Official Report 196KB pdf
Borders (Education Budget) (PE402)
The first petition is PE402 from Augusta Greenlees, who asks the Scottish Parliament to hold an inquiry into Scottish Borders Council's education budget overspend, to bring to account those who are responsible and to assess the impact on educational provision in the Borders. The petition had more than 10,000 signatures when we received it. Since then, we have received an additional 100 signatures from Ian Jenkins and others.
I come before the committee today with a simple request from the people of the Borders. They want to know why their children and teachers are paying the price for what is—it is now obvious—the council's total financial mismanagement. We have no confidence in the council's ability to sort out the situation. There is no long-term strategy for education in the Borders.
Before I invite committee members to ask questions, I ask Ian Jenkins and Christine Grahame whether they want to say anything in support of the petition.
I share many of Augusta Greenlees's anxieties, although I hope that the picture that she paints is gloomier than it needs to be. Nevertheless, the cuts will affect the provision of services in a damaging way.
I commend Augusta Greenlees, who was central in collating signatures from throughout the Borders, from the east coast to the western side.
In your opening statement, you said that the elected members are accepting no responsibility for the overspend, but are blaming the officials in the council. Have they taken any steps to bring those officials to account for the mistakes that were made?
The chairman of the education committee has resigned from that office, although he remains on the council. The assistant director has been dismissed, but allegedly on a different count. The director of education—or lifelong learning, or whatever it is called now—is on sick leave, and the chief executive of the council has been on sick leave and is now being granted early retirement. I am sorry to say that none of those facts fills us with a huge amount of confidence, nor do we feel that the council is accepting responsibility. We feel that the council is passing the buck and hoping that the schools will sort out the muddle for it.
So there is no way to get the information, especially if people are on sick leave. You cannot get information about whether officials were guided by councillors or vice versa.
No, not as far as we know. Rumours have started flying, which has produced misinformation, the like of which we have never seen. We feel abandoned.
I am inclined to go along with Rhoda Grant's train of thought, which is that ultimately councillors have overall responsibility. Has the affair been reported to the local government ombudsman?
I do not know. The matter is so public that one would have to be asleep not to notice what is going on. On comments that there should be an investigation within the council to see where responsibility lies, an inquiry would be all well and good, but we come back to the problem that our children must wait for that to happen. Some parents suggested that a task force should go in and sort the situation out so that our children do not carry the burden now. We do not have time.
Is it appropriate that the term "budget overspend" is being used? Do we have information about how the council finances were allocated at the outset of the financial year? The percentage that was allocated to education might have been underestimated at the start of the financial year.
I went, as a representative of a school, to a meeting of school boards with the director of education and the director of finance. We had a long and heated discussion. We asked that question. We asked how the muddle arose, what was the funding and whether it had been underestimated. We asked whether that was the problem. We emerged from the meeting without having received many facts and figures but with the feeling that there was perhaps underfunding of the total budget for education. That does not explain how it got into such a terrific muddle and why the council did not notice it for so long.
I understand that Christine Grahame might have more information.
It is my understanding that the council is setting up a working group with officials to consider disciplinary issues that arise from the situation. I do not know how far that will take us, because the officials are close to the situation.
I apologise to Ms Greenlees for arriving late and not hearing all her comments. One point that strikes me about this is the issue that is very much before us: what happened in the past? Did Scottish Borders Council make representations to the Scottish Executive, the then Scottish Office or the funding body of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities about the amount of money that it was receiving? Education costs in rural areas tend to be extremely high.
The first that parents and teachers knew of the problem was when the council woke up to the fact that there had been a huge overspend. When we asked how that had happened and why the council had not—as far as we could see—gone for help beforehand, we were given no direct answer. There seemed to be a lack of inclination to ask for more money. The council thought that it could manage within the budget.
That is also my understanding. Bearing in mind the criticism when the Scottish Parliament was set up that it would tend to become over-involved in local government matters and would in effect take away aspects of local government management, what do you see as the solution? Do you feel that the only way out now is for the Scottish Executive to inject extra funds and in effect to show extraordinary concern about this particular local authority's interest?
You can probably guess from my accent that I am not local, so it is a bit cheeky of me to answer. However, having learned as much as I can in the short time that I have lived up here I feel that it is easy to hide behind the statement, "We must not interfere with local government." There are moments of crisis, and this is one of them. I feel that that is what the Scottish Parliament is here for. In moments of crisis, the Parliament can step in quickly and deal with the crisis. We do not have to think about going to Westminster; the Parliament is here on our doorstep to help us. On occasions such as this, the Parliament ought to step in—that is what many people in the Borders feel.
If that were to happen, would it undermine the structure of local government and its responsibilities to the electorate properly to manage its affairs?
