AMBITIONS to ensure property developers always contribute towards education look set to fall short, despite some schools facing increased pressure due to the building of estates, a meeting has heard.

North Yorkshire County Council’s executive has approved series of changes to its policy for education contributions from developers, but the authority’s leading members heard the move would not overcome a loophole which saw no extra funding being given to schools in the surrounding area.

Cross-party concerns had been raised after it had emerged the authority had refused to seek funding for schools on developments in the Catterick Garrison area since Lingfield Academy launched Cambrai Primary School in the heart of the garrison last September.

However, following rapid housebuilding in the area and due to parental choice over where children attend schools, other primaries in the area had seen their rolls increase while receiving no extra funding to develop facilities.

Catterick Bridge ward member Councillor Carl Les said: “We know that in the garrison area there is no requirement for an increase in capacity because of the free school that has been opened there that is expanding.

“However, with parental choice a lot of garrison parents bring their children the five or six miles to  Catterick village and Michael Syddall School is bursting at the seams. How can Michael Syddall School access some funding out of the developments that are going on the garrison even though the garrison schools don’t require that extra capacity?”

Officers replied the free school would mean there would be no surplus capacity in Catterick Garrison area for the foreseeable future, leaving the authority unable to ask for contributions from any developments that come forward in the area for the short-term.

Cllr Les said the explanation of the situation, which opposition members have branded as ridiculous, provided “no comfort”.

The meeting was told the county’s district and borough councils had been “lukewarm” towards the education contribution changes, which would see an increased share of contributions going to the county council responsibility of education rather than the district council responsibility of low-cost housing.

Councillor Patrick Mulligan, the authority’s executive member for education, defended the move saying it had not updated the policy in more than two decades and the authority was using historic Department for Education formulae to calculate contributions.

He said: “What we have to remember is the costs we are proposing - a 16 per cent increase in the cost of primary expansions and six per cent in secondary expansions - compare with an increase in building cost inflation of between 25 and 40 per cent over the same period. I think it is fair. What we are doing is tightening up this policy so we can appropriate developer contributions to education.”

Other proposed measures include lowering the minimum number of houses being built for which primary education contributions would be sought to ten and for secondary education contributions to 25 and asking for contributions for special educational needs and disabilities and early years education for larger developments.

The meeting heard it would be up to the borough and district councils to decide if they accepted the increased demands, but the county council hoped and expected that they would.