MPs grilled the bosses of Newton Rigg this afternoon as the Environment, Food and Rural and Affairs Select Committee investigates land-based education.
The 11-strong cross-party select committee, which includes Penrith and the Border MP Neil Hudson, will be hearing from the following witnesses:
- Tom Bradshaw, vice president, National Farmers Union;
- Shireen Chambers, executive director, Institute of Chartered Foresters;
- Alex Payne, chief executive, Landex
- Lord Inglewood, chair of Cumbria Local Enterprise Partnership;
- Jo Lappin, chief executive of Cumbria Local Enterprise Partnership;
- Judith Clapham, director of governance, Askham Bryan College;
- Tim Whitaker, chief executive, Askham Bryan College
You can sign our petition to save Newton Rigg here.
2.38pm: introductions are being made of the first three witnesses.
2.39pm: What are the current and future challenges for land-based education? asks the chairman/
Tom Bradshaw says we need a different skillset to develop agriculture for the future.
There’s been a consolidation of education across the country, being delivered regionally which means it is not as accessible to school leavers.
The industry employs four million people and there must be the education for it.
2.42pm: Shireen Chambers says there are not enough people with the skills to continue forestry. Only 100 people graduated with forestry degrees this year and no data exists for further education – a huge drop from even 10 years ago.
2.45pm: She is concerned there are not enough forestry trainers or lecturers. It’s a numbers game, she says.
2.46pm: Alex Payne says there are barriers to entry for school leavers to enter land-based education.
The strategic review in 2020 shows the distribution of specialist providers and for forestry there are four providers nationally. The agriculture sector is highly skilled but lacks formal qualifications.
The land based sector is a £91 billion industry and education providers have diversified as the industry has diversified. She says upskilling is key.
2.49pm: What skills are needed? Tom says business management, on farm delivery are essential but there is no single skillset, there are so many different opportunities and how that is communicated is a big challenge.
2.52pm: Focus on lifelong learning needs to be driven through the industry, Tom says.
2.55pm: What skills are needed to deliver on the Government’s plans for tree planting?
Shireen says she’d like to see a concerted campaign and with young people concerned about the environment, now is the time to catch them – forestry isn’t just hairy men in checked shirts!
But they need support to do this.
Does it worry her that there isn’t the skillset there and will there be a lag time? It’s been concerning her for years, she says. We cannot wait for traditional foresters to go through university, we need to look at other ways.
3.01pm: In the 1980s, there were over 50 specialist agricultural colleges, now there are 11. Why?
Alex says there are also specialist wings at FE colleges – she says it is investment, resource, critical mass. But there are some examples of good mergers – there needs to be an understanding of critical mix of higher education, FE, residential education.
There are critical issues around location. Vast geographical spread for students.
Government funding is also key – and it needs to be weighted correctly so the resource can be delivered further.
Wiltshire College has improved its dairy, which is a good example. She doesn’t think mergers are always terrible but funding needs to be directed correctly.
Idea that selling off resources or land to plug financial gaps is less prevalent than it was – most colleges reinvest in resources.
3.08pm: In terms of growth or decline of education provision for agriculture, will leaving the EU have an impact?
Tom says we do need more resources and we are entering a very different period. Farming and land is going to be critical.
One of the fears is we end up in a downward spiral of investment and then it is impossible to deliver an apprenticeship – so what is the full cost of an apprenticeship? It needs to be made an attractive proposition for the college.
University of Cumbria says it cannot deliver a forestry apprenticeship because it will only get £16,000 over three years for an apprenticeship.
Newton Rigg should be supported and empowered for the future, rather than be sold off says MP Geraint Davies.
Tom says rather than focusing on Newton Rigg, there should be a national framework, but says its a tragedy that Newton Rigg with 100 years of history will be lost.
3.15pm: Chair says Newton Rigg is jewel in the crown. Alex says the Newton Rigg situation comes down to critical mass of average class size to run at a break-even or profitable basis.