No, I do not think so. On the whole, local government runs its budgets and so on very well, and Parliament can step back. However, Parliament cannot always do that. In a crisis, surely Parliament has the wherewithal, the imagination and the brains to see that this is an occasion when it must step in. That does not set a precedent and it does not undermine local government.
In the newspaper reports that supplement what you have said this morning it is suggested that, following the publication of Mr Hinds's report, the Accounts Commission might ask for a public inquiry. Has that been announced?
I do not think that it has been announced publicly. It has been heard of—we know that it is rumbling around.
I congratulate you on the geographical area that you have covered in putting together your petition. If we were to boil the matter down, could we say that you would like parliamentary intervention not to be confined to, for instance, the education committee, but to extend to local representatives?
That is what it boils down to. The council should be considered from top to bottom.
I agree.
I have enjoyed discovering the Borders via the petition.
Obviously, there will be parliamentary intervention because, as has been said previously, the Education, Culture and Sport Committee has announced its intention to hold a short inquiry. From what you have heard about that inquiry are you content that it will get to the bottom of the problems in the Borders?
Content is too strong a word. We are fearful that the inquiry might get bogged down and disappear in a mass of paperwork, but it needs to be done, so we keep our fingers crossed that it will be to our benefit.
I, too, am concerned. I have been a terrible stammerer for most of my life and, for my sins, I am the vice-president of the British Stammering Association. I am concerned about special needs education. This week, the BSA is launching an awareness week. It talks about the need for speech therapy services and so on. Is there any indication that speech therapy services are being withdrawn?
Very much so. Eileen Prior, who works hard for special needs children, wanted to be here this morning, but regrettably could not attend. She would have been able to give members more information. A catalogue of shame is being put together, which shows how individual children are being affected. Funds are being cut enormously. Special needs children are the most vulnerable children in the Borders and there is no two ways about it: they are suffering right now.
Is it the intention that this catalogue of shame be submitted to the inquiry?
Yes.
The report of Audit Scotland has been passed to the Accounts Commission, which will consider it. Do we have any influence over how long that will take? Can we ask the Accounts Commission when a decision will be made?
Are you asking me or the petitioner?
I am sorry. I arrived late at this morning's meeting because I went to the wrong room.
The clerk tells me that the matter is for the Accounts Commission. However, it will be aware that the Education, Culture and Sport Committee is holding an inquiry.
I do not think that one must wait for one thing to happen before another thing happens. All the evidence that will be submitted, including that of Augusta Greenlees, shows that for individual children the crisis is happening now. The Education, Culture and Sport Committee can examine that matter at the same time as work is being done in relation to accountability and liability. The people who should be dealing with the situation that has arisen should not get tangled up in how it came about. Speech therapy is being cut considerably, along with a lot of other auxiliary services for children who have special educational needs.
I thank Augusta Greenlees for her evidence, which was clear and has affected the committee deeply. We will now discuss what to do with the petition.
Given the urgency of the situation—and acknowledging my reservations about trespassing on local authorities' business—I think that not only should we pass the petition to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, but we should advise the Minister for Education, Europe and External Affairs of what we have done. We should express to him our concerns about the situation and ask him to re-examine the matter.
We could certainly pass a copy of the petition to the minister and state that the committee has recommended that there should be an early response to this critical situation.
We could also send the minister a copy of the Official Report of our meeting. That would enable him to pick up any additional points that have been made.
There is a need for a task force to examine the education provision in the area and to sort it out now. There must be an inquiry into how the situation came about. However, that will not help the children who are losing out at the moment. We need to ask the minister to consider creating a task force to assist those children, if that is within his powers, given the problem that Phil Gallie mentioned about the Scottish Executive interfering with council matters.
I have been told that the best way for that suggestion to be taken up by the minister would be for the committee to tell the Education, Culture and Sport Committee that that is the view of the Public Petitions Committee.
It would take some time to set up a ministerial task force. Perhaps local MSPs from the various political parties should set up a task force.
The meeting in Galashiels is on 5 November, so it is less than a fortnight away. The Education, Culture and Sport Committee will receive a copy of the Official Report of this morning's meeting and will be fully informed of the evidence.
Members indicated agreement.
Water and Sewerage Industry (Competitiveness) (PE399)
Petition PE399, from Dr D H S Reid, is on the lack of competitiveness in the water and sewerage industry. The petition calls on the Parliament to introduce democratic and competitive instincts into the water and sewerage industry in Scotland by converting the existing water boards into three or more public liability companies, half-owned by the taxpayers and half-owned by people who want to take shares. As members know, the Executive introduced the Water Industry (Scotland) Bill to Parliament on 26 September. That bill will create an all-Scotland public water authority, to be called Scottish Water, which is aimed at improving services in this area. The policy memorandum accompanying the bill makes it clear that Scottish ministers have ruled out the privatisation model as incompatible with their commitment to maintaining Scottish Water as a publicly owned water and sewerage authority. No doubt that will be debated at some length in the Parliament.
