11 February 2011
Six councils have won their legal challenge against the government over the cancelled Building Schools for the Future scheme.
Mr Justice Holman ruled in the High Court that the way the education secretary stopped the BSF projects was both ‘unfair’ and ‘unlawful’.
The London boroughs of Newham and Waltham Forest; Kent County Council, Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council, Nottingham City Council and Luton Borough Council brought the judicial review after Education Secretary Michael Gove halted the nationwide BSF programme last year.
In his ruling, the judge criticised Gove’s failure to consult with the affected councils before pulling the plug on their school building schemes. He said: ‘The way in which the secretary of state abruptly stopped the projects… without any prior consultation… must be characterised as being so unfair as to amount to an abuse of power.
‘However pressing the economic problems, there was no "overriding public interest" which precluded any consultation or justifies the lack of any consultation.’
The secretary of state’s failure to discharge his statutory equality duties when making the decision was also ruled to be unlawful.
Holman said Gove now needed to reconsider the position of each of the claimants with an ‘open mind and paying due regard to whatever representations they may respectively make’.
But he added that the final decision on the future of individual building projects rested with the secretary of state. ‘No one should gain false hope from this decision.’
Sandwell leader Darren Cooper said: ‘I feel we have been vindicated for the money we spent fighting this decision.The judge's decision has clearly shown a lack of transparency in Gove's decision.’
He added: ‘Now we have to wait to see whether the government accepts it was too hasty in scrapping the scheme. We have just got to wait with fingers crossed.
‘And in view of this High Court decision I have to say that I do not now feel confident that Gove is competent to look at this issue again.’
But the education secretary responded that the judge had rejected the contention that the decision to end the BSF was irrational.
‘We are delighted that the judge did not call into questionthe decision to end the wasteful and bureaucratic Building Schools for the Future programme. On the substantive points he concluded that it was a rational decision and that the authorities involved had no expectation of being allowed to proceed with their projects.’