Geraint asks Alex if she would support Newton Rigg – Alex says she only started in January and could not comment on it.
3.17pm: Neil Hudson asks if local provision is important, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Tom says he is correct and it is critical there is a network of training provision across the country but it is difficult to say what is regional or local.
He says T-levels are important and need to be delivered locally.
3.20pm: Difficult question says Alex, but investment is key and needs to be well resourced.
3.23pm: Are local enterprise partnerships proficient in helping to provide land-based education?
Tom dodges the question – says there is too much to difference between them.
Alex says it does depend – some are proactive, others they spend a lot of time lobbying them.
3.31pm: Barry Gardiner MP says there is a tension between the few numbers of land-based colleges and the ‘local’ provision available that all the witnesses have mentioned.
Tom says this is where T-levels come in but when you move to higher levels of education, you cannot expect everything to be done at a local level.
Alex says that the reason for residential provision is the 365-day nature of farming and expose them to the real life nature of farming.
3.39pm Tom says investment is a chicken and egg situation – demand will grow in the future for land-based education but colleges can’t put on courses that aren’t going to be full.
3.41pm: Next panel is being introduced.
They are:
- Lord Inglewood, chair of Cumbria Local Enterprise Partnership;
- Jo Lappin, chief executive of Cumbria Local Enterprise Partnership;
- Judith Clapham, director of governance, Askham Bryan College;
- Tim Whitaker, chief executive, Askham Bryan College
3.44pm: Lord Inglewood is asked how he feels about Newton Rigg. He says it’s important to the identity of our county and is central to the economy.
Jo Lappin says it would be totally counter-intuative not have a specialist college in Cumbria. She says it’s got to be available, attractive accessible and accessible – we make up more than half the land mass of the North West. “We’re talking beyond 70 miles”
The MP says he knows people in Cumbria are unhappy and he doesn’t want to spend time raking over the history about the University of Cumbria transfer agreement.
He says he wants to focus on the issue of the asset deed.
He wants to put people’s mind at rest that there is a clause that land cannot be sold off and must be used for education. But he says the asset deed was not carried out in this manner.
“My question is this. How did you allow this happen?”
Tom Whitaker said it was before his time and it was better asked of the people in charge at the time.
The MP says ‘You’ve got the papers as I have. You really want this parrot dead don’t you?”
3.53pm: Chair tells Tim that he must have a reasonable knowledge of what happened.
He says he doesn’t. It was many years before his employment.
Barry says he’s not trying to apportion blame but wants to know what’s happened.
He says is the original asset deed still not relevant and Askham Bryan cannot sell the land?
Chair says if Tim doesn’t know, then what they need is a full explanation in writing. He asks Tim what he can answer.
Tim says he’s taken due legal opinion and are free to sell the assets.
3.55pm: Barry asks if the sale of Newton Rigg was really just to save Askham Bryan as a going concern.
Newton Rigg showed a £300,000 profit for three years before the accounts were amalgamated.
Is Newton Rigg being run down and sold off to prop up Askham Bryan?
3.58pm: Tim says Newton Rigg is failing and there are costs to be incurred by redundancies.
But Barry says that was not true between 2013 and 2016 – only when the accounts were amalgamated.
Tim says that there was a considerable deficit position when the further education commissioners were brought in.
Barry asks if it was the plan to use Newton Rigg to bail out Askham Bryan?
Tim said the college took on Newton Rigg in 2011 and was happy to do so. The accounts were amalgamated in 2018/2019.
He can provide a note saying there was a £250,000 deficit as far back as 2014.
Lord Inglewood said he has become concerned about the proposal and charity law.
When Askham Bryan acquired the land for educational purposes – and it probably means while a charity can sell the land and get the best price, it does not mean it can use the profits for what Askham Bryan is intending.
He added: “I may not be right about this though.”
4.04pm: Lord Inglewood said the LEP has engaged as much as it could, but has been kept at arm’s length after Askham Bryan approached the FE Commissioner.
4.05pm: Geraint says he understands that the buildings and land were given for practically nothing as long as it continued providing education and now Askham Bryan is looking at £12m. Does Tim not think that it should be handed back to Cumbria and the LEP as opposed to asset stripping and selling it off?
Tim said over a period of time £4m has been invested and his work there’s a £5m-£7m cost over the entire time the college has had the campus so he wouldn’t describe it as asset stripping.
Geraint asks if they got £3.5m from the University of Cumbria.
Tim says it was an occupancy arrangement that the university continued to use this site.
Geraint says Cumbria gave you this asset, with a covenent, that was changed in a strange way and now you’re selling it off to prop up Askham Bryan. Isn’t that an absolute disgrace?
Tim said he wasn’t working there at the time.
Geraint says what would be a reasonable price to give it back to Cumbria?
Tim says the college has an obligation.
4.11pm: Judith says Newton Rigg is not a separate charity, it is part of Askham Bryan and although she cannot comment much more on the figures previously mentioned, there are a lot of issues intertwined.
Geraint asks again what would be a reasonable price to give it back to Cumbria?
She says it’s not that straightforward and there isn’t a viable option for someone to take it on – that was their intention.
She says she understands the depth of feeling but to be a viable vibrant environment for students it needs investment.
Geraint asks how much would you sell it for?
She says she cannot answer the question and we would have considered any options put forward but that didn’t happen – no one put forward.
Chair asks that the original agreement was for £1 and not for £3.4m?
He adds: “I’m getting slightly concerned that you have knowledge of some things and not of others.”
Tim said: “I’m not aware we got it for £1.”
Barry said it was to do with the University of Cumbria to pay a peppercorn rent but then it ending up that the university paid Askham Bryan.
He said there’s been a lot of ‘jiggery pokery’.
Tim repeats that he does not know about the specifics. Barry says he cannot know some things and others. Tim says the questions should be directed to the people who were in charge of the time.
Barry says he has the deed of transfer and wants more information about the deed of release and wants a written answer.
Tim repeats it happened when he wasn’t there.
4.20pm: MP wants to drill down on Newton Rigg’s financial viability going forward.
Tim says there has been around 500 students each year for several years and figures suggest colleges need 1,000 students to be viable.
Total income is around £5m as a campus; of the 183 colleges that return their statements, there are no colleges that operate under £8m and that particular college has been merged.
He says a combination of the Cumbrian demographics of young people is declining.
MP asks if there is a possibility to get those numbers up?
Tim says they have worked very hard to grow the cohort of students but have hit the top level of 600 students.
Specifically agriculture students – there have been between 90 and 100.
It has done some schools work with Ullswater Community College and Sedbergh School, but low numbers.
How does Newton Rigg impact on the future of Askham Bryan, the MP asks.
Tim says: “I entirely understand the strength of feeling in Cumbria and beyond and I get their importance. I am accountable to Askham Bryan and all 5,000 students and we have to remain solvent so we’ve had to make a really difficult decision.
“We have not gone into this is any way other than looking at Askham Bryan as a whole. We’re in an improving financial position. This has been a really hard decision to make.”
MP asks him to clarify – would you say if the status quo continued would it put both colleges at risk?
Tim said yes.
4.29pm: Neil Hudson declares his interest in Newton Rigg and talks about Myerscough College and Ullswater College’s partnership to provide land-based education.
He asks Tim how will land-based education be provided in Cumbria when Askham Bryan pulls out?
Tim talks about the partnerships and discussions are ongoing and Kendal College is offering a portfolio of land-based provision.
Neil says it will be a smaller portfolio and is Tim aware of what courses will not be available in Cumbria.
Tim says 429 students at Newton Rigg and they have done an exercise of future opportunities – it’s a 95% match.
Equine and gamekeeping have issues – but there would be the option of residential for them and it is a small number.
