Meeting of the Parliament 09 January 2014
—and she might have a point. However, although there is a wider parliamentary debate to be had about common good assets, that is for another day. This afternoon, we are discussing very narrow and specific interests relating to Portobello high school and the bill before us. We look forward to the on-going consultation and engagement on the community empowerment (Scotland) bill, which will provide an opportunity for some of these issues to be aired.
After all, members are right. Because of its very narrow focus, which was accurately highlighted by Cameron Buchanan, this bill is without precedent. Fiona McLeod was also right to highlight the issue of precedence and returned to the issue of consultation by exploring how local authorities make choices, engage with people and take forward that particular programme. Nevertheless, we believe that the process is robust.
This has been a journey. People might well have changed their position on the matter over time as circumstances have changed or as a greater understanding of the available opportunities and options has been reached. Alison Johnstone helpfully made the case about circumstances moving on with regard to the condition of the building itself; indeed, that is the issue on which this debate has been particularly consensual. No one disagrees that a new school is required. Different sections of the community might debate where the new school should be sited, but this bill facilitates the option of proceeding with the council’s preferred choice.
For all those reasons and given our understanding of the complexities of common good and other factors, Government will continue to be constructive and take forward consideration of such matters. Members will vote as they please at decision time but, although we recognise all the points that have been made in this afternoon’s debate, we will continue to remain neutral.
15:18