Debate contribution: Schools in Mid Ulster: Procurement Process
Debate contribution by Mr Nick Mathison on .
- MLA
- Mr Nick Mathison
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 18 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Schools in Mid Ulster: Procurement Process
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4806845
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I do not want to speak for long: I certainly would not want to step on the toes of any of the Mid Ulster reps, and I will not go into examples from my constituency. Every Member who is here has highlighted the fact that, when you visit a school principal, they will complain about the ridiculous scenario in which, on the one hand, they are pressed by the EA to deliver financial sustainability because budgets are under so much pressure, and, on the other, they are compelled to pay over the odds for EA-procured services. That is an incredibly frustrating position for custodians of public money to be in. I echo the comments that have been made. All school leaders find that scenario really frustrating. Many are staring into budget deficits that they cannot see a way out of because of the pressures that they are under, particularly from staffing costs. I declare an interest: I sit on the board of governors of Killinchy Primary School, and so I am well aware of the budget pressures that are faced and the difficult position that principals are in when they go to their board of governors to say, "I have had to spend x on this because the EA procured the service, as was required, but I know that so-and-so down the road could have done it for a fraction of the price". It is very frustrating. The message is clear: schools should be freed up to source the best value for money in low-level, routine maintenance and spending. That could mean anything from cutting the grass, to cleaning the gutters, to buying play resource equipment for the lower end of the school.
Principals should not feel that they are constrained by contracts procured by the EA that end up costing them more money.
In 2017, when the EA was established, we were promised that it was going to deliver economies of scale and that schools would benefit from those savings because the EA would be able to deliver that for them. While centralised procurement may provide a degree of consistency and a degree of central oversight, which is not necessarily a bad thing, it certainly has not delivered value for money. We need to find a way to reset that balance. I definitely echo comments made by other Members that we do not want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. All these processes need to be subject to appropriate and robust scrutiny, so, whatever the EA would do to review its procurement processes to deliver better value for money for schools, there needs to be oversight. It could not just be a nod to someone who lives down the road to say, "You do that, and we will make sure that we get you in to cut the grass for ever and ever and never ask anyone else". These processes should be robust, and we all need to be careful and cautious when public money is being spent, but value for money has to be balanced against that. I take encouragement from the Minister's previous comments that he is keen to look at the issue, so I am hopeful that, when he responds to the debate, which clearly has relevance in Mid Ulster and across Northern Ireland, there will be a sense of a clear timeline in which we will see some improvement in this area. I thank the Member for securing the Adjournment debate today. I emphasise that, yes, we want robust scrutiny of public money, but we must deliver value for money for our schools.
600 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Awaiting analysis
This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.