I support that proposal. However, I should declare an interest in that I am sponsored by the Co-operative Party as well as by the Labour party. I want to highlight the fact that I am very disappointed that we are not going down the route of supporting the mutual option. That is something that I am keen to see in Scotland, although that option appears to have been ruled out by the Transport and the Environment Committee.
At 12 o'clock today, I will be receiving a petition from the Co-operative Party about water and sewerage, which I suspect might have something to do with the mutual option. Therefore, that matter will come before the committee in due course.
Members indicated agreement.
Deaf and Hard of Hearing People
Petition PE400 is from Clare McCann on behalf of the Deaf Equality and Accessibility Forum. Clare McCann wanted to come to give evidence to the committee this morning, but was unable to attend. She has said that she hopes to be able to watch the committee live on the internet and looks forward to seeing the way in which we handle the petition. I am not sure whether that is a warning to members that we are under particular scrutiny.
The position of the deaf in Scotland is tragic. We have only 35 fully qualified sign interpreters. Finland has a smaller population, but has 350 sign interpreters. In my time as chairman of the European Parliament Culture, Youth, Education, Media and Sport Committee, the Parliament passed the view that the deaf sign language in each member state should be given official status. Only three member states have complied with that: Finland, Sweden and Austria. Britain has simply ignored the question. The situation in Scotland is terrible.
I read and thought about the petition, but Winnie Ewing has confused me further—although I am sympathetic to her point. It seems to me that the matter falls between two stools. Is it the health department's responsibility to provide facilities or, given what Winnie Ewing said, is it the education department's responsibility? Is it the responsibility of the social work department in a local authority area? The problem seems to extend further than the social work department that the petition refers to. Colleagues might want to consider that.
It strikes me, from what Phil Gallie has said, that this is another area in which the Parliament could get into difficulties if it tries to intervene at local level, either with a health board or with local government. However, Parliament could take action about setting standards throughout Scotland. If we had such standards, it would be down to local authorities to assess how they finance them. If there are issues about finance not being available, the local authorities and the health boards—through the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and other organisations—would need to take them up with the Executive and with MSPs.
I want to make a couple of points. The Minister for Health and Community Care has put particular emphasis on joined-up government and on the need for social work departments and health boards to pool budgets, so we should be able to make progress. As Phil Gallie said, the matter falls between many stools. However, since the health side of the Executive is pulling things together, we should send the petition to the Minister for Health and Community Care and a copy of it to the Minister for Education, Europe and External Affairs.
On Winnie Ewing's first point, we can certainly take up her suggestion when we seek the views of the Executive. We will ask the Executive for information on what guidelines, if any, it imposes on local authorities and, if no guidelines exist, whether the Executive intends to introduce any.
We should ask COSLA what provision exists throughout Scotland for the deaf and hard of hearing. It is important that we find that out.
Yes. We can do that as well.
We do not know why South Lanarkshire Council stopped the post. People skilled in sign language are scarce and the council may simply not have been able to find someone. We do not know the facts of the case.
That is why it is important that South Lanarkshire Council gets a chance to respond.
The council may have stopped the post simply because there was no one available. Such people are very scarce and they have to pay their own fees. Usually, the burning motive for people to learn sign language is that they have a family member who is deaf. The way that the hard of hearing and deaf are treated is a blight on our society. We should give South Lanarkshire Council a chance to explain the reasons for its decision.
Absolutely. The petition says that the council used to employ such a person. We will find out whether that person retired or whatever.
Members indicated agreement.
Civil Service Jobs (Tayside) (PE401)
Petition PE401 is from Mr Ian Williams on behalf of Perthshire Chamber of Commerce and concerns the relocation of civil service jobs to Tayside. The committee considered a similar petition, PE383, from Dundee and Tayside Chamber of Commerce at its meeting of 11 September. Petition PE401 should have been presented at the same time but was not. It is suggested that both petitions should be considered when we receive the Executive's response to the issues that were raised on 11 September. Is that agreed?
Members indicated agreement.
Trunk Roads (Commercial Developments) (PE403)
The last of the new petitions is PE403, from Mr Allan McDougall, about planning guidance in relation to commercial development on the trunk road network. He is concerned that the Scottish Parliament should take urgent action on the problem of commercial development directly on the trunk road network in order to reinforce the guidance in national planning policy guideline 17.
Members indicated agreement.
Next
Current Petitions