Comhairle nan Eilean Siar has dismissed claims – made in just about all Scottish news media – that the new Nicolson Institute cost £55 million. They say they have no idea where that figure came from. A source says the capital construction cost was actually £29 million, a figure claimed to compare favourably with equivalent mainland projects.
-
Search It!
-
Recent Entries
- Plenty of cheap diesel at Gordon Diesel as OFT returns to probe more claims of profiteering
- Malcolm Wicks
- Graffiti daubed on Free Church
- David Cameron on Letterman
- Stupid thieves have been targeting VW Golfs on Benbecula. Wonder what car they are driving?
- Stornoway filling stations respond as Gordon Diesel declares himself “proud” to help us all by slashing his fuel prices by 9p per litre
- Don’t mention the war. Cruel failures by Scottish Fuels mean islands of Uist and Barra forced into the same kind of awful fuel rationing they had in 1942.
- Missing Hungarian student is ‘still here in the islands’
- Calm down, everyone. Scottish Fuels may get round to fixing “issues” with the Uist fuel tanks in about a week’s time or thereabouts, depending on the tides and whether there is anything good on the telly.
- Who is Britain’s brightest?
-
Links
It has cost the council more than just money.
Too true Subsidy, is it also true that a certain M. Russell, who has also cost the Council more than just money, is coming up to do the opening, along with his Junior Minister, on a rare visit to the islands? I hear on the grapevine that the entire 57Varieties of SNP group form the platform party!
Only a monkey would write something like that.
£29m to build; £1m to Nicolsons; £15m to the consultants on revenue expenditure; £10m paid by the Government to other consultants; all for a nice pre-fab shed.
Forecast: in 10 years, enormous repairs/updates/improvements and a huge hike in the management charge to FMS.
Folks: it is HP to a pack of loan sharks.
Peter you are correct, an HP scheme created by Labour. There are councils and healthboards in financial melt down because of this crazy scheme.
Is the new school water resistant ? or is it waterproof ?
It’s not HP. It’s not a normal PFI project.
Peter, Junkie and Jacko, latest on the grapevine is that a certain councillor, a former employee of the comhairle, will be missing from the platform party in case awkward questions are raised about a project he was in charge of when he was a council employee, which went to a mainland company, over time, over budget, has a leaking roof, contract to repair the roof went to another mainland company, step forward Cllr Blogger Houston…….
What does this have to do with the new school, it is another subject in its own right. The subject in question is the new nicci, maybe it is a great piece of buusiness, then again maybe not. I have serious doubts. As for its funding, it was originally part of the great Labour PFI strategy, otherwise know as HP or the never never.
Steady on Jacko big man, everyone, including the council, is obliged to repay their debts.
Big man, sorry what do you mean ? At 5′ 5” I don’t think you can call me big man. Anyway you made my day, thanks
The Council owns the schools, unlike other PFI projects where the asset is owned by a third party (typically a bank, pension fund or infrastructure company etc) and the occupant (Council, NHS etc) simply rents them over a 25-30 year period which in effect pays for their construction plus interest plus margins + profit
I’m not in a position to comment on the accuracy of figures re cost, but I do think it’s harsh to refer to the new building as a pre-fab shed. I personally like the look of the building and in such a prominent position in town I think it’s a huge improvement from the outside. I hope it’s equally impressive inside. I also think the new school is long overdue and that it can only benefit our young people to have such a good facility. In today’s press I have seen a report on a study that has found a significant link between children’s physical fitness and their academic achievement. With this in mind, I hope the new sports pitch to replace the old building will be equally impressive and that the council will re-think it’s position on itinerant teachers in primary schools. Given the positive effects of both PE and music on children’s attainment and the brilliant work that is being done in the community in these areas by sports clubs and musical groups, the council need to make the most of the potential of new school buildings by revisiting education policy in the islands.
@Momus: If the Council own the schools, then how on earth do they also rent them?
The Council pay a maintenance charge depending upon the number of pupils over the next 30 years – and who can forecast where they will be in 10 years? – as any variance up or down from the contracted amount will result in additional charges. In the meantime the HP repayments are funded by cuts in the grant from the Scottish Government, meaning less money available for the other schools in the islands.
The Government have paid lots of the revenue costs directly, so they are outside the official cost, and still hold all the purse strings.
The build quality of virtually all the old Nicolson buildings is much higher than the build quality of the new build, as time will tell. But – and this is a big but – the new build is much better suited to current needs.
I just hope it lasts as long as it should,
@ Peter
You misunderstand. I was drawing a comparison between a typical PFI project and what actually happens as far as the WISP is concerned. The Council owns the schools and therefore does not pay the associated charges with ‘renting’ the assets – unlike traditional PFI projects.
The maintenance charge is also not related to pupils numbers so again is incorrect. I disagree with the build quality comment as well. If the old Nicolson had been built in the same flexible manner as the new one, it wouldn’t be getting knocked down. The new one can be completely reconfigured internally if required.
I know that the new primary schools are rented and that the cleaners and janitors are working for FEM, I don’t see the new Nicolson being any different. As for the building fabric, I also heard that Angus Campbell has said the buildings were designed to last roughly 30 years. That being the case the flexibility you talk about does not exist.
Apparently there is plenty of flexibility in the outside Walls !!
@ Jacko
Sorry, thats all incorrect apart from the fact that the cleaners and janitors all TUPE transferred to FES from the Comhairle.The buildings will be maintained (to the same standard as they are now) by FES FM for 30 years but have a design life of typically 60 years.
Is there any flexibility in the design life ?
@ Momus
If the cleaners and janitors have been TUPE’D and a big fat maintenance fee is being paid, then it is a PFI scheme. As for the 30 years that I was told came from the Whitehouse Ayatola.
@ Jacko Sorry. Disagree. Big fat maintenance fee? So you think that publicly owned buildings should just be allowed to fall into a state of disrepair? Would you do that in your own house?
Ah ! well !! disagreeing does not make you right. I don’t remember saying that public building should not be maintained, obviously you are confusing me withe someone else. What I did say was that buildinngs under the pfi scheme have big fat maintenance charges. There are three English Health Trusts which are crippled by these charges. The local authorities across are finding it difficult to pay the annual charges for the buildings which were built under labour flagship policy of pfi . I wonder what you’ll accuse of saying next.
I think you’ll find that buildings under PFI have realistic maintenance charges. They look high because many public authorities have traditionally under-budgeted on maintenance, particularly with new buildings. Because they could get away with it. Now they’re being forced to budget for it in a way they weren’t before.
Don’t think so, too many authorities and health trusts are complaining about the severe costs across the UK. The three Health Trusts who are crippled with PFI costs are in dire straights. UK Councils are complaining that job losses are down to large chunks of their budget being taken to pay PFI charges. It was a daft idea to begin with. Why should we have high maintenance charges on new buildings ?
The WISP is a unique one-off form of PPP/PFI project that does not rely on Private Finance, the PF in PFI.
It is the Private Finance charges in their entirety, of which the on-going maintenance is typically a very, very small part of the overall monthly charge, that is actually crippling other authorities and NHS Trusts.
@Jacko I disagree because I am know how this all works. I didnt accuse anyone of anything.
Monus @
I too am familiar with how PPP/PFI works. It was introduced by Kenneth Clarke when there was little money in the government coffers at that time. His intention was to scrap it after the 1997 election. He couldn’t believe it when Gordon Brown adopted it as a flagship policy.
In the case of the western isles where there is a variation it is still mainly funded through private money which has to be serviced. The contract involves FEM who are making a packet.
Had it not been PFI the school maintenance contracts would have to been put out to tender, which never happened.
Ho ho ho! I think Momus has beaten you on every count here, little big man!
Anyway, who is doing the honours at the magnificent new school in Stornoway South this Thursday? Is there any truth in the rumour that Ray is helping Michael Russell cut the ribbon, much to the horror of the MSP Education Minister and the rump of the SNP group on the Comhairle? Little more than a day to go and I think we should be told!
The schools were built under PFI, and we are going to be paying for the schools for the next 30 years.