Petition PE342
Item 5 on the agenda is the consideration of public petition PE342, from Mr Neil Kay and others, on school closures. Members have received copies of the petition. Cathy Peattie, who has been working on the issue, will give us an update on the situation, concerning the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities.
Members will recall that last year a petition led to a report on school closures in Argyll and Bute. The report made it clear that parents had not necessarily been involved in the debate surrounding the closure of schools and it raised many questions about the way local authorities decide on school closures. I recommended that we ask COSLA to consider drawing up guidelines for school closures, and the committee is concerned that nothing has happened.
I have been in touch with COSLA—I do not know whether I have a confirmed meeting yet—because I am concerned that it has still not taken up the issue. COSLA has responsibility for education and a role in drawing up the guidelines, but I have a lot of sympathy with the petitioner. There are reasonable guidelines in England, based on good manners and good practice in consulting parents, which should be adopted here. We are committed to asking COSLA to do something. However, if COSLA cannot address the matter soon, we must ask the Executive to look into the matter.
Cathy Peattie's assessment is fair, but there is a further dimension to the issue, to which the clerks' paper draws attention.
We do not want the Parliament to be seen as the final court of appeal on every school closure in Scotland. That would be unreasonable and it is not our position to do that. Equally, people may feel that they have a grievance at the moment because there is dubiety about the guidelines—they are different in various councils—and there does not appear to be a national context for the debate. The petition draws attention to those two aspects and suggests how we could proceed.
COSLA must introduce guidelines on consultation—that is what we asked it for and that is what it should be doing. If it cannot do that, we must consider an alternative so that we have a standard set of national guidelines on consultation and can say to anybody who approaches the Parliament that they were followed to the letter and that therefore there is no case.
However, what is also necessary is a national context. The petition very fairly points out that, for a number of reasons, the policy that was put in place in England in 1998 has worked well. One reason is that it has put the responsibility back on local authorities, but within a clear context. Local authorities know exactly how they should operate. The policy has prevented the closure of certain schools, but has permitted the closure of others. No matter how aggrieved parents are, they know that there is a national framework, a decision-making process and local guidelines. That is what we need in Scotland. It will clarify what happens in Parliament, allow this committee and the Public Petitions Committee to be clear about what we will and will not entertain and put the burden back where it should be, which is on elected local representatives.
The petition suggests a useful way forward, which we could build on in two ways. First, we must press COSLA to come up with the goods that it was asked for almost a year ago. We must ask it for a definite time scale and seek alternatives if we do not get the goods within that time scale.
Secondly, we must explore the issue of a national framework and guidelines. The committee could consider that quickly—not before the summer, but certainly after it. It could spend even just a day on it, talk to people and draw up a report.
Those who have been on the committee for some time will remember that we were meant to consider rural school closures. We received a report—which was perhaps not exactly what we were looking for—from the reporter at the time, which disappeared into the ether—the real issue was not addressed. The committee could usefully bring rural school closures and consultation together and do a service to Parliament, the local authorities and parents.
If Cathy Peattie is willing, she could continue with the issue, try to push it through and report back to the committee with an update as soon as she has one.
I am happy to do that. I found last year that most local authorities did not have reasonable guidelines—it was not just Argyll and Bute; other local authorities did not have them either. I am happy to press the matter—I am plaguing Martin Verity's life. I understand that Danny McCafferty of COSLA was off sick and has now returned. I want somebody at COSLA up with the issues very quickly and I will be pushing for that. I will report back to the committee. If we cannot get the guidelines through COSLA, they should be done by the Executive.
Could we get a research paper from the clerks on the application of the English system: how it works, what it has done and what benefits it brings? That could also be tabled for the committee by Cathy Peattie.
I would be happy to do that.
I support what Mike Russell and Cathy Peattie are saying. If COSLA does not come up with the goods, the matter should be addressed another way: through the committee, through ministers or a combination of both. We cannot let the matter lie without developments to clarify the situation.
That has been a helpful discussion.
Can we defer the petition, but inform the petitioner that we are very interested in it?
Martin Verity will keep it live until we have a further report from Cathy Peattie and can move forward on it.
Will we send the petitioner a record of our discussion?
The petitioner is here.
He is listening to the discussion.
We will keep Mr Kay up to date with what is happening with Cathy Peattie's report.
Meeting continued in private until 16:45.