust local authority or a
large multi-academy trust with a lot of expertise; conversely, it
could be a local authority that is in intervention with
commissioners or a trust which has only one school. Of the 10%
which have not returned their surveys, can my noble friend the
Minister outline how we are going to approach those responsible
bodies to make sure they respond and find out whether they are in
that risky category because they are weak for other reasons?
(Con)
I do not think we can say that the 10% which have not responded
are weak. We are dealing with it by running a small call centre
in the department. There are organisations that we have had to
contact multiple times—including, sadly, some local
authorities—and we are working with MPs and others to make sure
we get all the returns. We are also supporting, in slightly
slower time, all trusts to improve their competency in relation
to the management of their estate, including rolling out a free
specialist capital adviser programme to support them in estate
management.
(Lab)
My Lords, one aspect of safety in schools is fire safety. I
declare an interest as a vice-chair of the All-Party
Parliamentary Fire Safety and Rescue Group. In 2007, draft
guidance was given that predicted that most schools would be
fitted with sprinklers and very few would not. In 2021, further
draft guidance was published which predicted the contrary: that
very few schools would be fitted with sprinklers. I understand
the consultation on that has not been published yet and therefore
the guidance has not come into effect two years later. I
understand, too, that the problem is that there is a division of
opinion between the department on one side, which thinks the risk
is low, and the insurance industry and fire chiefs on the other,
which think the risk is high. Would the Minister be content to
attend a meeting of the APPG with representatives of the
insurance industry and fire chiefs to see whether there is some
methodology to ascertain precisely what the risk is and therefore
the need or lack of it for sprinklers?
(Con)
I would be delighted to meet the APPG, but I remind the noble
Lord that there are 67,000 buildings on the school estate and
about 450 fires a year, 90% of which cause no significant
damage.
(Con)
Does my noble friend agree that a much greater danger to children
in our schools comes from a judge’s ruling last week that parents
are not allowed to know about the relationships and sex education
that their children are given? This is a hugely controversial
area. Parents may knock on the door of a school to ask what is
being taught to their children, and can be denied. Does my noble
friend accept that this is a nonsense that undermines the heart
of family responsibilities and parental authority? Would the
Government please do something quickly to make clear what
parental rights are in knowing what their children are being
taught?
(Con)
I am delighted to be able to let my noble friend know that the
Government have already acted on this. We wrote to every school
to be clear about exactly that relationship between parent and
school and that trust, particularly on these very sensitive
topics, is essential. Schools should not enter into arrangements
with third parties that prohibit them sharing curriculum
materials with parents.
(LD)
To get back to the Question about the safety of school buildings,
can the Minister give an assurance that schools deemed to be at
risk have been made safe or at least closed until urgent repairs
can take place? Is she also aware that teachers leaving the
profession cite the state of school buildings and the environment
in which they work as one of their reasons for leaving?
(Con)
I am very happy to give the noble Baroness reassurance on that
point. To be clear, the returns that we have had from schools
about whether they suspect RAAC on their estate indicate that a
significant percentage believe they do, but then when we send the
surveyors in, in fact they do not. When RAAC is identified, some
poses a risk, but some does not. In every case where a risk is
posed, whether in a single store cupboard or a whole block, we
send our team in and work closely with the school, trust and
local authority to provide both practical and financial support
to address issues as quickly as possible.
(CB)
My Lords, the noble Baroness knows that schools have made great
progress on incorporating children who have special needs of all
kinds. Sometimes, the buildings are an impediment to this. Has
work been undertaken to ensure that schools are adapted to meet
the needs of children with very special needs?
(Con)
That is extremely important. Access to and the shape of a
building should never be an impediment to a child’s learning.
That is more straightforward in the new schools we are building,
but we are making adjustments and supporting schools through our
existing capital programmes to address exactly the needs that the
noble Lord raises.
