Official Report 89KB pdf
The next agenda item is single-sex schools. Before Tommy Sheridan, who is now present, joined the meeting, I advised members that while we can discuss that issue, one of the recommendations is to refer it to the reporter on gender issues, Johann Lamont. However, Johann is not able to attend today for family reasons and she asked if our consideration of the matter could be deferred until our next meeting. Tommy Sheridan asked for the item to be included on the agenda, and while I do not mind having a bit of a discussion about it, we should defer consideration of the recommendations until the next meeting.
I have no problem with that approach. I brought to the committee's attention a number of letters that I received from parents whose children live in the relevant education authority area. It appears that problems with the single-sex school in that area have become more prevalent because of school closures. When male pupils from those families were able to access local schools, the single-sex status of Notre Dame High School did not appear to be a big problem. However, local schools have closed and the difficulty is that male children from those families have to travel outwith their local area to attend a secondary school. The parents are saying, "Wait a wee minute here. Why is single-sex status allowed at Notre Dame?" The matter has been brought to our attention as a consequence of reductions in education provision.
There are two issues. School placements and closures are local authority matters, but single-sex schools seem to have become an issue because of changes to schools in that local authority area. The other issue concerns single-sex schools and women in education, which may not be a matter for the Equal Opportunities Committee. It is worth discussing those matters when Johann Lamont is present, as they involve the wider issue of gender-specific education. The committee might want to address that wider issue, or it might want to ask the Education, Culture and Sport Committee to address it.
Are you suggesting that the committee might not agree to refer this item to the gender reporters group for further consideration? I hoped that the committee would agree the recommendation to ask the gender reporter and her group to examine the matter in more detail and to report back to the full committee.
No. I am suggesting that, if we are to make that decision, we should wait until Johann Lamont is present, so that she can give her views. There is a question whether the Equal Opportunities Committee or the Education, Culture and Sport Committee should consider the specific benefits or disbenefits of gender-specific education. I do not want the committee to agree to refer the item to the gender reporter without the reporter being here to comment.
I am sorry, convener; I misunderstood your point. I assumed that you had spoken to Johann Lamont already. If you have not, we should just defer the item—that would be fine.
No—I have spoken to Johann Lamont briefly about the issue, and there were matters that she wished to discuss with the committee before she decided one way or the other.
Let us defer the decision until Johann Lamont is present.
Okay. We will put the item on the agenda for the next meeting.
Next
Legislation