Parents condemn vote to mothball 150 year-old school
This led the Scottish Borders Council to approve a recommendation to mothball, or temporarily close it, at Thursday's full council meeting. The mothballing will begin in August 2025.
Councils are required to review every mothballing decision at least once per year.
Evidence for the recommendation was presented by the council's solicitor, who explained that the council is not obligated to carry out a full statutory consultation on mothballing and that the council has some "flexibility" on the issue.
Mothballing is covered under the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010.
Although the guidance only requires a full statutory consultation if a council is attempting to close a school permanently, the Scottish Government has recently reiterated to other councils that engagement with parents is necessary before any mothballing decision is made.
According to the official guidance, if that engagement results in the majority of affected families opposing the mothballing recommendation, then the council should begin the process for consulting on permanent closure "as soon as possible."
Previous reporting from The Herald has shown that Scottish Borders Council has so far failed to provide evidence that it carried out consultations with affected parents ahead of the mothballing vote.
Council papers included evidence that the low roll, along with the fact that the only additional placement request comes from outside the school catchment area, meant that children would not receive a full educational experience at Fountainhall and would be better served at a neighbouring school.
The school's stated capacity is 50 pupils.
During the half-hour discussion, many councillors expressed regret over the situation.
SNP councillor Fay Sinclair said that mothballing a village school is an "emotive subject" that can impact even families without children directly connected to the school, but the situation required a hard decision.
"I couldn't in good conscience vote to keep a school open for one pupil."
Conservative council leader Euan Jardine said that his experience at a small rural school encouraged him to support the difficult decision to mothball Fountainhall.
"I went to a small rural school from Primary One to Three. But from Primary Four, I moved to a different school, and I learned how to play football and different social things I had never experienced in my life before."
He also questioned how a setting with only one pupil might negatively impact the career development opportunities for staff at the school.
Prior to the vote, Scottish Liberal Democrat members issued a statement to The Herald questioning the process which led to the mothballing recommendation and calling for a review.
Councillor Euan Robson said:
'Liberal Democrat members of Scottish Borders Council will be posing questions as a result of the Officers' report on the proposed mothballing of Fountainhall Primary School.
"We want to know whether the consultation procedure about mothballing was fair and reasonable and complied with government guidance.
"We shall ask for a review.
"We also need to know just how many placement requests were made to the school and how many potential nursery children might have enrolled. There are conflicting suggestions in this regard that should be resolved."
"We will be scrutinising the savings that are estimated to occur. Savings can only be achieved by a reduction in the Council's teaching establishment. Loss of teachers is regrettable but the Council's establishment will still seemingly be above the minimum level set by the Scottish Government.
"The wider point about savings is that without staff reductions, there are little or no revenue savings to be achieved in closing or mothballing small rural schools, and staff reductions do nothing for pupil teacher ratios and children's education.'
There was no significant opposition to the recommendation during the meeting on Thursday.
Read more
Independent councillor James Anderson called the situation an "unfortunate" reflection of the suggestion that the Borders has become "more of a retirement village."
He called on council officers to make sure that next year's enrollment figures are not "misrepresented, considering they may reflect a loss of confidence rather than genuine lack of demand."
The decision has been met with frustration by local parents, who argued that the council did not provide affected families with fair notice of the decision.
They also argued that, according to Scottish Government and council policies, there was enough parent opposition to the mothballing recommendation that the council should instead have opted for the more rigorous process of opening a statutory consultation on permanently closing the school.
Councillors were greeted on Thursday morning with a letter from an affected parent asking for a delay in the mothballing decision and a fuller consideration of the implications of mothballing.
Many parents have raised concerns that the mothballing process is used as a way to keep enrollments and interest in rural schools to a minimum and make it easier to justify permanent closure eventually.
Fountainhall Primary School will be mothballed beginning in August 2025, a decision which councillors called regrettable, while parents have questioned the process which led to the decision. (Image: )
Scottish Borders Council has mothballed 13 schools and early learning centres (ELC) since 2015. One of those has reopened and five are now permanently closed.
According to Scottish Government guidance, councils are required to undertake a full statutory consultation before permanently closing a school. Guidance also states that mothballing "should not be a way of denying parents access to the statutory consultation process required" by law.
In a press release following the decision, a group of parent campaigners said the decision has left the community "reeling."
Fountainhall parent Laurie Cameron-Back said that she chose to live in Fountainhall in part because of the school at its heart.
"Being able to walk our child to school was always our dream. I'm concerned that losing the school may make it harder for young families to stay, settle, and feel part of something.
"It's more than just a building; it's part of the village's identity.'
Thursday's decision to mothball Fountainhall also follows a period of controversy for the council over the attempted mothballing and later restructuring of several rural nurseries.
Michael Napier, whose child has been attending Fountainhall Primary School, said that parents no longer have faith in the process and that the council needs to "try harder" to engage.
"We suggest SBC revises the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010 set out by the Scottish Parliament. SBC's end-of-year report card for 2025 would read 'Does not pay
attention, does not listen, does not follow instructions'."
Scottish Borders Council has been asked to respond to parent concerns.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
27 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Police Scotland say transgender suspects have the right to ask for a male officer to search one half of their body and a female officer to search the other half
Police have issued new guidance ruling transgender suspects can demand one half of their body is searched by a male officer and the other by a female colleague. Gender-critical campaigners have accused Police Scotland of potentially putting female staff at risk with new rules drawn up after a recent Supreme Court verdict. The latest guidance - issued with comments from Assistant Chief Constable Catriona Paton - has been condemned by activists including Kellie-Jay Keen, of the group Let Women Speak, and Sex Matters charity chief Fiona McAnena. Judges determined in April that the word 'woman' meant a biological female and not gender within the terms of Britain's Equality Act. Police Scotland - the crime force covering the whole country - carried out a review in response to April's judgment and has now published what it calls 'interim transgender search guidance'. A statement described searching as a 'complex and important area of policing'. Police Scotland said the force 'must ensure that it is acting in line with its duties under the Equality Act and the Human Rights Act, and that officers and staff feel confident that they are conducting searches lawfully'. Among the new guidance is a question-and-answer section, which inclludes the suggestion: 'Can a transgender detainee ask for a separate area search depending on anatomical presentation?' The reply provided states: 'Yes - a transgender detainee can ask for a separate area search. 'This means that one half of their body will be searched by one biological sex officer and the other half of their body will be searched by a different biological sex officer.' The guidance has been sparked concerns among gender-critical campaigners, who worry female officers would be left in uncomfortable and even risky situations. Kellie-Jay Keen, who runs the group Let Women Speak, told MailOnline: 'I'm worried about the rights of female officers, if they're subjected to the whims of a suspect. 'I'd be asking the police force for single-sex searches - otherwise women aren't safe. It's just beyond belief that messages like this are being sent out.' Ms McAnena, director of campaigns at the charity Sex Matters, said: 'This ludicrous policy that allows one half of a suspect's body to be searched by a woman and the other half by a man comes from a police force which has embraced transgender ideology. 'Police Scotland's new rule is a gift to any suspect who may get satisfaction or enjoyment from being disruptive. 'This is particularly the case for trans rights activists who take an interest in eroding boundaries and making women uncomfortable.' The new Police Scotland statement comes just weeks after a controversy over similar searches for prison inmates identifying as transgender. MailOnline reported last month how female prison guards were having to strip search the top half of transgender inmates before male colleagues check their lower region. Trans criminals held at HMP Dovegate described how two female guards are used to check the top half of their bodies while two male colleagues check below the belt. The inmates subjected to the searches say they feel 'humiliated and violated' by the additional checks by male officers, which leaves their confidence 'shattered'. However, women's rights campaigners accused prison bosses of breaching the 'human rights' of female officers. April's ruling by the Supreme Court in London deemed the definition of a woman to be based on biological sex, meaning transgender women are not considered to be women in the eyes of the law. The verdict means trans women with a gender recognition certificate could potentially be excluded from single-sex spaces if 'proportionate'. Police Scotland has now said in a statement: 'The Service has been reviewing affected areas of operational policing, including the procedure for conducting certain kinds of searches, to provide clarity to our colleagues and communities. 'The guidance states that officers and staff will undertake all searches whether in custody or as part of a stop and search interaction, which involve the removal of more than a jacket, gloves, headgear or footwear, on the basis of biological sex. 'The guidance also states that when an individual, whose lived gender differs from their biological sex is subject to search and requests to be searched by an officer of their lived gender, efforts will be made to ensure an appropriate officer conducts the search, where this is operationally viable to do so. 'In these circumstances written consent will be required from the authorising officer (Inspector rank or above), the person to be searched, and the officer(s) conducting the search.' The force said the approach followed advice from its legal team, 'as well as engagement with relevant business areas, staff associations, trade unions, the Scottish Government and other key partners'. What does the Supreme Court gender ruling mean? What did the Supreme Court rule? The Supreme Court ruled the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex. What does it mean for single sex spaces? The court's decision will have huge consequences for how single-sex spaces and services operate across the UK, experts said today. The written Supreme Court judgment gives examples including rape or domestic violence counselling, refuges, rape crisis centres, female-only hospital wards and changing rooms. The court ruled that trans women with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) can be excluded from single-sex spaces if 'proportionate'. The government said the ruling 'brings clarity and confidence, for women and service providers such as hospitals, refuges, and sports clubs'. What does it mean for employers? Employment experts say it will provide companies with greater 'clarity' over single sex spaces for their staff. Lara Brown, senior Research Fellow in the Culture and Identity Unit at Policy Exchange, said a trans woman with a GRC who is excluded from single-sex spaces cannot say she is being discriminated against as a woman. She explained: 'This ruling makes it legal for any space that wants to be single sex to exclude biological men.' Could employers still be at risk of discrimination? The Supreme Court made it clear that trans people are protected under the gender reassignment provisions in the Equality Act and will be able to bring claims if they are discriminated or harassed. Experts say a trans woman will be able to bring a sex discrimination claim if they are disadvantaged because they are perceived to be a woman or because they associate with a woman. Rob McKellar, legal services director at Peninsula, said failure to be an inclusive workplace, regardless of any protected characteristics, could result in a discrimination claim. What does the ruling mean for competitive sports? In recent years, many sports have cracked down on rules around transgender athletes at the elite level. Athletics, cycling and aquatics are among those who have banned trans women from taking part in women's events. The UK government said it hopes the decision will provide clarity for sports clubs. Although today's ruling did not concern sport directly, former Olympian Sharron Davies welcomed the decision, saying it was important to 'define what a woman is'. Could a pregnant woman with a GRC be entitled to maternity leave? Experts said today that the ruling that only women can become pregnant shows a trans man (biological woman) would be able to take maternity leave, while a trans woman (biological man) would not. Jo Moseley, an employment law specialist at national law firm Irwin Mitchell, said: 'The Supreme Court acknowledged that only women can become pregnant. Therefore a trans man (a biological woman who identifies as a man) can take maternity leave. 'Had the court reached a different decision, it's possible that trans men with a GRC wouldn't have been entitled to protection in relation to pregnancy under the characteristics of 'pregnancy or maternity'.'
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Bid to halt Edinburgh George Street revamp defeated
A bid to scrap the £35 million plans to revamp Edinburgh's George Street has been rejected by councillors. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... The city's transport and environment committee voted down a Tory proposal that because of the lack of any confirmed funding for the project, the council should opt for a maintenance-only approach instead. The George Street plans are to remove parking and reroute buses, turning it into a pedestrian and cycle zone with vehicles excluded for most of the day. Pavements are to be widened and trees planted at each end of the street, along with planters and benches. The full revamp of George Street would see the current parking down the centre of the street removed, buses rerouted, the pavement widened and vehicles excluded for most of the day. | supplied Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad City Centre Tory councillor Joanna Mowat said: 'The elephant in the room is we still don't have any money and are reliant on applying to third parties and having this money granted to us before we can put a single shovel in the ground.' She said a report to the committee made clear it would cost £10.5m to carry out maintenance to bring George Street up to standard. And she argued that could be paid for with the parking revenue from the street of £3.2m a year. 'We should just be realistic - that's what we've got, that's what we can afford, let's do the maintenance schedule from the parking income rather than having a £35m fantasy budget. 'I don't see, given the financial climate we're in and the pressures on government funding, that we're suddenly going to get this money.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But officers said a 'do minimum' scheme would not meet the criteria for external funding. And committee convener Stephen Jenkinson said: 'It's perfectly normal not to have all the funds sitting in a bank account ready to be spent. As you move through developing a project, at various different stages you will draw down funding both internal and external.' Some of the money for the George Street revamp is likely to come from the city's planned Visitor Levy; there could also be contributions from developers; and the main source is expected to be various Scottish Government and Transport Scotland funding channels. The committee agreed to proceed with the full scheme to the next stage, advertising the road traffic orders, while keeping options open for future cost savings, for example by changing some of the materials. But it was agreed to rule out two 'do minimum' options - the maintenance-only proposal advocated by the Tories and another which would include the removal of parking. However, SNP transport spokesman Neil Gardiner said: 'This project needs a lot of scrutiny. Until we understand the money side of it we should not be taking any of the options off at this stage.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad He said it was possible the money could be better used elsewhere. "We will make our decision on whether to proceed or not on the basis of future reports." Lib Dem councillor Hal Osler said she was ' deeply concerned' about the level of funding. She said: 'Of course, as a council, we should have aspiration and we should bring forward something that isn't just a 'do minimum' approach. But we have to be realistic about the situation we're in and this is public funding. We do have to make a decision whether it is actually going to be worth spending £35m on something.' Green councillor Chas Booth said: 'We share a lot of people's concerns about the cost of this project but the question is: What do we do about that? 'The Conservative position is to say 'Scrap the whole scheme' - but we've heard from officers that might actually increase the financial exposure of the council. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'We've heard there is the potential for external funding if we proceed with this scheme and I think that's the right thing to do. And we've heard from officers that, if that financing is not available they will come back to us for a further decision.' The George Street Association, which represents the street's businesses and other organisations, gave its backing to the full revamp. In a written submission, association chair Dr William Duncan said the other options simply deferred essential infrastructure work that will need to be done He said: 'George Street should look and operate very much better than it currently does. Planning its transformation has been under discussion for far too many years and it needs to move forward at pace to deliver the high-quality changes needed for the future success of this iconic 'go to place,' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'We do not agree with those who might want to put this project on hold or not to proceed, because the physical condition of the public realm in George Street has deteriorated due to lack of investment for decades, meaning that status quo is not an acceptable or credible alternative. 'The need has gone beyond a facelift – the street needs major work done and the longer this is delayed the more extensive and expensive it will be.' Afterwards, Cllr Jenkinson said he was pleased the committee had agreed to move forward with the project. "This is a unique opportunity to bring one of Edinburgh's most important streets into the modern world whilst still maintaining its unique history and features. "The wider potential improvements are vast, from benefits to local residents and businesses to enhancing Edinburgh as a visitor destination, and beyond – we're on our way to delivering a bold new vision for George Street and our city centre.'
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Plans for £35m Edinburgh George Street revamp backed
Plans for a major redevelopment of one of the Edinburgh New Town's main streets have been backed by city councillors, despite fears over a lack of estimated £35m revamp of George Street will see parking down the centre of the street removed, a new cycle lane and traffic restrictions council hopes money for the project will come from the new visitor levy and through Scottish government and Transport Scotland funding concerns have been raised about the current financial situation and how likely it will be to secure all the money for the project. If funding is found, construction is scheduled to start after the Edinburgh Festival in 2027 with a completion date of August or September a meeting on Thursday, councillors voted six to five in favour of backing the most expansive – and expensive - approved George Street revamp will include more space for pedestrians, seating areas, trees and raised access will be restricted at certain times to just taxis and delivery vehicles, with "hostile vehicle mitigation" bollards controlling access at entry points. Most expansive and expensive plan Opposition councillors expressed concern over the scheme's practicality, instead calling for £10m to be spent on properly maintaining the existing street council officers said this would not meet the city's street design guidelines and would not qualify for funding from public bodies. Conservative councillor for the City Centre ward Joanna Mowat said: "We've been talking for nearly 11 years now."The elephant in the room is that we still don't have any money, and are reliant on applying to third parties and having this money granted to us before we can put a shovel in the ground."Two lesser options, costing £13m and £20m, which would cut out certain elements of the full scheme, were also proposed but voted council said that if adequate funding for the project cannot be found, councillors will be able to scale back to one of these less ambitious and Environment Committee convener Stephen Jenkinson said: "This is a unique opportunity to bring one of Edinburgh's most important streets into the modern world whilst still maintaining its unique history and features."The wider potential improvements are vast, from benefits to local residents and businesses to enhancing Edinburgh as a visitor destination, and beyond."
