Recommendation 21

The Department told us that when it first ran the process, 88% of schools responded. It explained that 93% of schools had now responded to the survey, and that it was pursuing the remaining schools and had built asbestos assurance processes into its condition data collection work which should help pick up any remaining schools. The Department told us that schools were generally keen to inform it of asbestos concerns, and it was therefore not overly worried about the asbestos risk amongst the 7% of schools yet to respond to the 47 Qq 103–4 48 Q104; HC Committee of Public Accounts, Oral evidence: Financial Sustainability of Schools in England, HC 650, December 2021 49 Qq 100–1, 104 50 Q103 51 Q 106; HC Committee of Public Accounts, Oral evidence: Financial Sustainability of Schools in England, HC 650, December 52 Committee of Public Accounts, Academy schools’ finances, Thirtieth Report of Session 2017–19, HC 760, 30 March 2018 53 HM Treasury, Treasury Minutes – Government response to the Committee of Public Accounts on the Twentieth to the Thirtieth reports from Session 2017–19, Cm 9618, May 2018 54 HC Committee of Public Accounts, Academy accounts and performance, Seventy-Third Report of Session 2017–19, HC 1597, January 2019 16 Academies Sector Annual Report and Accounts 2019/20 survey.55 However, we were nonetheless concerned that some schools might not highlight that they had asbestos to avoid alarming staff and pupils, especially if it did not hold sufficient budget to fix the asbestos problem. The Department confirmed that there was no designated asbestos funding, but that it was a key consideration when allocating funding based on school condition.56 It explained that it did not have a target for the total removal of asbestos from the school estate as there was some asbestos that was better left in place than disturbed, but that it was committed to ensuring that “every bit of asbestos in a school [was] either removed or managed in a way that health and safety c