4.37pm: Neil asks to what extent does future educational provision come into the college’s decision about disposing of the assets of Newton Rigg?
Tim says they would be delighted but previous reviews did not find a suitable operator but that would be delighted to talk to anyone who came forward.
Neil asks about the market value of the assets – if someone will take on the campus as a educational establishment, it will not need to achieve full market value.
That is confirmed by Tim and Judith.
Eden council has said that any development on that site must have education at the heart, so Neil asks if that comes into the thinking of the valuation of the site.
Tim says yes.
4.38pm: Neil asks Tim “Do you consider that Askham Bryan has an obligation to the learners of Cumbria to ensure their educational provision continues?”
Tim said yes they are working with various partners.
Neil asks about the assets and if they feel some obligation to make a new Newton Rigg college work.
Tim says there is a track record showing that we will and we have tried to find a solution.
4.41pm: Ian Byrne MP queries the reasons given for closure on Askham Bryan’s website being a lack of population and more than 700 people applied last year for places, but only 500+ were offered places. He said “That would have gone a long way to solving the financial problem”.
Tim says he would like to take the figures away and have a look at them, as it’s not a simple case of the number of students multiplied by income.
The MP said the low demographic growth claimed by Askham Bryan contradicted evidence in the first session.
Tim repeats he wants to take those figures away.
4.46pm: Lord Inglewood says we should see money redirected into the wider rural economy.
“In the case of Newton Rigg, with the benefit of hindsight, a lot of decisions were made or not made which looking back now were a mistake.”
Geraint says if it was the case that we could return the assets to Cumbria would the LEP be able to commit to £7.5m of Borderlands funds to make it work?”
Lord Inglewood said: “As of today, we’re very broke. But we will bust a gut to make sure land-based education stays in Cumbria.”
Jo said in terms of offer of financial support it was trying to provide growth deal funding but no proposal came forward. That is now committed cash so it would have to come from Borderlands funds.
Jo and Lord Inglewood said they would be right behind any proposal.
4.57pm: Chair asks how do we get the LEPs together to work together about education provision
Jo says there is a panel that does work together, but if you’ve got a small rural economy, quite rightly they are not going to focus on that.
She said in Cumbria, over 2 and 1/2 times of our economy is agriculture, which is why it is important.
5.01pm: Chair said the problem with Newton Rigg is there have been so many figures bandied about about whether it is viable or not, when new colleges come in they close colleges. “This is not the first time, it’s happened all over the country,” he said. “How do we make sure land-based education is continued?”
Jo said if we are going to avoid this again unless you’ve got a vibrant attractive environment for learning you’re not going to attract students.
Investment is key.
“Newton Rigg is a major strategic site and a huge asset that we need to think about as such,” she added.
5.03pm: Lord Inglewood said the Newton Rigg issue has been handled parochially and there are wider implications than that. “We must look forward and fight the next war, not fight the old ones.”
Chair tells Tim and Judith they’ve been given a tough time of it this afternoon.
Tim said he didn’t disagree with much of what Jo said and hoped he had been given more time to talk through land-based education provision.
“If you look at the 11 colleges left, there are commonalities – often located to a city region with access to rural hinterland.
“The breadbasket of England does not have a specialist college. We’ve ended up with a mix of providers and courses.
“There’s an opportunity to look at a joined-up approach. We can look at a hub and spoke model. You could look at specialist designation of some colleges. There needs to be a national co-ordinated response to how we go forward.”
5.11pm: Judith said joined-up approach was a good idea as colleges were private sector, although there was a perception that they were public and insolvency was an issue.
Geraint says he wanted to give Lord Inglewood the last word and said that Newton Rigg had lasted 100 years and wouldn’t it better to adapt that than sell it off.
Lord Inglewood said it would be a tragedy if it was sold off. “Evolution is always going to work better in the medium term rather than revolution,” he said.
“Just simply to dismember the estate and then who cares that’s not the best thing for Cumbria or the country.”
