Debate contribution: Schools: Improved Procurement Practices

Debate contribution by Mr David Brooks on 25 February 2025.

MLA

Mr David Brooks

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

25 February 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Schools: Improved Procurement Practices

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4815463

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank the Members opposite for tabling the motion. I, of course, support our constructive amendment, and I am thankful that Members around the House agree with it. Trying to be prudent with finances not only because of a moral imperative around the good use of public moneys but because it is evidently in the interests of school leaders to use wisely the already strained budgets that they have access to is a no-brainer, yet it is clear from the interactions that we have all had with schools that, too often, the mandated adherence to EA contract procurement is a ball and chain that prevents and does not assist the procurement of appropriate, efficient and good-value services. When red tape gets in the way, we should rightly consider how to cut it back. School procurement is, first and foremost, about serving our schools with good-value products and services. As we have heard not just today but at other times in the House, school leaders, who have to work within already restricted budgets, are clearly frustrated. They tell representatives like us that EA procurement is often more costly, and, from lobbying for works on behalf of schools, we know that it is far from efficient. I support colleagues on the Benches opposite in their call for schools to be able to access the benefits of a free market economy and be unshackled from the detriments of the drag of big government inefficiency. Joking aside, as I said, our amendment is intended to be constructive, and I am thankful that it has been viewed in that way. It simply gives more specific direction to the motion's overall intention and outlines the way in which the Minister might work, as he described, to achieve the shared aim of us all, which, as is referenced in the motion, is to reduce unnecessary burdens and provide flexibility.

We have all heard examples today. I recently visited Dundonald High School, with which, I know, the Minister is familiar. He will also be familiar with my lobbying for it and with the recent Education and Training Inspectorate (ETI) report on the school. I thank the Minister for recently agreeing to visit the school at the earliest opportunity. My visit certainly opened my eyes to some of the struggles that some of our schools face. I spent a number of hours touring the school. I saw holes in the wall that, at the time, had been covered with Correx. There were issues with toilets, while science classrooms had only half of their gas taps functioning. I could go on, but I am not telling the House or the Minister anything new or raising issues that do not predate the Minister's tenure. He is not only well aware of the issues in hand but, as he outlined to us today, keen to take action to improve the procurement system for our schools. The reality is that there has been a legacy of underinvestment that is placing budgets under significant strain at departmental level and at school level. That has led to something that is, sadly, neither uncommon nor unfamiliar across much of our public sector: resource being available only for the most urgent or pressing concerns, not for planned or routine maintenance. That is a false economy, as a lack of proper maintenance inevitably leads to bigger issues and greater costs in the longer term. That is clearly recognised by those in charge. To be fair to the chief executive of the Education Authority, who has inherited a system that is already crippled by a lack of resource, he was remarkably candid in his response to my questions at a recent Committee meeting, telling me that he had no satisfactory answers to give and that, although the authority's inability to meet some needs is not acceptable, it is, as we know, a matter of financial reality. Whether it be grass cutting, grounds maintenance, the provision of new equipment or issues with doors, windows or heating, the EA's maintenance is evidently badly frayed. Too often, it takes too long for work to be assessed and even longer to have it done. Anecdotally, there can be further delays to follow-up work as further issues emerge and required materials are not immediately available. Work also often costs more than it needs to. With that being evident, I cannot help but feel that greater flexibility, such as that which the Minister outlined, will be a net benefit for all. I realise that I have run out of time.

760 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:02 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification