Chamber
Plenary, 02 Sep 2009
02 Sep 2009 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
The committee convener made that point but then went on to say that the committee wants the Government to keep the three criteria under active consideration. That was the compromise position that the committee agreed.
The focus must be on the criteria that are needed to help to protect rural schools. The advantage of that is that those criteria will also help to protect urban schools, which means that we will not need to differentiate between them. At the moment, we are in danger of relying on special pleading, but we do not need to: the robust case that can be used to defend rural schools will apply equally to urban schools and be to the benefit of all. In its evidence, the EIS stated that it would be invidious to ask a council to apply two different sets of criteria to the potential closures of a rural and a non-rural school within its boundaries. As we go into stage 2, will the minister clarify whether it would be possible to have the same criteria rather than separate ones? That would protect all schools equally.
There was general agreement, among not only committee members but witnesses, that we must try to ensure that any consultation is comprehensive, accessible and fair. The bill stipulates that consultation must include an educational benefits statement; the committee further agreed that any closure proposal should also be accompanied by a cost benefit analysis.
That latter suggestion is slightly more controversial in that we heard conflicting interpretations of what it might entail. Saving money on an unsustainable school is clearly a factor—if not the crucial one—in many closure decisions, but witnesses to the committee gave widely differing views on what those savings might include.
On the one hand, we heard estimates that millions of pounds might be saved from greater utilisation of spare capacity in schools; on the other hand, we heard the assertion that the extra cost of spare capacity will be close to zero, so there is little money to be saved. To my mind, what is important is that there is openness about any figures on which a decision is based and that it is preferable that ministerial guidance is produced on preparing a cost benefit analysis.
On a related point, it also emerged in evidence from the Scottish rural schools network that the local government distribution formula currently provides additional funding for rural schools with fewer than 79 pupils. It also emerged that that source of supplementary support from rural schools may be under threat from an on-going Scottish Government review. I put a question on that to the minister at committee, but can she make the Government's position any clearer at this stage? As our witnesses argued, it would be ironic indeed for that funding to disappear as ministers supposedly moved to reduce the threat of closure.
One of the most important measures in the bill is the proposal to replace the existing automatic need to secure ministerial consent in certain cases with a broader ministerial power to call in closure decisions. There is certainly broad acceptance for reforming the current system—not only is there general unhappiness with an automatic referral that is based on distance from the school or on occupancy, but many regard it wrongly to be an appeal process. Having said that, there remains some anxiety over the new system, not only over the question whether ministers should be involved in decisions that are best taken locally but over the precise criteria to be applied in deciding whether or not a school closure proposal should be called in.
I believe that the minister recognised in her opening remarks that there is consensus about removing or repealing the old system, but perhaps there is not consensus about the new system. Certainly, several witnesses to the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee, most notably those representing local authorities, expressed their concern that the grounds—
The focus must be on the criteria that are needed to help to protect rural schools. The advantage of that is that those criteria will also help to protect urban schools, which means that we will not need to differentiate between them. At the moment, we are in danger of relying on special pleading, but we do not need to: the robust case that can be used to defend rural schools will apply equally to urban schools and be to the benefit of all. In its evidence, the EIS stated that it would be invidious to ask a council to apply two different sets of criteria to the potential closures of a rural and a non-rural school within its boundaries. As we go into stage 2, will the minister clarify whether it would be possible to have the same criteria rather than separate ones? That would protect all schools equally.
There was general agreement, among not only committee members but witnesses, that we must try to ensure that any consultation is comprehensive, accessible and fair. The bill stipulates that consultation must include an educational benefits statement; the committee further agreed that any closure proposal should also be accompanied by a cost benefit analysis.
That latter suggestion is slightly more controversial in that we heard conflicting interpretations of what it might entail. Saving money on an unsustainable school is clearly a factor—if not the crucial one—in many closure decisions, but witnesses to the committee gave widely differing views on what those savings might include.
On the one hand, we heard estimates that millions of pounds might be saved from greater utilisation of spare capacity in schools; on the other hand, we heard the assertion that the extra cost of spare capacity will be close to zero, so there is little money to be saved. To my mind, what is important is that there is openness about any figures on which a decision is based and that it is preferable that ministerial guidance is produced on preparing a cost benefit analysis.
On a related point, it also emerged in evidence from the Scottish rural schools network that the local government distribution formula currently provides additional funding for rural schools with fewer than 79 pupils. It also emerged that that source of supplementary support from rural schools may be under threat from an on-going Scottish Government review. I put a question on that to the minister at committee, but can she make the Government's position any clearer at this stage? As our witnesses argued, it would be ironic indeed for that funding to disappear as ministers supposedly moved to reduce the threat of closure.
One of the most important measures in the bill is the proposal to replace the existing automatic need to secure ministerial consent in certain cases with a broader ministerial power to call in closure decisions. There is certainly broad acceptance for reforming the current system—not only is there general unhappiness with an automatic referral that is based on distance from the school or on occupancy, but many regard it wrongly to be an appeal process. Having said that, there remains some anxiety over the new system, not only over the question whether ministers should be involved in decisions that are best taken locally but over the precise criteria to be applied in deciding whether or not a school closure proposal should be called in.
I believe that the minister recognised in her opening remarks that there is consensus about removing or repealing the old system, but perhaps there is not consensus about the new system. Certainly, several witnesses to the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee, most notably those representing local authorities, expressed their concern that the grounds—
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson):
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-4734, in the name of Fiona Hyslop, on stage 1 of the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Bill.I am delighte...
The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning (Fiona Hyslop):
SNP
I express my gratitude to Karen Whitefield and the other members of the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee for their careful, thorough and co...
George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab):
Lab
The cabinet secretary is dealing with her manifesto commitments in relation to rural schools. Can she confirm that there was also a clear manifesto commitmen...
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
Yes, I acknowledge that commitment. I am delighted that we now have record lows in class sizes and record lows in pupil teacher ratios. Indeed, on my visits ...
Malcolm Chisholm (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab):
Lab
Is the cabinet secretary willing to urge local authorities that are undertaking school closure exercises, such as the City of Edinburgh Council, to follow th...
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
As the member will understand, the consultation to which he referred is a matter for the City of Edinburgh Council. He will note on page 19 of the bill and i...
Margo MacDonald (Lothians) (Ind):
Ind
In the event that a consultation does not meet the best practice requirements that the cabinet secretary has outlined, will parents have recourse to somebody...
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
Indeed, yes. I refer the member to the bill. One proposal is for ministerial call-in: if a consultation process is not carried out properly, parents can refe...
Margaret Smith (Edinburgh West) (LD):
LD
Does the minister accept that those of us who have some concerns about that in no way want to diminish the safeguards in the bill for rural schools? Extendin...
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
It is important to recognise the strength of the improvements on consultation for all schools, including semi-rural schools with transport issues. The defini...
Karen Whitefield (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee in the stage 1 debate on the Schools (Consultation) (S...
Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab):
Lab
We came back from the recess to the fall-out from the al-Megrahi debacle and the decision to postpone the introduction of the children's hearings bill, and t...
George Foulkes:
Lab
Oh, no!
Ken Macintosh:
Lab
I was extending the hand of friendship, Mr Foulkes.A number of issues with the bill remain, but I hope that with a little movement from the cabinet secretary...
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
This is an important point. The committee convener stated that rural schools require special consideration. Does Ken Macintosh agree with that? If so, what s...
Ken Macintosh:
Lab
The committee convener made that point but then went on to say that the committee wants the Government to keep the three criteria under active consideration....
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
Will the member give way?
Ken Macintosh:
Lab
Yes.
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
To clarify, there was not consensus on the consultation, but quite a polarised response. However, the compromise and new creative solution of ministerial cal...
Ken Macintosh:
Lab
I think that there is still some anxiety about whether ministers should have a call-in at all, but I recognise that that is an improvement on the current pro...
Elizabeth Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
I apologise on behalf of my colleague Murdo Fraser, who is absent from the debate because his wife Emma has just given birth to their second child, Lucy Eliz...
Margaret Smith (Edinburgh West) (LD):
LD
The Liberal Democrats welcome the opportunity to speak about the bill.The issue is important. As members may be aware, the City of Edinburgh Council is consu...
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
That is an important part of the debate. Even under the current system, the transport issues that are associated with school closures are subject to scrutiny...
Margaret Smith:
LD
I understand what the cabinet secretary is saying, but I think that there is a potential lack of clarity in the way in which those three criteria are set out...
Bob Doris (Glasgow) (SNP):
SNP
I am pleased to speak in this afternoon's debate as we consider the general principles of the bill. However, as I am a Glasgow MSP, members would expect me t...
Ken Macintosh:
Lab
Does Mr Doris believe, given the nature of his remarks, that rural and urban school closures should be treated identically, or does he think that different c...
Bob Doris:
SNP
Given that the SNP's manifesto commitment—which I suspect members are only too keen to see us fulfil—specifically mentioned rural schools, it is only right t...
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
The member made an interesting argument about calling it an educational analysis statement as opposed to an educational benefits statement. That cuts to the ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
SNP
Mr Doris, you should keep an eye on the time.
Bob Doris:
SNP
Of course. I thank the cabinet secretary for her helpful clarification.I conclude by saying that I am delighted with the core change to allow call-in by the ...