Jack Given Pledge Over Future of University Technical College

Last month I was contacted by a constituent who had read the following on the Save Filton Airfield website:

"The plan jeopardises Government funding for the proposed Bristol University Technical College next to Abbeywood Community School. This joint venture between University of West of England (UWE) and the City of Bristol College, with financial and technical support being offered by Airbus and Rolls-Royce, is aimed at producing high-calibre engineers through academic and apprenticeship routes, largely aimed at the aerospace industries based around the airfield. The funding decision has been deferred until the fate of the airfield is decided. The young people of Bristol stand to lose their future livelihoods."

Obviously concerned by this assertion, I immediately contacted the Business and Enterprise Minister Mark Prisk, who responded with the following assurance:

"Contrary to what you have heard, I can confirm that in October the Secretary of State for Education approved the Bristol and South Gloucestershire UTC proposal to enter the pre-opening stage with a target date for opening in 2013.

"I understand the proposers' preferred site option is the former Filton High School site.

"Department for Education property advisers, Partnerships for Schools, have recently commissioned searches for possible alternative sites in order to ensure best value for money in securing an appropriate site for the UTC. There is however no connection between the timescales for that process and the closure of Filton Airfield".

I am pleased with the commitment from the Minister that the University Technical College will proceed as planned, and I hope this reasures anyone who has read the above statement on the Save Filton Airfield Website. I am disappointed that the Save Filton Airfield group have felt the need to resort to scaremongering and spreading misinformation to achieve their aims. This is obstructive to transparent and open debate over the future of the site, which could be of great benefit to the area if developed correctly.

I would call on the group to remove the incorrect information from their website and publish an apology as soon as possible so that local people can consider the issue whilst in posession of the full and correct facts.

Back to all posts