A scathing independent review into the £160m Dargavel School scandal has branded Renfrewshire Council "incompetent" and "amateur."
The report by David Bowles - a former local government chief executive who now carries out investigations into public sector organisations - was commissioned by the authority last year after it emerged that a brand new primary was far too small.
We revealed in November that the £18m school building should have been able to accommodate 1,100 pupils, but due to an “error” by officials, could only hold 430.
The authority announced in February that they now expect 1,500 children to need to use the school by 2033.
Mr Bowles said the error was “so obvious it is difficult to see how it remained undetected for six years.”
He said the council had “failed at virtually every stage” and ignored multiple warnings that their calculations were flawed. Locals who tried to warn officers were treated with "professional arrogance."
“The application of simple common sense should have alerted the council to the scale of the problems. Millions were at stake for primary and secondary provision. I cannot comprehend the lack of professionalism in dealing with this matter,” his review added.
READ MORE: Dargavel school blunder could cost taxpayers in Renfrewshire £160m
Dargavel Primary is part of the privately funded Dargavel Village project, a multimillion-pound development which will see nearly 4,000 new homes built on the site of a former Royal Ordnance Factory by 2034.
As part of the agreement with the council, BAE Systems paid for the new school.
However, they built it to the specifications supplied to them by the council. That means their obligations under what is known as the Section 75 Agreement are now discharged.
In his report, Mr Bowles said the school had approached negotiations with the developer in “an amateur manner” which resulted in BAE's financial contribution reducing as their profits increased.
The report goes on: “Combined with a failure of management oversight and gross incompetence the council did not negotiate fair and reasonable terms for the provision of education, in its various Section 75 Agreements with BAE.
“It failed to secure adequate school provision for the Dargavel development. As BAE’s profit will have increased, its contribution to education per child has reduced, in large part due to officer incompetence, negotiating agreements which were grossly inadequate.”
He said the "council’s failing will impact upon the quality of children’s educational experience and will impose significant additional costs on Council taxpayers in the years to come.”
Mr Bowles criticised the council’s initial decision in 2009 when they first signed a Section 75 with BAE to base their estimates for the school roll on Bishopton Primary School in the next village along, which he says is “a mature area with relatively low pupil demand.”
This meant they failed to recognise that new developments such as Dargavel are likely to attract younger families and have a higher birth rate.
He said: “This one, deeply flawed decision resulted in seriously underestimating demand at 340 primary school places.”
When the developer then came to the council with a request to increase the number of homes from 2,500 to 3,850, the authority’s calculations had “fundamental and obvious flaws” that projected the primary school roll would actually start to fall.
The second Section 75 agreed in 2018 only required BAE to build a school for 440 pupils, an increase of only 100 extra places for 1,350 new houses.
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf pushed on £75m Dargavel Primary scandal
When the Council told BAE that the new houses would mean 300 additional secondary school places, the developer rejected this, saying it would only need 200.
Officials accepted the calculations and “did not seek the underlying data to challenge them.”
Mr Bowles said it was “difficult to see how both of these agreements, involving potentially millions of pounds of investment in primary and secondary education, could have been handled in a more incompetent manner."
He added that there were “numerous examples where the application of simple common sense should have alerted the Council to the fact it had grossly underestimated demand."
He pointed to NHS data detailing the number of people registering with GPs and health visitors should have indicated that the council were way out on their estimates.
For that 2018 increase in housing, BAE ultimately received planning permission for over 100 acres of housing land, which the report states “can be valued in excess of £1m per acre.”
He said the firm “will have gained very substantial financial benefits from this new agreement, increasing its rate of return. Council taxpayers however will now be faced with substantial additional costs.”
Mr Bowles was also scathing about the way in which concerns over the school were dealt with.
The local Community Council, parents council, MSPs and Councillors suggesting the primary may not be big enough were, he says, “brushed aside with an increasing degree of irritation.”
“If any of the complaints or observations had been taken seriously, just a cursory examination of the data should have raised concerns. I have not found a single instance where a concern was properly investigated.
“Again, repeated opportunities to identify very serious deficiencies in the Council’s approach were missed. The response by Council officers showed professional arrogance.”
He said that despite many millions of pounds in education investment being at stake there was a complete “absence of any curiosity.”
READ MORE: Gilruth to meet with parents at centre of £160m too small school
Last month, in a paper sent to councillors, education chiefs at the cash-strapped authority admitted that the cost of fixing the problem would be far more than previously thought.
The cost of the new building will be somewhere between £42m and £45m while extending the local secondary, Park Mains High School, to accommodate another 400 pupils will be between £27m and £30m.
The local authority said they would likely need to take a loan out to pay for the cost. They estimated that this would leave the council with annual repayments of £4m over the 40-year lifetime of the new building, £160m.
Responding to the report, the council’s Chief Executive Alan Russell issued an unreserved apology.
He said: “On behalf of Renfrewshire Council, I am deeply sorry for the very serious historic mistakes made over a prolonged period and for the understandable distress caused to local communities in the area.
“This is a very difficult report for the Council and will be equally upsetting for the Dargavel community. I fully acknowledge the review findings and accept all its recommendations.”
He said he had written to BAE’s Chief Executive to “underline the need to work together to do the fair and just thing for families in Dargavel that allows a solution to be progressed.”
The authority made clear that no senior officers involved in the development were still with the council.
The independent review will be discussed at the council meeting on 22 June 2023.
Iain Nicolson, the SNP leader of Renfrewshire Council said: “The initial details make for extremely difficult reading, particularly for those who raised concerns over many years and were not listened to, some going back as far as 2008.
“As an administration, we will take the time to consider this report and its findings and ensure we work closely with officers to rectify the mistakes of the past.
"I have sought assurances from the Chief Executive and welcome his commitment to work together, openly and transparently, with parents and carers across Dargavel to deliver the high-quality learning and teaching environment all pupils deserve.”
Shortly after the publication of the report, Alan Kelly, quit as the leader of the school's parent council.
"Since the major issue was confirmed by Renfrewshire Council in October 2022 I have pushed the parents in the community to work constructively with Renfrewshire Council.
"Let down after let down I’ve fought with the parent body to give Renfrewshire Council the benefit of the doubt, and convinced people to trust them again.
"Even the existing leadership team at the council, who seem to have escaped criticism in the independent review have let us down, and not acted transparently.
"After convincing the parent forum to trust the Council again, my position is untenable.
"It is crazy to think that in the whole debacle, it is only me who feels a sense of responsibility and is stepping down from my position."
Local Labour MSP Neil Bibby described the review as "utterly brutal for Renfrewshire Council."
He added: It exposes a serious failure of leadership, a failure to manage financial risk, a lack of oversight and an arrogance towards concerns raised by the community.
"The review has evidenced serious failures by the council for which those responsible must be held to account.
"There must now be an independent investigation carried out by the Accounts Commission.
"Taxpayers and children in across Renfrewshire should not have to pay for the council’s incompetence".
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel