Education Spokesperson, Councillor Ellen Morton, has told us that she hopes that the enhanced criteria to identify schools which may be proposed for closure will be published on the council’s website tomorrow morning (8th March).
127 Responses to Councillor Morton hopes school closure selection criteria published 9th March
Leave a Reply
All the latest comments (including yours) straight to your mailbox, everyday! Click here to subscribe.
I wonder if this will be specific to each school or a holistic criteria
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Surely the only criteria can be Educational Benefit
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
She must have had a busy few days writing them! If there are criteria, why couldn’t she just cut and paste them in immediately?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Why was the criteria not published before Morton visited the schools, this would have enable the parent/guardian to understand why their school was on the closure list. Surely there is some form of procedures in place which the council must follow to establish a fair and acurate analysis of each school.
If this document was not in place before Morton visited the schools, I would assume we could see this as being negligent of the council? If this was to happen in any other Industry/Business there would be a public outcry.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So. at the meeting 0n 3rd of March at Kilmory, the numpties voted for a pig in a poke. They never cease to amaze me.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
As Fiona knowns, and was discussed with her and the Times Educational Supplement Scotland (TESS) on Tuesday, this is a HOLISTIC approach but without any indication of a criteria. It now looks like the penny has dropped and someone in the ConDemAll administrtaion has realised that they require to have some criteria / reason to justify a school being on the list. As the proposals are not from progessional officers as was confirmed at the Council meeting last Thursday but from a Member, the advice that I have now received is that the chance of eventual call-in will be very high for any school proposd for closure. Did Cllr Morton give ForArgyll this information before her meeting with TESS on Tuesday or after?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It is the word ‘hopes’ that interests me.
Hopes suggests there is a possible barrier to publication. What might that barrier be?
Dick Walsh?
Sneddon?
The fact it is being retrospectively drafted?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
this is getting even sillier. cart – horse!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Is this what the QIO’s have been doing for the past few weeks?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Fair and accurate-Argyll and Bute Council!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
To Cllr Freeman: as the Council’s Chief Executive recently did you the favour of sending copies of the Code of Conduct to councillors you might fresh our memories on what exactly it has to say about councillors not interfering with operational matters.
To my simplistic mind, the role of councillors is to formulate policy and oversee the running of the Council. Officers implement policy and are responsible for operations. I seem to remember the Code makes this quite clear.
As you say, Cllr Morton does seem to be insisting that the current list is “her” list that she reached through “holistic” assessment of the various schools and using “enhanced criteria”. She had promised as much during her processional tour of Argyll’s schools.
Deciding that there should be a school estate review is a political decision (as is deciding to continue with it) so no problems there. Formulating criteria for selecting schools could just about be considered a political decision (though this is open to question). However, choosing which schools should go for consultation is clearly an operational matter and thus not a proper activity for a councillor, even if they are the Spokesperson for Education.
When I had a year on the Student’s Representative Council at Glasgow Uni (ironically as an independent!) the phrase “ultra vires” was very popular. It would seem to me that Cllr Morton has indeed been ultra vires and has thus breached the Code of Conduct.
What I had not actually considered is that this in itself could be grounds for the SG to call in the whole caboodle but a quick mental exercise suggests that Cllr Morton’s position is hopelessly compromised by the fact that she is also leader of the Lib-Dem group on the Council and this is an election year. It may seem cack handed to be proposing the closure of the school in the very village (Minard) your MSP candidate and fellow councillor is from but consider this: if Minard does not go forward for consultation after the pre-con phase (an unfortunate but rather amusing contraction of pre-consultation) then political opponents could accuse Cllr Morton of having influenced a purely operational matter for political gains. Likewise, if Minard is chosen to go forward then the school might complain that this is purely so that Cllr Morton can show that there is no bias but she is capable of making tough decisions!
I remember Cllr Morton on Oban FM explaining that she was able to take on this task of selecting schools for closure as she had no schools in her constituency that were affected “except for a tiny piece of Luss”. Tiny or not , the fact that she is connected to Luss should have automatically debarred her from any involvement with Luss. Again, if Luss escapes the list after pre-con or remains on it, Cllr Morton’s position is open to attack.
Now, I’m not for a moment suggesting that Cllr Morton really does have a political bias in her selection of the schools and I actually think she was genuinely trying to help the officers responsible for the hopelessly floundering schools closure programme. However, she has put herself in the position where, regardless of the outcome, it can be suggested that her list is political. This is why councillors have to stick to their knitting and that is policy and oversight.
Incidentally, the application of varied criteria without some sort of numerical weighting given to each just means that the process is entirely subjective rather than objective. Mr Sneddon’s previous plan did at least have the merits that it was entirely objective (even if it led to completely daft closure plans).
I look forward to reading the criteria later today.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
this is exactly why there is pre-consultation. in the phoney war morton and sneddon can make up their own rules, gain advantage and be immune from counter attack. they will then have the positions and ammunition for when the blitzkrieg on schools actually starts.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
for Dr McKenzie. The Councillors Code of Conduct is clear on this issue. At paragraph 3.4, the Code reads: “Whilst both you and Council employees are servants of the public, you have separate responsibilities: you are responsible to the electorate but the employee is responsible to the Council as his or her employer. You must also respect the different roles that you and an employee play. Your role is to determine policy and to participate in decisions on matters placed before you, not to engage in direct operational management of the Council’s services; that is the responsibility of the Council’s employees. It is also the responsibility of the Chief Executive and senior employees to help ensure that the policies of the Council are implemented”. I hope that this is helpful.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thank you Cllr Freeman for pointing us to the exact wording of the Code. Would you consider that selection of schools for closure proposals constitutes direct operational management?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Was Councillor Morton’s communication with For Argyll yesterday another pre-consultation exercise? There should now be enough comments on her announcement for her to cobble together another fudge of so-called criteria which she wasn’t able to supply previously.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I have heard that this statement does exist as the Helensburgh Advertiser had to get an advance copy as their deadline for publishing is at lunchtime on Wednesdays.
I think we all know what we should expect it to say.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
And here it is:
http://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/news/2011/mar/education-review-pre-consultation-criteria-clarified
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thank you Fiona (you have been hovering on the Council web site haven’t you!).
The press release makes several things clear:
1: Cllr Morton devised the additional criteria
2: These criteria are not purely objective and indeed some appear highly subjective: notably that connected with transport
3: Since there is no objective matrix at work, the schools do not “self-select” (this is indeed made clear in the statement).
4: Cllr Morton clearly used her own judgement in deciding what list of schools should be brought forward for consideration.
The “holistic” approach is not without merit but I still question Cllr Morton’s authority under the Code to actually make these judgements and ask if her actions have not in fact rendered the whole exercise incompetent? (in the legal sense). Is this a question we should be putting to Mr Hendry?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The full Code is available here and there may be other useful things to find at this site:
http://www.standardscommissionscotland.org.uk/
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
In my mind “Your role is to determine policy” includes determining a school closure selection policy/criteria. An operational matter is how many bin men does it take to empty a bin. Exactly how this would be interpreted in a legal sense is another matter. Regardless I don’t think it will be a show stopper.
I think the level of engagement that Cllr Morton has in the process is something to be recognised as positive. Much better than anonymous members of staff working away in the background which inevitably attracts criticism.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Jim: Whether or not we agree with the specifics of what is being done, we agree that Councillor Morton’s leading from the front is courageous and accepting of responsibility in a way that is constructive and is a positive move in the council.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Dr McKenzie. You ask if I “consider that selection of schools for closure proposals constitutes direct operational management”? I know that a number of Members, including myself, continue to have difficulty in relating this to the formulation of policy and consider that this is an operational matter. Having said that, I am sure that the ConDemAll administration in the Council will argue otherwise.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Soooo, lets start the sweep. Name the date that this farce will fall to pieces and preconsultation will be abandoned.
Winner gets a years subscription to the Ellen Morton fanclub.
I’ll go for the 18th of April.
And we perhaps should say which year… 2011.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It is certainly courageous and accepting responsibility certainly seems an unusual thing for A&B but, and it is a huge but, it would appear that the new ‘criteria’ are entirely subjective and are totally down to the individual making the judgements.
To say openly that:
“Criteria for inclusion in the proposals are not based on any single formula or calculation. All of the criteria will be considered, although the significance of each criteria will vary from school to school.”
Is in effect to say that the council (or councillors or officers) judgement is what counts.
So, instead of, say, having a 45 minute travel time as a criteria (however arbitrary one may feel it is) which can be proved or disproved, one now has a judgement on:
‘Are there any travel issues which would prevent the proposal being successfully implemented?’
That is impossible to measure and one cannot even compare decisions on different schools since:
” …the significance of each criteria will vary from school to school.”
So, school A could have a new journey time of 30 minutes which is considered to be a ‘significant’ enough issue to prevent the ‘proposal being successfully implemented’. Pupils at school B could have an hour journey, but that is not considered ‘significant’ enough to prevent closure.
So someone (councillor or official) will decide what their judgement on each ‘criteria’ is for each school and then will decide on how ‘significant’ each of those criteria is to inform their ‘holistic’ view.
I also fail to see how this whole ‘system’ can lead to any decent assessment which would enable them to effectively judge the ‘potential educational benefit of any suggested change’.
In fact I cannot see how this process can be said to meet the requirement of the 2010 act that for rural schools:
“a decision to consult on a closure proposal would not be made until the local authority had explored all possible alternatives and fully assessed the likely implications of closure.”
In view of this I would certainly be very suspicious of any ‘pre-consultation’ since this is acting outside of the requirements of the act and it is for the council to demonstrate that it has met its legal duties: parent and community groups are not required by the act to do any of the council’s business for them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
newsroom- courageous and leading from the front – you’re having a laugh! this is a full blown retreat – chaotic, shambolic with the innocent children getting trampled in the rush to save skins and elections!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Fopr corcale: Yes indeed – but Councillor Morton has run up her personal flag on the entire operation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
To Jim (not to be confused with Jam as I did a few days back!)
I agree that selection of criteria could be considered policy. Had the criteria been objective resulting in schools self-selecting for inclusion then there would have been no difficulty. However, because the criteria are not all objective and have no fixed weighting, what Cllr Morton has effectively done is to set herself up as a Roman Emperor at the gladiatorial games and the twitch of her thumb dictates life or death for a school. OK that’s an exaggeration as it still requires the councillors to approve decisions but I’m sure you understand the metaphor. If it is a policy (and thus political decision) then surely it would have been appropriate for these criteria to have been brought before councillors to approve before they were applied?
If operational matters are really at the level of how many bin men does it take to empty a bin then it beggars the question as to why we have so many very well paid Directors and Heads of service if this is the level of their responsibility! However, this is of course a nonsense: would it be appropriate for a Councillor to set the criteria for, say, Council procurement of building services and set criteria where the weighting can be changed on their judgement? I could go into planning but that might be too near to the bone for one councillor!
Fact is that Cllr Morton is a politician. She leads her party group in the Council and is the Deputy leader. The Code of Conduct is designed to prevent politicians and officials from crossing into each others domains of responsibility. Cllr Morton has clearly crossed into the domain of the officials and regardless of how courageous this was, it was wrong. I notice that Mr Russell has also picked up on Cllr Morton’s apparent breach of the Code. While the Administration may huff and puff that she has not, judgement lies not with them but with the Standards Commission.
However, the more pertinent question is does this matter? Cllr Morton has not been engaged in wrong doing. She has not abused her position for personal gain or the benefit of friends. I would be surprised if her actions have led to political gain – indeed some may argue that she has doomed the election prospect of her party’s MSP candidate for Argyll and Bute. If the rumours emanating from ARSN about them deciding to oppose or even stand against pro-closure candidates at the 2012 council elections then her decision may indeed be seen as “courageous” – in the way Sir Humphry used to use it when Jim Hacker proposed some new policy.
Cllr Freeman’s point, however, remains unanswered: does the fact that that Cllr Morton supplanted the proper role of officials mean that the list that has emerged from her pereginations is incompetent and would automatically mean ministerial call ins if any of these schools are finally chosen for closure at the end of the consultation process?
It would seem vital that a definitive answer to this is obtained from the Scottish Government BEFORE potentially wasting yet more money and time on this issue. If it turns out that Cllr Morton’s well intended actions to reduce the risk of closures being called in has actually had the opposite effect then we may yet again marvel at the power of the law of unintended consequences!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim. Regarding operational matters, how many bin men does it take to empty a bin. In my area it takes three bin men to empty a bin. The driver sits in the bin lorry, one person gets out to put the wheelie bins on the back of the lorry and a third person sits in the bin lorry doing nothing!
As the householder now takes his wheelie bin out to the side of the road to await emptying and brings the empty wheelie bin back into their own garden there is no need to have three men on each bin lorry. Yet another case of overmanning.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The approach is illogical and counter-intuitive. Cllr Morton’s tour of Argyll & the Isles WAS the pre-consultation. The very fact that this process has led to a ‘list’ means that those schools on it are effectively under immediate threat of closure – there is no other reasonable way to interpret their position. The Act requires that all the ‘Section 12′ factors be considered BEFORE proposing closure. The council intends to use ‘pre-consultation’ to investigate those factors… but it can’t do so BEFORE compiling a closure list, because the list is already in existence. Reductio ad Absurdum.
The penny hasn’t dropped in Kilmory yet. The problem here is not a lack of consultations, but an apparent lack of any understanding of the true meaning of the word. We have had ‘informal consultation’, then ‘Statutory Consultation’ (now abandoned), then we had ‘Morton consultation’ (the tour), now we are to have ‘pre-consultation’, presumably to be followed by more ‘Statutory Consultation’. Perhaps they’re hoping to achieve ‘Death by Consultation’! They’re certainly achieving confusion – seemingly more among themselves than anyone else.
The only really important factor doesn’t require any ‘consultation’ at all – it has been loudly and insistently apparent for months, and is right there on the opening page of the statutory guidance to the Act: “The Act also introduces a presumption against the closure of rural schools by ensuring that a decision to consult on a rural school closure proposal is not made until the local authority has had regard to all viable alternatives and assessed the likely implications of closure.”
Argyll & Bute Council has, from the start, been coming at this issue from precisely the opposite direction, namely “What is the maximum number of schools we can close”. That is their policy, and until they abandon the current process completely, and sit down with a genuine intention to revise the policy itself into a form both acceptable to communities and compliant with the law, no extra layers of consultation will make the slightest difference.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Tim McIntyre: Excellent point on the chronology of the appearance of the list.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Re Tim and BFO and C:
You are both correct in that schools have indeed been selected before viable alternatives have been looked at. However, I suspect the Council will wriggle off that hook by saying that this is merely a pre-consultation list, not to be confused with the consultation list. By the time they get to the consultation list they will have indeed looked at the viable alternatives (in a very short time frame). They will have thus ticked the box demanded by the Act for “have you looked at the three factors relating to rural schools before drawing up closure plans!. This is why the pre-cons are so dangerous.
Turning to the criteria: in some cases these are not criteria as to why some schools are on the list but rather why some are off it. Specifically Cllr Morton looked at factors that would have meant that it would be very difficult to justify closing a school (eg travel too difficult; school costs more to close than keep open; receiving school doesn’t have capacity). This removes schools where there is a very high risk that closure would be prevented either by SG call in or heaped ridicule from all quarters for others (Jamie McGrigor’s comment in the Parliament about Barcaldine springs to mind on the latter).
The starting point for the review still appears to be “let’s shut down as many rural schools as we can get away with”. The only schools really exempt from consideration are single school islands and the town primaries. Everyone else has the “enhanced criteria” applied and if they come up with a result that suggests they would cause too high a risk of the closure plan failing then they are off the list. What is left is not a list that is based on weaknesses of the remaining schools but rather the other schools are too strong to be closed.
For the schools that are left on the list, Cllr Morton is proposing a bizarre game of school closure top trumps. For instance Minard call on their excellent HMIE report but Cllr Morton responds with “ah but my price per pupil and short journey distance out trumps that”. For North Bute they say, “ah well, our cost per pupil is one of the lowest in Argyll and it will cost the Council money to close us so we win”. “Not so fast” says Cllr Morton, although cost per pupil out trumps educational value at Minard, my holistic criteria means that I can now play building condition and the fact that you don’t have too far to go to the next school so I win again! Other schools can predict how their best values will be trumped in this game by Cllr Morton applying other categories “holistically”.
I don’t pretend to be an expert on local government and how they approach school closures but most of the good ones that I have seen have only one criterion: school roll. If this falls too low, the Council looks at what can be done. If nothing can be done about the roll and the fall is terminal then the school is closed. Simple.
But then again those councils cherish their rural schools.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Councillor Morton. I suggest that the primary school in Lochgilphead be closed and the pupils transferred to the surrounding primary schools which have sufficient vacancies to accomodate them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Treblet: something similar occurred to me. For people in the towns who might not understand why people in villages care so much about our schools: imagine if someone suggested putting all of the primary school children from Helensburgh onto the train and sending them to Dumbarton. Quicker journey time than that suggested for many of the targeted rural schools. Just imagine the opportunities for peer interaction. And the savings!
And just imagine the reaction from parents and community groups.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
DDM: Had the Council come up with a ‘objective’ system we would just be sitting here poking holes in that approach and complaining that such a procedure can never take into consideration the unique characteristics of each school ie you want the selection criteria to be subjective. It’s a no win situation. The fact that many of the schools selected have very small roles and very high cost per pupil suggests to me that some sense of logic has prevailed.
On your point about sending kids from Helensburgh to Dumbarton. What if parents of kids attending school in Helensburgh were to demand that their children attend classes with the same pupil to teacher ratio of say Achaleven? And that they demanded the same amount spent per head on their kids as those attending Achaleven?
Treblet: your anecdote does not prove a systemic “overmanning” on bin routes. On my route there is one driver and two men furiously chasing the lorry and emptying bins.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim: you miss my point. There shouldn’t be any criteria, only a single criterion and that is roll. That it is the only thing that should be looked at to instigate a consideration of the viability of a school and what should be done to improve its viability.
Whether to close a school that is not considered viable will depend on a whole host of factors but the decision to consider the school in the first place should only depend on roll.
I think you also missed my point about moving children from their home towns, villages or settlements.
My wife has already told me off for writing over-long posts so I won’t rise (immediately) to the bait of the nonsense of per pupil costs and of parental choice being driven by teacher:pupil ratios. I’ll save that for another time!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
DDM: You seem to be contradicting yourself, should their be no criteria or one criterion ie roll?
It’s a moot point however, roll alone will inevitably produce a list which will include schools which can be struck off the list instantly for obvious reasons, examples would be Luing and Iona.
It don’t remember all of the school rolls for the ones identified but from my vague recollection the majority have rolls of about 15 or less with a couple of exceptions.
I get your point re moving kids to other schools but it is entirely disingenuous.
Per pupil costs are far from nonsense. A number of the schools on the list are examples of hideous inefficiency in ABC’s education system. We are spending £15k/yr on kids who can be educated for half of that 6 miles away. How do you justify that to the tax paying electorate?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim: grammatical pun on plurality – no criteria (plural) because there is only a criterion (singular). Sometimes I try to be too clever.
On roll – other councils usually apply a cut off limit for roll after which the school is reviewed to look for the best way forward. The actual cut off depends on the Council. Iona would indeed be probably being under constant review and perhaps you meant Lismore rather than Luing (the latter having a robust roll). But the point of review is to see how the roll can be improved. Problem with ABC’s approach is that it has decided to close schools first then gone to look for reasons to do so. This is totally at 180o to what is supposed to happen.
Nine of the schools on the current list do have low rolls (exceptions are North Bute, Toward and Luss which are higher and healthy – apologies if I am mistaken here). There are two empty schools and two “micro” schools: Ardchattan and Skipness. The latter should definitely be reviewed and you could argue that the remaining schools (5 if my arithmetic is correct) should also be reviewed. But that review should be about how to increase their rolls with closure only as the last resort.
I’m not sure how you consider my point disingenuous. It was simply to illustrate the outrage of the good folk of Helensburgh if it was suggested that their weans were moved on a daily basis to Dumbarton because of cost savings and to use this illustration to allow people to better understand the outrage parents from villages feel when something similar is suggested for their children (eg Luss to Helensburgh).
Not rising to per pupil costs tonight. Sorry! (but they are a nonsense)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim. The the bin men on my route are certainly not furiously chasing the lorry and emptying bins. I see them from my front window when the bin lorry stops at my road end to empty my bin. One bin man gets out to put my wheelie bin on the back of the bin lorry whilst the other bin man sits inside with the driver. It that is not overmanning then I do not know what is.
It is a legacy from the time before householders were given Wheelie bins which the householder has to put out him/herself. Prior to that one bin man collected the householder’s bin from his garden whilst after emptied the other bin man returned the bin back to the garden. It is time that the Argyll & Bute Council work measurement department were monitoring operations such as this.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
DDM: Where other Councils have reviewed schools with low rolls what has been the outcomes on means of improving the rolls? And to what extent have any steps taken to improve rolls succeeded or failed? What additional cost have these initiatives incurred? Do these reviews take into consideration that there are viable schools within very comfortable commuting distance?
You know very well that closing a large school and moving it to another will produce no cost saving. You would need to move the majority of the staff (to teach newly created classes) and accommodation (to accommodate the newly created classes) then pay for travelling costs. Your hypothetical situation is therefore a farce.
It also does not compare like for like. With these proposals we are talking about a handful of kids travelling in some cases only 6 miles. Hundreds of kids already make this sort of commute to school. There doesn’t appear to be any kind of public outrage at this hence I suspect little sympathy to be found among the electorate.
Dismiss cost per pupil as your wish. The information that the public are being presented with indicates that one school within a 5 mile radius of 3 others costs 3x as much per head. This is what the public make their judgement on. If this is inaccurate then those campaigning need to stress that point.
Treblet: Have you followed your bin lorry around the entire route? If you have and the 2nd man sits on his bum the whole time then you will have a good case. From what I’ve been told the bin crews are running with fewer men and on longer shifts than ever before. It’s not the jolly it perhaps once was.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim – the point of a hypothetical argument is that it is hypothetical – i.e. “what if…”. In this case “What if there WAS a cost saving” – would people in a large town be quite happy to see their primary-aged kids bussed off to another large town to go to school? It’s a point of principle, and a fair question.
In simple terms, the cost-per-pupil comparison is a nonsense because it compares inputs, not outputs. The kids in ‘expensive’ schools get just the same education as those in larger schools; there’s no caviar at lunch time or gold-plated taps in the wash rooms. They probably get a bit more teacher time and a bit less access to some facilities and resources – swings & roundabouts. Your constant refrain about some kids apparently ‘deserving’ more spent on them is politics-of-envy tosh.
It costs more ‘per pupil’ because there are less pupils in small villages – it’s not inefficient, it’s a fact of life. Also remember that the financial comparisons place no value on the factors which can’t be measured financially: community stability & diversity, ability of kids to walk/cycle to school, etc. From past posts, I know you don’t think these factors are important – but then I’m guessing you’ve never raised a family in a small village.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim’s argument that there is a lack of equality where the taxpayer sees, for example, one child being ‘afforded’ 10,000 on their education wheras another gets 4,000 worth exploring.
At face value that does seem wrong but the brain doesn’t live in the face, it lives upstairs.
The public purse provides a range of services to the public and where you choose to live has an impact on the services you can access – that is a personal choice and once it is made then you live with the consequences of your choices.
So, for example, family 1 choose to live on West King Street in Helensburgh and family 2 choose to live in Minard.
Family 1′s child goes to Hermitage Primary and it costs the public purse 3,500 a year for that child (not sure the exact number)
Family 2′s child goes to Minard and it costs the public purse 10,000 a year.
‘Outrageous’ cries family 1′s child.
Meanwhile family 1′s child goes to the swimming pool in Helensburgh whilst Mummy and Daddy make use of the recently revamped gym. They also benefit from very regular bus services, Helensburgh library, Hermitage Park, and when little Billy is old enough they have Hermitage Academy on their doorstep. All of this comes out of the public purse but family 1 consider this a service the Council are duty bound to provide and would cry foul if it was withdrawn.
Family 2 realised that they chose to live in a rural village. They accept irregular bus services. They accept that they don’t have access to leisure facilities and an, on the doorstep, secondary school. They chose that way of life and they did so for personal reasons. However they cry foul when their primary school is removed because it is one of the only, if not the only, main service that is provded in their area. Without that they start to feel that the public purse is providing them with nothing more than street lighting, roads and maybe a public toilet (something that every town, village and city expects by default).
So when Jim is drying the eyes of the urban community who feel that there is a lack of equality in terms of cost of education provision maybe he can suggest that they should surrender these extras because rural life doesn’t have access to them. When we see equality throughout all residences and across all services we will then see the Jim’s ‘hard done by’ communities up in arms.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Integrity: I am not comparing the cost of educating kids in towns and villages, I am comparing two villages that are 5 miles apart. At Achaleven it costs £15k/head, at Lochnell it is half of that (and even less up the road at Barcaldine). Both of theses schools can be considered rural. Bus services are the same, neither have swimming pools etc.
Are we saying that the public should accept an extra £10k per kid as a fact of life for Achaleven kids where they can get the same education 5 miles down the road?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
To add to Integrity’s comments of today.
Jim, Argyll and Bute is a largely rural and island area with a handful only of larger towns and villages. Our councillors knew that when they put themselves up for election, so did Sally Loudon and the other executive officers when they accepted their well paid jobs here. It ill behoves them to now attempt to solve the current financial problems by ripping the heart out of so many small communities. Remember that these weren’t just created by people moving in from elsewhere but are an integral part of the make-up of Argyll and Bute.
Many of their inhabitants have their family history deeply rooted in the areas in which they live and they contribute hugely to making Argyll and Bute such a desirable place for residents and visitors alike.
If some of our elected councillors and paid officials (yes, remember the whole population of Argyll and Bute employ them all), feel that this concept is too difficult to grasp then perhaps they should consider making their services available en masse in a nice Metropolitan area somewhere, with none of problems of Islands, ferries, long winding roads and rural communities that they obviously find so irksome.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The fact remains that the officers in question and indeed many of the Councillors have no clue what they are doing.
They need to save money, so they cut infrastructure, which just lets to further and indeed terminal decline and they will continue to cut more and more until there is nothing left for them to destroy. They want to nip this situation in the bud? They invest in their rural communities, help them become sources of income and properity – not just for the communities that live there, but also in revenue that will come back to the council. Listen to the communities – they have the ideas. Schools are an essential part of that infrastructure and don’t need removed, they need development into the true level of resource that they can be.
This is the time where more than any other, the council needs to be forward thinking. Unfortunately our council is completely backwards – as displayed in the way they have tried to close schools – BACKWARDS This decay will just continue forevermore with the ignorance and complete lack of foresight and imagination within our council and Argyll & Bute will become a deserted area with nothing to offer anyone – tourist or resident.
Jim we need you to take this back to your fellow councillors and open their minds. This is not the time for destruction, this is the time for investment. Invest in the infrastructure. Invest in the communities. Invest in our children.
Invest so Argyll and Bute has a future.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
None of the listed schools should engage with this ‘pre-consultation’ exercise. All they are doing is hingin’ themselves by assisting with the construction of the gallows. It is not any part of the statutory process.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Crazy She-Bat. I didn’t know that Jim was a Councillor? It is a pity he will not put his real name to his comments. Having read them again, if he is a councillor, it appears that he is a member of the administration and a supporter of Cllr Morton and also supports school closures. He certainly not from Helensburgh & Lomond or a Bute & Cowal so that norrows it down to MAKI or Oban and Lorn. I know which one I would go for. No doubt we will now find that he comes back under a different pseudonym as he does not appear to have the courage to comment openly. Maybe Crazy She-Bat or someone else would like to give me an idea who they think he is at: george.freeman@argyll-bute.gov.uk ?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim. As you appear to be an Argyll & Bute Councillor are you James McQueen, James Robb or someone else. There are other A&B Councillors who are honest enough to quote their full name when submitting posts. Please can you do likewise.
Regarding bin crews where I live. Please send work study officers to measure whether the bin lorries are overmanned or not especially as fortnightly general waste collections are finally being rolled out to the whole of Argyll & Bute and not just parts which are “out of sight out of mind” as far as Kilmory is concerned.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Treblet
I think we can say without any fear of error that it isn’t James Robb!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim: I promised to show why the per pupil cost is bogus and a distraction.
Let’s look at the hypothetical primary school in the village of Achabrigadoon. It has a roll of twenty. It is a single teacher school. The costs of the school are as follows:
1: Teaching £60K
2: Property costs: £10K
3: pupil related costs (transport, meals, educational supplies) £20K (£1K per pupil)
4: Other costs: £10K (maintenance, assistants etc)
Total cost: £100K; cost per pupil: £5K
Now, the MacGuffins with their 4 children at the school move to Barcaldine because of employment opportunities in the hugely successful Renewables Now business. The Allcocks with their 2 children have moved to Dunoon and the 4 primary 7′s have moved to the High school. There is no P1 input but three new families have moved into the village which have between them 7 children, all pre 5′s and Mrs MacDonald has another on the way.
School cost is now:
1: Teaching £60K
2: Property costs: £10K
3: pupil related costs (transport, meals, educational supplies) £10K (£1K per pupil)
4: Other costs: £10K (maintenance, assistants etc)
Total cost £90K; cost per pupil £9K.
So the total cost per pupil has risen to a completely unacceptable £9K per pupil – 3x what it costs at one of the larger schools and almost 3x what it costs at that shining beacon of Barcaldine Primary! How can this be justified? Why should the rate payers put up with this outrageetc etc.
However, the actual cost of maintaining the school in Achabrigadoon has actually slightly fallen so the Council is paying the same amount to maintain a school in this village regardless (pretty much) of how many children are in the school. This illustrates the point I have tried to make before: what matters is not the per pupil cost but the cost of providing education to an area. Rural schools actually provide a pretty good cost/square mile of area covered compared with the urban schools.
The actual figures would of course be more complex but I hope this example shows why straight per pupil comparisons are a nonsense and a bogus argument for closing schools.
Where you do have a better point Jim is in comparing the costs of similar sized schools with similar rolls. If the education department is doing its job, the costs should be very similar. In fact costs are often surprisingly different. You seem to have something against Achaleven so let’s use this as an example of excessive cost. The supplies services and travel costs at Achaleven with approximately half the number of pupils as Barcaldine is £2K per annum more than it is at Barcaldine. Janitor services are £4K higher (twice what it is at Barcaldine). Why is this? And similar cost discrepancies occur all over Argyll. There are a whole lot of reasons for them (some entirely justifiable) but there is scope to drive out some of these costs by better budgeting and benchmarking between schools (especially if you give Parent Councils the figures).
Just while we are on Achaleven, less than 5 years ago Connel’s school was one of the most successful and cost effective in Argyll with a roll that was over capacity. The village itself has approximately 40 pupils of primary school age living there but suddenly most pupils are being placed elsewhere (and resulting in large GAE losses). Its current situation reflects neglect by the Council in dealing with an emerging problem and their only answer is to close it. What a manifestation of a complete lack of ambition and competence.
Turning to your other point about schools in close proximity to each other: I would agree that if schools are within walking distance of each other (3 miles) and they have the genuine capacity to allow merger then they probably should be merged unless there is some other factor at play that makes this unwise. However, I am unaware of any schools on the current list that lie so close to each other and the savings to be had from the current closure wave are far too small to justify the social and strategic capacity damage that would result from them.
Anyway Jim, you have successfully steered the topic away from Cllr Morton’s probable breach of the Code of Conduct, the implications of this and the guddle that the Council is creating through the enhanced criteria and the pre-con meetings. So let’s get back to them. On the pre-cons, it seems no-one in the Council knows what to do with these as Mr Walsh has expressed very different ideas about their scope and function from that of Mr Sneddon. Oh dear, policy getting in the way of operations….again!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I did not think it would be James Robb but he is one of two A&B Councillors whose first name is James the other being James McQueen.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dr McKenzie – I think I am correct in guessing that you are a ‘fully fledged’ Dr instead of a ‘two degree’ Dr, but you really should give some thought too training to be a Proctologist. Your bedside manner is quite exquisite but at the end of the day…………..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Treblet: I can assure you that if “Jim” is a councillor as Crazy She-Bat has indicated, then he certainly is NOT Cllr James McQueen and Cllr James Robb is normally happy to put his name to any comments he submits. Anyway, I have already said that if “Jim” is a councillor, then I do not believe that he comes from the Helensburgh & Lomond Area or the Bute & Cowal Area so that rules both Jimmy McQueen and James Robb out. “Jim” is used to put you of the scent. Take a look at the comments from “Jim” across a number of ForArgyll reports and then look at the MAKI and Oban & Lorn councillors and you can certainly narrow it down to one or two. I note that “Jim” has not commented since the question of his identity was raised?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Treblet – Jim has previously denied being connected with the Council in anyway whatsoever. He has previously stated that he is only a concerned member of the public who thinks rural schools are too much of a burden on the Council.
‘Jim’ appeared on the forum not long after ‘Simon’ and they were both apparently just innocent members of the public who supported the Council’s position on school closures.
‘Simon’ disappeared just before christmas and suddenly re-appeared about a month later with the a quite unpleasant post which just basically attacked ‘For Argyll’. Of course he’s entirely entitled to do this but his two or three posts were completely out of context with where the debate had moved onto.
‘Jim’ continued to make one or two posts over the weeks but became very quite until the most recent set of proposals became public. Since then it’s just like he has never been away!!
‘Jim’ will continually argue about what is fair and what isn’t fair. He will not comment on the fairness of process. He will not give recognition to the validity of the school act and it’s guidance. He will not give credibility to the perception that this process requires clearly identified procedures and protocols. He will merely argue that ‘her down the road managed to buy her kludgie paper for a penny and I have to pay thruppence and it’s just no fair’
Is ‘Jim’ a Councillor? Don’t really know. Is ‘Simon’ a Councillor? Don’t really know. But they both know an awful, awful lot about Council issue’s. Much, much more so than you would expect from even the most dedicated of ‘political anoraks’.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Treblet: Following on from my previous posting, has anyone noted that this is the only report that “Jim” has submitted comments on!! Take a look at the reports back to the start of the month and I certainly can find no comments having been posted from “Jim”. Does he (or she) have a bag of names that he (or she) picks his (or her) latest pseudonym from to put everyone of the scent?
I also note that Crazy She-Bat has not commented since she highlighted that “Jim” was a councillor!! Does she know something that we don’t? Could “Jim” be a senior councillor within the Council’s administration? Think about it? It is about time that Crazy She-Bat spoke out.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Alasdair. Thank you for your comments about “Jim”. He certainly seems to be sticking up for the bin men which makes me think he is either a Councillor or a Union Official.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think that Alasdair has hit the nail on the head. Simon/Jim (whoever HE or SHE is) is certainly not a Union Official. They are certainly a supporter of school closures and if they are a councillor as Crazy She-Bat has stated, then they are certainly a member of the ConDemAll administration. Let’s see if we can identify them under their next pseudonym?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Councillor Freeman: You – particularly – might not have to look far beyond your own recent experience to identify both. We read the clues at a pretty early stage, tested our conclusions against further comments from both of them – and it all added up. It’s been fun.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim does tend to talk a lot about the Lorn area. That narrows it down. Dont think Cllr Duncan macintyre would have the time or desire to come on here, or cant see Cllr Robertson calling herself Jim.
Bit of a ‘whodunit’.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For phill: We agree with your eliminations – and you’re not far off the mark now.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
BWS: It may be that it’s late at night but I’m unsure what you are getting at. I’m a “proper” Dr ie a PhD (in Zoology if anyone is interested). I never had a hankering to be a medic and most certainly not a proctologist. Mind you I am hoping that I am proving to be a pain in the bum in certain circles!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I would love to say I have been sitting here all day waiting with baited breathe for “Jims” reply, however I have been engrossed in a pile of ironing.
“Jim” defo a ConDemAll – thats a no brainer, first one being how he quotes Ellen Morton almost verbatim, as if he is copying it straight from his script. And Ellen will be checking he gets it right as she makes sure to get her daily dose of For Argyll.
It then becomes very easy to narrow it down.
As Alasdair has touched on, who in their right mind would even want to know all this stuff going on in the drama of Kilmory Castle? Unless they were a councillor or senior official (thats Simon).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Where are you Jim?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We have long thought, despite the denials, that “Jim” was a councillor representing Oban North and Lorn. There have been several clues that this is where he hails from and the foreknowledge of the full extent of the budget cuts meant he had to be either a Councillor in the administration or very close to someone who was.
The other factor is his desperation to believe Council figures. Even although the proposal documents have been entirely discredited, the administration Councillors and Cleland Sneddon have continually refused to concede this point. In several posts Jim points to Barcaldine (in his ward?) as being a super wee school (he is right on this point at least). He has repeatedly quoted its low per pupil cost as a reason why it should be retained, indeed he says it has a lower per pupil cost than Lochnell. Everyone else bar administration Councillors know not to trust Council figures. Barcaldine’s per pupil costs in the proposal papers is shown as £4,947 per pupil. Unfortunately the Council divided the total cost of the school by 30 pupils and not by the 23 pupils it actually has. The per pupil cost should be £6452 for the current roll or £7066 for the projected roll. The figures for Lochnell are even more wildly out. A councillor has sent me a new Council document tonight which has the Lochnell error corrected but STILL repeats the Barcaldine mistake.
Barcaldine is actually very similar to Luss in roll and costs except Luss has higher electricity and janitorial costs – yet another thing we are investigating. Barcaldine is half the distance from Lochnell that Luss is from The Hermitage. Luss has better occupancy, sufficiency, cost per pupil, energy costs and higher GAE entitlement than some schools which were removed from the list. This “enhanced” and “holistic” approach will take some explaining.
Even if they could get the per pupil cost right (somebody tether down those pigs) the figure is completely irrelevant. Each LA in Scotland is charged with providing education to every child in their area regardless of where their home is. They are also legally obliged to provide free transport for all under 8s who live more than two miles from school. This is why Government compensates rural Councils for their small rural schools and provides grants for hostel accommodation. Many schools in Scotland have huge per pupil costs but are by far the cheapest way of fulfilling the Council’s legal obligations.
Savings from closure may well be a relevant statistic but per pupil costs most certainly are not.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dr McKenzie – My apologies, I did not mean to confuse. I didn’t want to insult the medical fraternity by not calling them proper Doctors as they only need to complete two degrees to qualify and I thought you probably had a Phd.
The proctologist reference was indeed about how you must be a pain in the bum in certain circles.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
DDM: Thanks for your example but it isn’t really representative of the situation in the Lochnell, Achaleven and Archatttan area. The difference in educating kids in this area is £17k between extremes. A problem of a totally different magnitude to the one you give in your example.
Now I fully understand that education in rural schools costs more than town schools and would not expect parity. My problem with the North Lorn Area is the huge variation between the costs at various schools and what appears to be an over provision of education resource in the area. There are 5 schools within a 7 mile radius (excluding Oban schools). This area is a great candidate for consolidation of schools and realignment of catchment areas. You can go from 5 schools to 3 and displace only 10 kids (7 achaleven and 3 ardchattan IIRC). None of these kids will be undertaking journeys that are uncommon in Argyll. Community impact, none.
Educational benefit. A 20 minute or less bus ride would be well spent given the opportunity to interact with a much wider range of kids.
With the cuts that other areas of the public sector are seeing I do not see this level of adjustment in the education provision as dramatic or unjust.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim,
For the sake of clarity maybe you could provide some sort of idea about what you would consider dramatic or unjust. If I recall correctly you had little, or no, qualms with the original proposals of 25 either (I do recall a lot of bluster about ‘if the proposal papers are so flawed then the Scottish Govt will save you’ – I notice you never actually held up your hand to admit that it transpired that the papers were fundamentally flawed).
So do you have a point beyond which you would stand up and say that a proposed displacement was unjust and if, so please share it with us? Or, as I suspect, do you blindly support whatever Dick Walsh tells you to support.
If I recall correctly you did contribute once, maybe even twice, to the meeting on March 3rd (which I will grant you makes you practically verbose in comparison with most of the rest of the Administration) however it should also be stated that what you offered absolutely no value whatsoever to a debate about a very serious issue.
Vote ARSN 2012
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Newsroom – apologies for the typo in last sentence. I blame the Guardian!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim – how can you say that there will be NO community impact in closing a school that is miles from any other community building and is a thriving busy resource in a community that has raised over £40,000 for facilities in and around the school in the last few years.
your idea of community impact and reality are clearly very far apart.
As to Achaleven – there is a strong case for opening a pre-school at Connel and supporting the existing primary facilities which would stem the leakage of children from the community to other schools – this would then ENHANCE further the community resources and boost the whole community.
Instead of being destructive it is about time you and your ilk (AKA ABC ) became Constructive and helped local people to BUILT stronger communities across the county.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Newsroom;
re who is jim
Has to be Oban and North lorn members. Who would say ‘super wee school’?
Could it be Councillor Devon or Councillor Mackay that is ‘Jim’? Both one time libdems, then post election became independents for some reason. Both are now I think in the ‘administration’, and once again in tune with their former libdem colleagues.
Im really starting to enjoy this as I havent played ‘cluedo’ for years!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
That goes along with my original point linnhe, I completely agree – this is a time to invest in your communities Jim – not destroy them.
I’m glad you have responded and in actual fact my original post was actually a heartfelt plea, not a deliberate effort to “out” you. The more opportunity we have for dialogue between you and your associates, the better this situation can be resolved – I sincerely hope.
Going on a question that Integrity asked… what is your cut-off point? What is a bridge to far in your opinion? I am genuinely interested in your response.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Who ever runs the forargyll.com website will know who “Jim” is because to register for “The Daily Comment” you have to give your first name and surname as well as your email address.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Integrity: My understanding of the initial 25 proposals is that it was not a “all or nothing” situation. The list was 25 schools for which a closure case was made (albeit the case for some was very weak). It was then for Councillors to decide of the proposals which ones to take forward to closure. AFAIK even going as far as the statutory consultation is not a commitment to proceeding with closure and the conclusion of the consultation could be that the proposal is abandoned.
So no, I had no qualms about the initial 25 proposals for the reason that I never expected that all 25 would result in closure. Whether this was the guidance given to councillors I have no idea.
I would say that closing Luss is a proposal that doesn’t generate savings or an educational benefit to the degree that justifies the impact on the kids and community. It is in a markedly different situation than to say the North Lorn schools already discussed.
linhe: I can say that there will be no impact as that is my opinion. I don’t believe that survival of Connel as a community hinges on the presence of the school. It has lots of schools in very close proximity (by rural metrics) and many settlements of it’s size in Argyll have survived just fine without their own school. The money that the community has raised for the school could very well be directed at any school which receives Achaleven’s 7 kids.
Your point about pre-school is taken but I don’t see this as a solution to the problem in the North Lorn area. It simply juggles about the same number of kids between the schools. The solution would be to increase settlement in the catchment for each area but that is a very long term problem as hinges as much on economic factors as anything. Even if settlement numbers were increased you could still have parents choosing to place their kids at schools outwith their catchment for a variety of reason eg perception that the standard of education is better at another school, convenience for pick-up and drop off, after school care.
“Investing in communities” is a great slogan but where is the reality. The public purse is empty, where is the money going to come from? In my opinion the current situation requires us to consolidate our resources so we have a sustainable school estate and Council as a whole. This isn’t the time for “blue sky thinking” and catchphrases.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim, “many settlements of it’s (Connels) size in Argyll have survived just fine without their own school.” Is this your own opinion again or are you claiming this as fact? If so then name these many settlements so that we can see how much agreement there is with your claim.
Possible reason for parents wishing to seek a placement elsewhere; “perception that the standard of education is better at another school.” As Argyll and Bute Council is responsible for education shouldn’t it have been acting responsibly since its inception in ensuring that the standard of education is percieved as equally good throughout the school estate, or have they only just thought that one up?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I was going to ignore the giddy game of Guess Who that certain contributors seem interested in entertaining but I thought it best to set the record straight, again.
I am not an elected official in any capacity and represent only my own views. Neither do I have any affiliation with Council staff at any level. I am not privy to any information that any inquisitive member of the public cannot be.
I find the desire to “out” contributors to this forum perverse. I have been active in discussion and debate on the Internet for many years and I have not encountered a group of people more interested in the identity of contributors than FAs subscribers. None of my posts have been directly offensive or inflammatory. I can be accused of having little else than a difference of opinion. Who I am is of absolutely no relevance, as I said I represent only my own views and I am not politically active.
I also find it disappointing that one of ABC’s elected officials has chosen to take part in this game too (and during time in which he is being to paid to represent his constituents???). I don’t find that acceptable behaviour for an elected member.
If the contributors to FA wish to maintain an environment which is hostile to those with differing opinions then that is their prerogative. The opinions on school closures do differ across ABC and this does drive our elected officials decisions. I personally enjoy what is at most times, a civil discourse which takes place on here. And I appreciate FA for giving providing the platform even if I strongly disagree with the content and style of their reporting.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim: I for one don’t really care who you are and welcome your contributions on here. It would be a dull world if we all had the same opinions. You have stated that you are not a councillor or a council official and I’m not going to ask if you are related to one or the other. I would be happier if people would drop the “out Jim” campaign as it distracts from the issues.
Which neatly brings me to ask Jim to answer Hotbird’s and name at least some of the “many settlements of it’s (Connel) size in Argyll have survived just fine without their own school.”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Whoever Jim is, I’d say he’s definitely in politics. It’s only political activists and analysts who refer to people as the “electorate”. Mind you, most of us wouldn’t dream of using the word in public. Folk would get the impression we were treating them as mere numbers.
Vote ARSN 2012
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Kilmelford
Balvicar
Lochawe
Dalavich (appreciate it did have a school until relatively recently but people still seem to live there)
Portsonachan
Ford
Eredine
Kilmore
I will admit most of these could be considered smaller than Connel depending on how you draw boundaries but if anything that only reinforces my point. The places listed don’t have schools in walking distance yet still seem to have people with kids living there.
Notably Kilmelford is continually expanding with the help of WHHA (IIRC) and has no school. Balvicar, again more housing development and no school. Kilmore a small but stable settlement.
And there are smaller yet settlements, with only a handful of houses, miles from the nearest school but still with kids living there.
And then you have tiny settlements with no or very few kids but which do have a school with a good roll ie Kilninver. So perhaps it is more about access to a primary school than having one on your doorstep which determines the viability of a settlement and community.
hotbird: We live in the real world where everything isn’t fair or equal. I don’t want to distract the discussion further but have you considered that factors such as potential for peer interaction could contribute to the perceived standard of education at a particular school.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
All considerably smaller than Connel!
I think if you asked the people of Kilmelford: “would you perceive having a school in your village a beneficial asset?” they would put it high on their priority list. My understanding is that many (most?) of the weans at Kilninver are in fact from Kilmelfort but if you gave them the choice of a school in Kilmelfort over having their weans bussed to Kilninver you would get a fairly emphatic answer on this. However, I would be interested in the views of anyone from the list of villages mentioned.
No-one is saying that schools are quite up there with oxygen and water as prerequisites for life but they are immensely beneficial to community life. Of course communities can survive without a school but not having one greatly diminishes community strength and resilience and can lead to a community going into terminal decline. There was an excellent piece in the Herlad a few years back describing the social damage that losing their school did to a small community. I will see if I can dig it out and reference it here.
Let’s leave peer interaction alone for a while!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim, you do make researched and pertinent points, however to suggest that an elected member should not be allowed to participate in a public forum iis simply wrong.
Cllr Freeman is to be complimented by sharing his opinion, and others would be more than welcome to let us know their views, (whatever they me be) without fear of favour. I would be more concerned if my ward councillors sat on the fence and did not put their cards on the table, as many do.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“All considerably smaller than Connel!” Disagree and as I said, my point makes itself without arguing over the boundaries of villages.
I bet if you asked the residents whether they would like to work less and get paid more you would get a positive response too. I would rather not travel as far as I do everyday for work but alas this is life in the rurals.
Perhaps some day a new school will be built in Kilmelford and Kilninver will be closed. In the meantime I expect that families will continue to settle there because there is affordable housing and jobs within commuting distance.
phill: I have no problem with elected members participating in online forums under their public servant guise, I would infact encourage it. Cllr Freemans conduct in this particular thread of discussion has left me with a dim view of his character.
“Maybe Crazy She-Bat or someone else would like to give me an idea who they think he is at: george.freeman@argyll-bute.gov.uk ?”
Council email account provided so a contributor can be outed.
“Let’s see if we can identify them under their next pseudonym?”
Again, entertaining the game of “out Jim”.
“Following on from my previous posting, has anyone noted that this is the only report that “Jim” has submitted comments on!! Take a look at the reports back to the start of the month and I certainly can find no comments having been posted from “Jim”. Does he (or she) have a bag of names that he (or she) picks his (or her) latest pseudonym from to put everyone of the scent?”
And now what is really a direct attack on me and my character. I identify myself as Jim and have an interest in the topic of school closures. I expect more from our elected members than this.
“I also note that Crazy She-Bat has not commented since she highlighted that “Jim” was a councillor!! Does she know something that we don’t? Could “Jim” be a senior councillor within the Council’s administration? Think about it? It is about time that Crazy She-Bat spoke out.”
And again, egging-on CSB to reveal information on my identity.
Just to reiterate, no problem with Councillors participating in online forums.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So you disagree that these villages are considerably smaller than Connel? Connel has approximately 40 children of primary school age in the village. What are the similar cohort numbers for these villages? I think you will find they have considerably fewer children in any of them – but I stand to be corrected if anyone has accurate figures for these villages.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well we would have to agree on your definition of “considerably”.
And we would have to agree that the size of a village is measured by it’s primary school age children. Not total number of children (under the age of… 16, 18…), or residents, or properties…..
I will concede that I was wrong in my initial statement about them similar sized, they are smaller to varying degrees. I shall be more careful with my wording next time. And again, my point was that these communities exist without a school in walking distance and I see no reason as to why Connel will be any different.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Children from Ford travel 4 miles to Kilmartin, Ederline children around 11miles to Kilmartin – although the “self closing” Ardconnel is 1 mile up the road.
Furthest current pupil at Ashfield travels 7miles and will be expected to travel around 18miles to Lochgilphead or Tayvallich on what would be considered Island roads by many – perhaps Jim can justify this for us.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ashfield mum – you have beaten me to my point but perhaps I can expand on it. Before doing so, let me just thank Jim for acknowledging that he was wrong on the similar sized bit – these debates are best conducted when we work from facts and when any of us get them wrong then we should all be big enough to say that we got them wrong.
Back to the point:
Jim says: “And again, my point was that these communities exist without a school in walking distance and I see no reason as to why Connel will be any different.”
Actually, Lochawe, Balvicar, Eredrine and Kilmore all have schools within 3 miles of them. Ford is 4 miles, so outside the 3 miles “statutory” distance but not what you might consider as being remote from a school.
Of the remaining villages you mention, Dalavich has, as you say, only recently lost its school so too early to say much about that. I ask forgiveness of the people of Portsonachan in advance here, but on my rare forays down that side of Loch Awe, I would not have said that Portsonachan is in any way, shape or form comparable in size with Connel. I don’t know enough about it to comment further.
That just leaves one community on your list: Kilmelfort. This is about 6 miles from the nearest school (Kilninver). I have heard that most of the children at Kilninver are actually from Kilmelfort. I will concede that Kilmelfort is growing despite of a school actually being in the village – driven (as you say) by the provision of affordable housing (and it looks quite a nice place to live). Kilmelfort also enjoys additional facilities: notably a shop and a pup/restuarant. The question though, is how much better a place would it be if it had a school and how much faster it would develop?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Pub not pup of course!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Dr Douglas Mackenzie: Some typos take on a life of their own. We will remember ‘pup / restaurant’ fondly.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Newsroom,
As a nation of animal lovers I think we should be united in our condemnation of the Doctor’s dietary preferences!
Aside from this I would add that Dougie is, of course, entirely correct to welcome Jim’s contribution and I offer my apologies to Jim for my contribution to the ‘Jim is a Councillor under a pseudonym’ debate.
I picked up on Jim’s comment that ‘The opinions on school closures do differ across ABC and this does drive our elected officials decisions’ and I wonder if he truly believes that. Does he, in fact does anyone, actually believe that the 19 in the administration are driven by the opinions of the people who voted for them.
When Danny Kelly and Billy Petrie voted in November to take the Rosneath, Kilcreggan and Luss to consultation, and when Kelly voted to go to pre-con 10 days ago was he/they driven by the opinions of the people of the Peninsula and Luss?
When Elaine Robertson etc etc etc the Barcaldine families?
And what of Walsh and Marshall and Toward?
The list goes on.
What is the worth of having Independent Councillors if they do not represent local views? All the Councillors listed above, and others too (I refrain from pointing them all out as the point is already made) do not represent their communities and I urge their communities to reject them in 2012.
Similarly for the party affiliated Councillors.
When Alison Hay voted to go to consultation in November and to go to pre-con 10 days ago was she driven by the opinions of the people of Minard?
VOTE ARSN 2012
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
NEWSROOM: I hope that you exclude some of us from your comments?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Councillor George Freeman: Of course – and the point you make is taken in that we should make it clear that we are usually referring to the ruling coalition group you have memorably christened the ConDemAlls (and seen that enter the coinage) – from which we would except Councillor Mary Jean Devon who, when it matters, can be relied on to be genuinely independent – and possibly Councillor Alex McNaughton.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
George
I think you may have meant to refer to me rather than Newsroom (easy mistake to make although for future reference I am ever so slightly taller!)
Regarding the decision on the original 25 you are one of three exceptions from the Independents. After that the other 2 went running back to the nest and you became, temporarily, nestless!
VOTE ARSN 2012
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim – I’m still wondering if you consider 18 miles reasonable for a a child to travel on roads similar to those around Ulva on Mull that the Education Spokesperson considered to have “issues”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
One must question why we have a wealth of non-independant independants in Argyll and Bute. If they have turned their backs on the people they are supposed to represent, what is it they deem of higher value? Obviously something must be in it for them.
Either its for the money they get for their cosy little positions in the Mutual Back-Scratchers Association (otherwise known as the ConDemAlls) OR Dick Walsh and/or Ellen Morton have some serious dirt on their associates locked away in the Kilmory vaults.
It makes you wonder, what is making them all follow along this one way track of political suicide like a bunch of lemmings…
Vote ARSN 2012
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Is “Alliance of Independents” a contradiction in terms?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Tim McIntyre: As of 13.55 you’re tying with Crazy She-Bat for the best joke of the day. (Comment to the story on the Government licensing the shooting of pregnant seals in the breeding season).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I see some posts have VOTE ARSN under their comments. Are there candidates standing next May in council elections?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
To Phill: that would be interesting!
I met a couple of councillors today who were escorting Mile Russell on a visit to Barcaldine to meet with local business owners and managers (and we all had a very nice lunch at Barcaldine House – thanks Alastair). They were telling me that ARSN have lodged a formal complaint with the Council over Cllr Morton’s interference in operational affairs. Looks as if ARSN may be no more easy to deal with than SRSN!
Newswrom: Look forward to hearing more on both of these stories.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
What is up with my typing? – that should have been Mike not Mile.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Newsroom. When the responses to this subject top 100 have you considered creating for Councillor Morton the first “For Argyll” Turkey voting for Christmas award?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The main players in the ‘Condemall’ set up are easilly identified, and in their favour they are consistent. What I find more uneasy with is the ‘quiet pigs’ (who eat the most) who have done well out of new responsibility money, increased status, by performing uturns galore. Thank God they will no longer be with us next May.
The new kids (on thr block) in the executive will be bombed out, but the wise old owls (Dick Welsh, Duncan Macintyre, Cllr Robertson, Alison hay, and wee Donnie macmillan(the great survivor) will be re-elected as they do have a good power base. The (expendable) ones who are starting to climb the ladder (at any cost) will be back where they belong. It will be too late to realise their mistakes in voting like sheep and never questioning the leadership line. Enjoy your responsibility cash while you can. 14 months and counting!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Phill
I think you are right that many of the old guard will get in again however those that perpetually vote for them may want to think twice before doing it again. The power base the key ones enjoy is only due to being in an administration which has a soft belly, a collection of ‘Yes’ men and women without the backbone to stand up to a dictorial leadership.
It will only take a handful of well organised campaigns for the administration to fall and leave the likes of Walsh on the oppositon and be sure that when he is there he will receive no favours.
VOTE ARSN 2012
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ashfield Mum: Apologies for the delay in replying, life has kept me busy the past couple days. I’m not in a position to comment on Ashfield, I do not know the area at all. I’m not going to defend all of the proposals blindly either. I do know about North Lorn and only intend on commenting on the proposals in this area at the moment.
DDM: It’s Kilmelford, not fort too
I will take your distances as accurate. For information, Achaleven is 2.4 miles from Dunbeg and 3.2 miles from Benderloch. Should Achaleven close then, in your words, Connel will qualify as “not what you might consider as being remote from a school”.
RE: Kilmelford. My hunch is that the growth and viability of communities in Argyll is much more dependant on housing and jobs than it is schools. Yes, having a school in your village makes it nice. But if you can’t afford to buy a house in the village or you are commuting significant distances to find work then it is rather academic.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
If there’s a school in a village it will probably attract families IF there is affordable housing and work available.
If there are employment opportunities they may well attract workers with families IF they can find affordable housing and there is a Village School for the children.
If there is affordable housing in a village it will be most attractive to those families seeking housing IF there is a Village School and work available.
Remember that not everyone wishes to live in a town, life in a rural community is often seen as a preferred choice and Villages with a growing population of all ages flourish and contribute much to the economy and well being of Argyll and Bute.
It’s called joined up thinking, what a pity there seems to be such a lack of it at Kilmory!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
hotbird (I didn’t think I would ever be writing that in a serious forum!)
You have hit the nail on the head. The strategy of the Council’s education department appears to be designed without consultation with their planning department – it is almost as if they are in opposition with each other.
What the Council needs to do is not just rethink school closures but rethink their approach to rural communities. They lack imagination and lack vision and the way they are targetting schools should worry all people in rural communities, not just those directly affected, for it is this lack of vision which will manifest itself in other areas of Council strategy.
VOTE ARSN 2012
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim,
Your original point was to suggest that there were plenty of villages the size of Connel that don’t have schools and yet are thriving communities. My riposte was that your suggested villages were not of similar size to Connel and in any case most of them were within 3 miles of a school so could be considered to have schools (or not to be considered as being isolated from a school).
Now you are twisting the argument round to suggest that schools should close merely because there are other schools within 3 miles of them. You will remember me saying that this is indeed a scenario worth considering if there is capacity and there are no other factors that would suggest this is an unwise move.
Dunbeg is indeed relatively close to Connel (and the Sustrans cycle path will result in a relatively safe walking and cycling route). Most of the children who are due to go to Connel are indeed being placed into Dunbeg so why not just go the whole hog and close Achaleven?
The reason is strategic capacity. Dunbeg is somewhere between 69% and 93% of total capacity (the actual figure will depend on the exact roll next year and the result of ABC’s review of how they calculate capacity – the lower figure is the current figure and the upper occupancy figure relates to the Scottish rural schools average). Dunbeg currently has around 20 Achaleven pupils placed with it. If all 40 Achaleven pupils move to Dunbeg then Dunbeg will either be at 100% capacity or over capacity. Taynuilt is already at or nearly at capacity. There is confusion over what the capacity of Lochnell really is but parents there will tell you that they consider the school already is full and with inadequate toilet and washing facilities. Barcaldine is full. Park is full and the only other school with some spare capacity is Rockfield.
Ardchattan is not full but is in the wrong location to help reduce the growing capacity problem in North Lorn.
So, the picture of huge numbers of schools lying half empty does not hold ring true for North Lorn (if it does anywhere). Worst case projections suggest a modest dip in primary school children in North Lorn followed by strong increases after 2015. However, this presumes no net immigration. I completely agree with you that jobs are the number one priority for families (people need money to live), followed by affordable housing (people need somewhere to live) but access to schools for their children is probably number three in terms of priorities (for families at least). North Lorn is very fortunate in that we have jobs and we are determined to create new jobs as well. Demand for housing in the area is high and, as you will know, there are plans for a dramatic increase in houses in the Dunbeg corridor and new estates at Connel, Benderloch and Barcaldine. Taynuilt is likely to also see increasing numbers of houses being built. The sum total of this is that the numbers of primary school pupils in North Lorn is likely to show growth rather than decline.
The problems at Achaleven that have led to a low occupancy are managerial rather than demographic. Sort these and Achaleven will return to being an excellent school in all regards, with normal per pupil costs. Close Achaleven and we lose all strategic capacity in North Lorn and we will be looking at having to fund new school building within a very few years.
If there is a suggestion to build a new and larger primary school that could service both Dunbeg and Connel then that might be worth looking at but as we both know there is no capital available for this either now or in the immediate future. Retention of Achaleven is the only sane option.
And none of the above even touches on the really strong educational case that can be made for retaining Achaleven.
Just one other point: Connel is not the same as, say Ulva or Ashfield (as examples). You are probably correct in suggesting that closing Achaleven would not turn Connel into a ghost town. Close schools in isolated villages, however, then you doom them. Achaleven should be retained primarily because it would be incredibly short sighted and stupid to close it because of strategic capacity issues in North Lorn.
Apologies to Kilmelford for my spelling error!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
‘Integrity’
I quite agree , so i feel it would be a good move now for some of the soft ‘underbelly’ to vote with their concience, and reresent their electorate, and not suck up to Cllr walsh/Morton for the sake of a quick addition to their bank account albeit for only another 14 months. The love of money is the root of all evil.
Somebody will get twitchy, particularly as time goes by, and change their allegience, sadly though for their own survival, and not for any principled stand.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
A good idea indeed Phill – however there is only a chance of this happening if the people they represent make it clear to them that will turn their back on them unless they abandon the Dik Tator.
If we don’t tell them they will carry on coasting along representing Dick Walsh rather than their local communities.
In some ways 2012 is the blink of an eye away and Councillors who have a genuine desire to stick around for another term need to return to serving their community rather than pandering to a playground bully.
There will be genuine contenders who, as a matter of unwavering principle, will never go into coalition with the likes of Walsh, Marshall, Mulvaney, Kinniburgh, Dance (to name a few).
If your Councillor is in the administration and you can see that group for what it really is then ask your Councillor to walk or decide to give your vote to a contender with integrity.
VOTE ARSN 2012
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So Dunbeg has some capacity (the actual figure being disputed). Any new builds in the area will be within the Oban schools’ catchments so that’s not a worry.
Lochnell is at capacity according to parents, the Council say it is well below capacity. Improvements to the toilet arrangements would alleviate the problem?
Taynuilt is near/at capacity. This years Capital Budget includes plans for an additional classroom to be added to Taynuilt (raising the capacity to???).
So we have some capacity around North Lorn, forecast drops in rolls for a few years, plans to increase capacity one school and (what I assume) a simple fix to allow for more capacity at another. It seems to me that North Lorn isn’t really in that bad a shape for a good few years.
Inward settlement – the housing budget took the biggest hit in the 11-12 Scottish Budget (according to Shelter). I think the proposed affordable housing developments around the Oban area might be on the backburner for a while.
And then there is the investment in Council assets over the coming years. The capital budget which is totally different to the revenue budget (where the savings are proposed) is also limited. The more estate the thinner the capital budget is spread. A smaller school estate could allow capital budget to be concentrated on expansion and improvement to a reduced number of properties rather than skimming over the cracks in lots of properties.
I think there is a strategy there, not one that you agree with I’m sure.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim – to accept the argument that closing schools will help the council as it struggles to maintain its properties within a restricted capital budget, we’d have to see some detail, which they have been unable to provide. The ‘old’ proposal papers stated that £25m would be required to bring the entire estate up to ‘sustainable’ condition. An FOI request for a breakdown of this brought the response that it was a ‘global estimate’ and no detail had been calculated. Furthermore this figure includes the secondary schools which are in generally much worse condition than the primaries.
Most of the schools proposed for closure are in at least condition ‘B’ i.e. Good – this would suggest that the likely required capital spend on them in the medium term is not enough to make a big difference to the area where the biggest investment is needed, i.e. in the secondary school estate.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The simple truth is that the Council have been managed their school estate blindly for years. Their School Estate Management Plan categorically states that they have a database within which a whole stack of data exists on every school – this was ratified by Council in 2008. When asked for a copy of it under FOI they admitted it didn’t exist and that there was ‘some confusion’ about the data held on the school estate and they were now looking at buying software to help with this.
So a document ratified by Council in 2008 had a blatant lie in it AND three years later that lie had still not been rectified.
In A&B we trust!
VOTE ARSN 2012
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim, you must give me the address of your opticians: I would love a pair of rose tinted glasses that allow the wearer to ignore inconvenient facts.
There was soooo much wrong with your last post that I don’t know where to start!
I was unaware of plans to add a classroom at Taynuilt but that’s good news that I’m sure will be welcomed by all at that school. However, your optimism that this will lead to an increase of capacity at Taynuilt may be misplaced.
After submissions by SRSN and others, the Council agreed to revisit capacity calculations for all of Argyll’s schools. Sandy Longmuir might give us the details but it has dawned on the Council that all might not be right with the current capacity calculations that it has been reporting to the SG. This is a confused situation as the information on capacity calculations for each school appears to be unavailable (despite this being a statutory requirement). However, there is no denying that ABC devote the least amount of space per pupil of any other Council save Glasgow (and under half what children in Orkney enjoy). In the case of North Bute, the Council’s capacity figure is TWICE that of similar size schools in any other authority.
The over estimates of capacity in Argyll appears relate to a number of factors including a failure to take account of statutory limits on class size, limits on composite class sizes, presence of pre-5 units and the provision of GP (general purpose) spaces in ratio to teaching places. The result of the review of capacity will inevitably lead to reductions in planning capacity for almost all of Argyll’s schools and a corresponding rise in occupancy.
So Taynuilt will probably still be at full capacity (though the weans will have more space). Dunbeg will be effectively full at the current roll with no room to take all of Connel’s 40 children and Park even more full. For Lochnell, there remains uncertainty over this school’s capacity. The original figure of 177 is now recognised to have been a typo for 117 but that 117 figure related to the original building before the extension was built. However, the presence of the large pre-5 unit does not seem to have figured in the calculations (officials had apparently “overlooked” these children!). Your solution to Lochnell’s apparent over-crowding: add more toilets! Where? would be the obvious rejoinder.
Lochnell doesn’t have the space to even absorb Barcaldine’s 23 weans never mind the 40 from Connel.
Incidentally, for those playing the “who is Jim?” game and think he is a councillor: I would say his comments rule out Neil McKay, Donald MacDonald (never a serious contender for this title anyway) or Elaine Robertson as they all concur that Lochnell has space issues at present.
However, I’m interested to see that in your objective of closing Achaleven you are prepared to spend money on other schools to create capacity. As the purpose of closing schools is to save money, can I ask how much money you think will be saved by closing Achaleven?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I have been following this thread with interest. The last question posed by Dougie does indeed hopefully bring us all back to the real focus. This exercise is about saving money, and how much money. There has been so much wasted already on this ridiculous exercise it seems to have deteriorated into ‘we must close as many or few schools as we can just to show we can’. Stop, just take a breath and consider the children, the families and the communities. Connel will not close down it as is in an ideal ‘commuter’ spot. There are houses under construction all over the village and there are strong toddler and pre school facilities. Allow a pre-school facility within the existing school (I bet you could charge for wrap-around childcare to fund itand it would be fully subscribed as fast as the certification would allow), and the role will grow rapidly. It is in the hands of the community and they are fighting for it, as are other like-minded communities in the same position. They deserve support and encouragement not negative press.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We do, in this debate, end up mired in the detail. It’s important but shouldn’t cloud the larger story. Argyll & Bute is in dreadful financial trouble (let’s not get into why). What does it do? It attempts self-mutilation. In any other scenario you’d call a shrink.
These small communities are the roses in the A&B garden. The lifestyle, the strong community, the safe place for children, the clean air, the beach 100 yads away are the best thing Argyll & Bute has to sell. It can sell it to tourists, but it can also sell it to incomers who are looking for a better way of life. If it applied as much will to recovery as it has to chopping off its own infrastructure we might even start to feel we were getting what we believed we were paying for.
Rural resettlement works well in other countries and doesn’t actually cost a lot of money to get going.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
DDM. I agree with your assessment that Jim is a councillor and I think that most of us who have sat back and followed this thread now know who HE is. Yes, HE is from the Oban area. No, it is not Donald MacDonald. Yes, he is a member of the administration. No, it is not Duncan McIntyre. NUF SAID? What better way to put folk of the trail by throwing in a comment about Lochnell that most folk know you discagree with. Clever little trick.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I agree with you (Dr MacKenzie) that Cllr D. Macdonald was never a contender to be ‘Jim’, however it it would not be beyond the skill of other councillors to appear to acknowlege aspects like capacity in Lochnell while at the same time actively voting against the recognition of that fact, by siding with Dick.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Phill: I know there is the temptation to demonise all of the Alliance, Lib-Dem and Tory councillors who have been supporting the Executive. However, this is probably counter-productive and I prefer to focus on the facts. And the facts are that these school closures make no economic sense and certainly no educational sense.
I have the sense that Muggle Mum is right and those who still support these closures have lost sight of what was supposed to be driving this exercise. Some councillors have been pursuing an agenda of closing rural schools for over a decade (and haven’t changed their tune a note in all that time) but it was the acute financial mess that ABC found itself in that I think allowed other councillors to be dragged along into this grisly closure farce perhaps against their better judgement. When the paltry savings that are available from the latest list are revealed I hope those councillors will wake up to just what a waste of time and money this whole exercise has been and vote with their consciences and in line with the wishes of their constituents to bring this sorry affair to an end.
I would be astonished if Neil McKay or Elaine Robertson were Jim and if Jim turns out to be a councillor then I will be most disappointed in him. I genuinely trust his word that he isn’t.
So, back to the facts: come on Jim, how much do you think closing Achaleven will save?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim – you are also very welcome to come and drive the route from Kilmory Knap to Tayvallich or Lochgilphead anytime and we can give you a tour of Beaver country at the same time!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jim – I am aware that you have said that you do not wish to talk specifically about any area other than North Lorn, but I would be interested to hear your more general comments/opinions on the wider school debate affecting the County.
I believe you have already said that in your opinion the children from Luss having to travel such a distance is unacceptable.
I can fully respect why you were unwilling to comment on Ashfields Mum’s post, however a similar journey would be from Portsonachan to Ford, which you may be familiar with.
If all the schools on the current list were to close, I believe this would only leave one school open in Kintyre between Tarbert and Campbeltown, would that be ok.
Minard has had a lot of coverage, do you feel it’s HMiE report should be taken into consideration or is it irrelevant in the wider debate.
North Bute, with some investment, can be a large ‘profit maker’ for the Council.
Although I fully respect your argument about different schools being so close to each other and the relative cost attached to this, do you recognise that, in law, there is a presumption against closure and that closure can only happen when there is a clear educational benefit for the school children (I don’t think you honestly believe a 20 minute bus journey would constitute an educational benefit)?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Another titbit to throw Jim’s way while he is contemplating his answer to my question: if we could persuade enough Connel parents to send their children to Achaleven rather than Dunbeg, this would bring Dunbeg back under 70 children and generate £208,000 in additional GAE to Argyll and Bute. From memory, we need 8 children to remain at Achaleven for this to happen.
A rather more positive vision I feel than just closing a recently great school which is currently in a bad patch.
To Ashfield mum – you might want to clarify that you are referring to the large rodent Castor fiber in case Jim gets the wrong idea!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dr MacKenzie you are correct we must keep on the main issue here ie schools closures, but we must recognise that whether or not councillors post on here, they do check on the latest vibes. Its politics and if pressure can be brought to bear then so be it. You appear to have confidence in at least 2 councillors in the executive – be careful as they both made it clear that Barcaldine should have gone to consultation. dont take your foot off the gas. no prize for nice guys in this mess.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I concur Phill.
Administration Councillors who sent schools in their own ward to consultation whilst promising to save them when it came to the final vote are councillors who put their own political aspirations first and their communities last. In doing that they put their own schools in grave danger as they became at the mercy of divide and conquer voting.
Robertson may well be expressing how delighted she is that Barcaldine is off the list but it is through no effort of her own and I very much doubt she now cares a whole lot about the remaining 12. If it was local GP services under threat she may be more interested.
This is the Administration that sits on its hands and only speaks when they want to cuddle up a little closer to Walsh, Morton and Hay.
VOTE ARSN 2012
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“cuddle up a little closer to Walsh, Morton and Hay” Thank you for that mental pic Integrity, I shall have nightmares tonight thinking about that sandwich.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
DDM. I bet you know lots of zoology jokes!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
There is a simple solution. Get rid of these councillors who put their own political aspirations first and their communities last through the ballot box in May 2012.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Some of the current administration councillors were elected (loosely) along the lines of their recent voting record, believe it or not. They are in many ways good for their communities. The top players you do know where you stand. What i find more distasteful is the ones who juggle about and manipulate their own profile/status to suit the (their) needs at that particular time and to hell with the electorate.
With old timers like Welsh, D macintyre, Robertson, Petrie etc you know where you stand, but too many are feathering their own nest and not even good at it!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For phill: Some parallel perspectives from the baiss of our own first hand experience.
We have not seen Councillor Elaine Robertson say one thing and do another. We are not aware that she ever promised to save schools before voting to send them to consultation. We witnessed her listening attentively but making no commitment.
We were present, though, when Duncan MacIntyre deliberately and knowingly misled Mary Jean Devon in trying (unsuccessfully) to get her to vote FOR sending the first and flawed set of school closure proposals to public consultation. He told her -utterly untruthfully and wihtin minutes of the start pf the meeting – that ‘her’ two Mull schools listed for closure had AGREED to go to consultation. This was his last throw and this is what he was prepared to do.
He also purported to support the first Oban Bay Marine project for the transit marina Oban (and Argyll) will benefit from having – and was then complicit in its evidentially skewed shafting – for whatever reason – by council officers.
Now that OBM, in its perseverance, has revised what was always a strong proposal and has become a Community Interest Company – which can issue shares we hope to see the highly supportive Oban business community buy – he is now declaring support again. But who, with any sense, can rely on that?
While it is distasteful to see OBM welcome that ‘support’ after their previous experience, it is evidence of the culture of personal power that Argyll and Bute Council maintains. People are afraid to do other than crawl – and so the culture is perpetuated, essentially unchallenged. We all have to do much better than this.
On the evidence, we have witnessed Councillor MacIntyre to be untrustworthy. We are also aware that the Council’s greatest and most expensive failures have been in the area of transport for which he is accountable. We have the avoidable failures at Oban Airport, Port Askaig Harbour, Bruichladddich Jetty,the Oban ring road. Most damagingly of al, we have had, affecting everyone, the crucial failure to invest in the maintenance of Argyll’s roads. The current proposal to spend £15.5 million on our roads can do no more than improve a few token stretches of the worst of ourappalling unable roads infrastructure.
We also witnessed Provost Petrie promise unequivocally at a public meeting in Luss that he would save the community’s school – and within a couple of weeks we witnessed him baldly vote, before a public audience at the critical council meeting, to send that school to consultation. That school and that community is now on the rack again, with its inclusion in the second production of a closure list.
In our experience we have not witnessed Councillor Walsh say something and do the opposite – but he is far from a trustworthy operator.He excluded his responsible Education Spokesperson of the time from high level strategy developments on the first and failed attempt to close 26 of Argyll schools. And he is personally, with Chief Executive, Sally Loudon, responsible for a negligence which has seen the cut to Argyll’s budget – avoidably – double. Hardly a winning hand of cards.
On the newcomers front – Councilor Douglas Philand of the Argyll First group is the newest of the councillors and, on witnessed performance to date, among the most honourable and the most engaged.
So it’s not really a matter of the vintage of the councillor, it’s a matter of the integrity of the individual. We must all weigh the evidence we have before us on every single one of them – and disregard the plausibility of which the most powerful offenders are perhaps most possessed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Agreed re Cllr Philand and Argyll first have not put a foot wrong.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Parents fighting to save their schools under threat should hope that the Scottish ministers call in the proposals. This will only happen if MSP’s consider there has been a significant failure by the education authority which has certainly been the case in Argyll & Bute.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0