����Vlog

The Department for Education has been urged to correct “misleading” claims about its energy-buying service for schools, amid warnings that leaders could be pushed into contracts that are not right for them.

The Energy Consultants Association (ECA) has written to education secretary Bridget Phillipson to raise “serious concerns” about DfE claims made to schools and trusts under its .

The programme, launched in December, aims to make school finances stretch further across energy, supply teaching and banking by using DfE frameworks and deals.

However, the ECA, which represents independent energy brokers, said two claims in a were “factually incorrect or materially misleading”.

It urged the government to correct its description of how energy is purchased and rethink any expectation that all schools and trusts should use the DfE’s service.

‘Correct market conditions’

The DfE claims energy acquired through its scheme is bought “up to 30 months ahead when market conditions are right”.

The ECA said this implied the DfE service actively monitors the market and chooses to buy energy when prices are favourable.

However, it said the actual arrangement worked differently, with energy bought in stages over a set period to reduce the impact of sudden price swings, rather than guaranteeing schools the lowest possible price.

Reducing volatility and securing best value were “not the same thing”, the ECA letter states.

John Haw, chair of the ECA, told ����Vlog that energy under the scheme was purchased on a rolling basis, rather than bought “when the time is right”.

Many schools had previously been protected during recent energy shocks - notably resulting from the war in Iran - by means of fixed-price contracts arranged through brokers, he said.

Most schools would have “outperformed” the DfE’s contract as they have been on fixed contracts for three or four years, Mr Haw added.

Broker contracts defended

The ECA also challenged the DfE’s claim that “too many schools are locked into broker-negotiated contracts with no protection from sudden price rises”.

This statement was “really misleading”, Mr Haw said, as many broker-arranged contracts are fixed-price deals designed to protect schools from sudden market increases.

Brokers also provide services beyond procurement, including checking bills, resolving disputes, rolling out smart meters and helping schools reduce energy use, he said.

They also help schools and trusts simplify complicated energy arrangements, as they often have multiple suppliers and rates across different sites, Mr Haw added.

The DfE’s programme, on the other hand, only purchases energy for schools.

ECA challenged over broker interest

Mr Haw was challenged by ����Vlog on whether the ECA was writing to ministers because its members would lose business to the DfE scheme.

He acknowledged that some brokers, particularly those with many public sector clients, would be affected if more schools moved to the government service.

ECA’s objection went wider than this, he said, arguing schools still needed independent advice in a “very complicated” energy market.

He added it was “morally incorrect” for ministers to issue communications that the ECA considered misleading.

Legal action warning

Some large energy brokers are already taking legal action over the DfE’s approach, ����Vlog understands.

Mr Haw said the ECA hoped the dispute would not reach that point, but it was “minded to take a stand” if the DfE did not address the concerns.

While the DfE service may suit some schools, the ECA warned against a “blanket expectation” that all schools and trusts should use it.

The association has asked the DfE to present its buying service as “one credible option among several” before any changes are made to the academy trust handbook.

The DfE has been approached for comment.