Written question asked by Lord Trimble (Ulster Unionist Party) on Tuesday, 11 March 2003, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Wednesday, 19 March 2003. It was answered by Jane Kennedy (Labour) on Wednesday, 19 March 2003 on behalf of the Northern Ireland Office.

Northern Ireland Office

Question: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, for what reason the proposal contained in the Contenders List for the Schools Capital Building Programme to provide an extension and refurbishment to Banbridge Academy was unsuccessful; and what criteria were used to make this decision.

Answer: Mr. Trimble: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland for what reason the proposal contained in the Contenders List for the Schools Capital Building Programme to provide an extension and refurbishment to Banbridge Academy was unsuccessful; and what criteria were used to make this decision. [102932] Jane Kennedy: The schools' capital programme is determined on the basis of the highest educational need within the resources available. A scheme to extend and refurbish Banbridge Academy was one of 46 high priority schemes that met the criteria to compete for funding in this year's programme. However, as there were insufficient resources for all the competing schools, funding was allocated on the basis of priority of educational need. Banbridge Academy was one of the schools that did not succeed this time round. The criteria used to prioritise educational need (in order of weight) takes account of the suitability for teaching and learning, the condition of the school and the number of temporary classrooms.

Secondary information

Type: Written question
Reference: 102932; 401 c801-2W;401 c801W
Session: 2002-03
Subjects: Construction Capital investment Finance Schools Repairs and maintenance Banbridge Academy
Link: View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk