School academies: what they REALLY cost US, the taxpayer

“The leaders of academy schools are spending taxpayers’ money on luxury hotels, top-end restaurants, first-class travel, private health care and executive cars, a joint investigation by Channel 4’s Dispatches and the Observer can reveal.

Expense claims released under the Freedom of Information Act lay bare for the first time what critics claim is an extraordinary extravagance by some academy chain chief executives and principals, at a time when schools are struggling financially.

The taxpayer is paying Ian Cleland, the £180,000-a-year chief executive at Academy Transformation Trust, to lease and have joint insurance with his wife on an XJ Premium Luxury V6 Jaguar car, it can be disclosed. Included in nearly £3,000 worth of receipts is payment for servicing the car and the purchase of new tyres.

Cleland has also spent £3,000 of taxpayers’ money on first-class rail travel, while dining expenses racked up on his taxpayer-funded credit card include a meal with other staff at Marco Pierre White totalling £471, and the Bank restaurant in Birmingham, at a cost £703.45. …

… The Paradigm Trust pays for its CEO, Amanda Phillips, to have broadband at her holiday home in France, even though she earns £195,354 a year.

Meanwhile, as former education secretary Michael Gove’s vision of a more market-led school system has materialised, in which multi-academy trusts have taken the place of local authorities, salary levels have soared within the management tier, it can be revealed. More than half of the largest 50 chains pay their chief executives more than the prime minister (£143,000). Sir Daniel Moynihan, the chief executive of the high-performing Harris Federation, earns £395,000 a year.

The chief executive of the Aspirations Academies Trust, which runs 12 schools, pays its chief executive and founder, Stewart Kenning, a total package of £225,000, while his wife, Paula Kenning, receives £175,000 as executive principal and founder. And as the salaries have shot up, the so-called related party transactions – where companies with close links to directors of academy trusts are paid for services to those trusts – have also multiplied.

Take, for example, the US organisation founded by Dr Russell Quaglia, the American-based co-founder of the Aspirations Academy Trust (AAT). In a document uncovered through a freedom of information request, the trust claims to the regulator that it is abiding by the no-profit rule governing such transactions, and it is suggested that the American is working at a discount.

It actually costs Quaglia $8,300 (£6,330) a time to come to Britain, AAT claims. “This is based on transportation costs to and from the US, including parking and travel to and from airports in the US – $5,000,” the document says, adding of further costs: “Hotels and meals: $3,000; internal travel (trains/cabs/tubes): $300. For six visits a year, the [annual] average cost would therefore be $49,800.”

The trust adds that the provision of Quaglia’s top-of-the-range staff and student surveys to the schools costs an additional $20,000 a year. And his normal consultancy rates range from $9,600 a day to $18,000 a day, plus travel costs, it is said. “The amounts paid directly to Dr Quaglia, in lieu of basic salary, range from $8,000 to $15,000.

“Based on 15 days’ consultancy for the AAT, the total day rate cost would be a minimum of $120,000. We can confirm that Dr Quaglia is in high demand and turns down 75% of approaches, so any time not devoted to ATT would be easily filled by other paying engagements. In conclusion, the cost … equates to £114,337, which is significantly above the charged amount of £89,724.” …

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/jul/23/education-academies-funding-expenses

” The inanities of the National Planning Policy Framework “

Letters page Daily Telegraph 23 July 2016:

SIR –

It is the kind of self-interested view of the planning system given by Professor Adam that got us into this mess in the first place. Developers play the system to obtain permissions that they land-bank rather than build-out.

The inanities of the National Planning Policy Framework then allow them to use the lack of five-year housing supply to demand even more permissions, often in places that command higher prices than those that communities have identified for development.

Developers are businesses and they are interested in profit. It is time for a rather obtuse government to understand that this doesn’t deliver either mass housing or specific housing such as bungalows.

There is selective deafness on the part of the Government in respect of the failure of the National Planning Policy Framework. Maybe this is yet another example of why there was selective deafness on the part of the electorate to the wishes of the Government in relation to the referendum.

Jenny Unsworth
Congleton, Cheshire