Campaigners launch legal challenge over new Mull school
A judicial review is a type of legal case where a judge reviews the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public authority.Argyll and Bute council have been approached for comment.
Tracy Mayo, chairwoman of the Mull Campus Working Group, told BBC Scotland News: "This is about all our children - it affects the whole of Mull and its future sustainability and its unique island way of life."When we first learnt the terms of the bid for funding in August 2024, we immediately raised our concerns the offer didn't make sense - it seemed irrational."How we define our community appears to differ from that of our council. We have been highlighting flaws in the process for many years as have other communities."Effective partnership working fosters trust and mutual trust. We have stated all the way through this we want to work with our council but not like this."It has taken a huge amount of work to get this far. Volunteers have lost huge swathe of family time, our families have been very patient and supportive and so has the amazing community of Mull."
Mull Campus project
The location of the island's only high school has long been a source of division on Mull.Pupils living in the north go to the school in Tobermory, but the commute is more than 90 minutes for those living in the south, and most travel to Oban on the mainland, staying in hostels during the week.Funding was secured in 2023 to build a new secondary school on the Isle of Mull to replace the depilated Tobermory High School.A number of sites where the new school could be built were identified across the island.
Campaigners argued for a new secondary school to be built in a more central location such as Craignure, while keeping a primary school in Tobermory.But the council said splitting the campus would cost the authority an extra £12m, and that any further delay could jeopardise promised Scottish government funding.Ultimately councillors voted to go ahead with building the new school in the Island's main town of Tobermory, near to the existing school.Campaigners launched a petition and held protests against the decision, and the issue has been debated at Holyrood.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
12 minutes ago
- BBC News
Why Gers figures will play a prominent role in the Scottish election
Gers-day, every August, is a statistical festival to add to Edinburgh's other colourful offerings. It gives performers a wide variety of creative options to attract into them, and you'll find Scotland's public finances benefit a lot from the generosity of the Treasury in London. Spending per head last year was nearly £2,700 ahead of the figure for the UK as a you may find, as the Office for National Statistics told us for 2022-23, that spending per head is higher in same set of figures showed us that the net transfer of funds was not as big as the ones for north-west England, Wales, Yorkshire and Humberside or the West Midlands. Just because Scotland is the only part of the UK to go through this annual analysis does not mean it's the outlier. Dig a bit deeper, as the Scottish government has done, and you'll find that devolved revenues have been rising faster than devolved expenditure. That was the first choice of interpretation by Holyrood's Finance Secretary Shona may be so, but expenditure is a much bigger number than devolved revenue, so the growth rates don't matter as much as the actual minister added that Scotland raises more money per head than other parts of the UK except London and south-east puts it in that position is oil and gas tax revenue, which is on a long-term downward trend. Even if it weren't, it's widely recognised as an unreliable way to balance the nation's on the bright side of independence doesn't answer the awkward questions this raises, where there would be no division between devolved and reserved finances and a future with not much oil and gas revenue flowing. What choices would an independent Scottish government make? An independent Scotland would, last year, have had to borrow – if it could persuade the bond markets – more than one ninth (11.7%) of the economy's annual total output. The UK last year was borrowing one-twentieth (5.1%), while the European Union tells it members that less than one-thirtieth (3%) is more like the maximum sustainable answer from supporters of independence is that they could unleash the potential of the Scottish economy to grow faster and fill Holyrood's coffers with more tax revenue. That is preferable to setting out where the spending axe might have to figures, they remind us, reflect the slow growth you get under the current constitutional arrangements, and it should be possible to do much already finding that faster growth, sought by ministers in Westminster and Holyrood, is hard to achieve. It depends on the choices a newly independent Scottish government would make. There are trade-offs between growth and independent future may not seem imminent. But First Minister John Swinney has made that his chosen battleground for the Holyrood election next May. These Gers figures will surely feature in that debate.
The Guardian
12 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Of course Mark Zuckerberg is still doing good works – he's just switched up the definition of ‘good'
If you put it in a novel – a ham-fisted satire of tech overlord hypocrisy, say – it would look too contrived to fly. But here we are, absorbing a story from the New York Times this week in which Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, are discovered to have been running a private school out of their compound in Palo Alto, California, in violation of city zoning laws. More pertinently, the school of 14 kids, which includes two of the couple's three daughters, is less than a mile from the school for low-income families that the couple founded in 2016. Guess which school the world's second-richest man and his wife are shutting down? Say the word 'zoning infraction' to a certain stripe of American and the effect is equal to using 'queue jumper' on a Briton, but of course the broader point here isn't one about permits. (A spokesperson for Zuckerberg and Chan told the newspaper that the family was unaware about the zoning laws and that the private school, or 'pod of home schoolers' as they put it, is now moving to another location.) It is, rather, about Zuckerberg's perceived retreat from progressive social causes, starting with the shuttering of the school and ending with the announcement in May this year that the pair's charitable foundation, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI), will be pulling funding from almost all the affordable housing and homeless charities it supports in the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as slashing diversity programmes. Officially, the reason for these changes is that after a decade spent learning the ropes of effective philanthropy, CZI has decided that its money is best allocated to science and medical funding. Unofficially, of course, the switch from a mission statement about 'advancing human potential and promoting equality' to a foundation that now calls itself a 'science-first philanthropy' seems in keeping with more localised changes in the Zuckerberg household. Namely: the Meta head's swing from the kind of guy who, during the Biden administration, might have worn a This Is What A Feminist Looks Like T-shirt, to his Trump-era guise as someone who goes on Joe Rogan to argue for more 'masculine energy' in the workplace and appoints a Trump ally to the Meta board. Zuckerberg's politics are clearly as flexible as the next tech leader's, but I suspect there are other things in play here, too. Unlike science research, the specimens in philanthropy-funded social experiments have a nasty habit of talking aback. In 2010, when Zuckerberg gave $100m to overhaul the Newark public school system, some educators called him out for what they saw as the application of startup values and glib quick fixes – charter schools, anyone? More 'parental choice'? – to the vast, interlinked challenges of the US's struggling public school system. You can imagine how this might have gone down at HQ. We're trying to help them; why are they giving us shit? Why aren't these nobodies tugging their forelocks like a billionaire at an autocrat's inauguration? Another thing about billionaires: they get bored very quickly. One of the alleged reasons that Zuckerberg and Chan are shutting their charitable school in East Palo Alto, is that, reportedly, Chan was frustrated by the slow pace of progress. It is baffling, isn't it, given the geniuses involved; and yet these kids seem determined to stay poor and not get into Harvard. The rock-solid certainty among certain tech leaders that their skills are infinitely transferable is, however, a hard one to unseat. Consider the Bezos Day 1 Academies Fund, in which the world's third-richest man promises to 'operate a network of tuition-free, Montessori-inspired preschools in under-resourced communities', rather than, say, compel his $2.36tn company to pay its fair share of taxes to fund state education coffers. Meanwhile, back in the Zuckerbergs' Crescent Park community, things are getting a bit tense. In an area popular with Stanford professors, the Zuckerbergs bought 11 properties, turned them into a compound, and like low-rent oligarchs in Holland Park, west London, promptly put in a pickleball court and dug out the basement. Years of noise, construction and traffic from the school – oh, boy, were neighbours ready when the New York Times reporter came calling. 'No neighbourhood wants to be occupied,' said one, whose home is surrounded on three sides by Zuckerberg properties. 'But that's exactly what they've done. They've occupied our neighbourhood.' Substitute 'neighbourhood' for 'world' and he's summed it up nicely. Emma Brockes is a Guardian columnist
The Guardian
41 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Of course Mark Zuckerberg is still doing good works – he's just switched up the definition of ‘good'
If you put it in a novel – a ham-fisted satire of tech overlord hypocrisy, say – it would look too contrived to fly. But here we are, absorbing a story from the New York Times this week in which Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, are discovered to have been running a private school out of their compound in Palo Alto, California, in violation of city zoning laws. More pertinently, the school of 14 kids, which includes two of the couple's three daughters, is less than a mile from the school for low-income families that the couple founded in 2016. Guess which school the world's second-richest man and his wife are shutting down? Say the word 'zoning infraction' to a certain stripe of American and the effect is equal to using 'queue jumper' on a Briton, but of course the broader point here isn't one about permits. (A spokesperson for Zuckerberg and Chan told the newspaper that the family was unaware about the zoning laws and that the private school, or 'pod of home schoolers' as they put it, is now moving to another location.) It is, rather, about Zuckerberg's perceived retreat from progressive social causes, starting with the shuttering of the school and ending with the announcement in May this year that the pair's charitable foundation, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI), will be pulling funding from almost all the affordable housing and homeless charities it supports in the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as slashing diversity programmes. Officially, the reason for these changes is that after a decade spent learning the ropes of effective philanthropy, CZI has decided that its money is best allocated to science and medical funding. Unofficially, of course, the switch from a mission statement about 'advancing human potential and promoting equality' to a foundation that now calls itself a 'science-first philanthropy' seems in keeping with more localised changes in the Zuckerberg household. Namely: the Meta head's swing from the kind of guy who, during the Biden administration, might have worn a This Is What A Feminist Looks Like T-shirt, to his Trump-era guise as someone who goes on Joe Rogan to argue for more 'masculine energy' in the workplace and appoints a Trump ally to the Meta board. Zuckerberg's politics are clearly as flexible as the next tech leader's, but I suspect there are other things in play here, too. Unlike science research, the specimens in philanthropy-funded social experiments have a nasty habit of talking aback. In 2010, when Zuckerberg gave $100m to overhaul the Newark public school system, some educators called him out for what they saw as the application of startup values and glib quick fixes – charter schools, anyone? More 'parental choice'? – to the vast, interlinked challenges of the US's struggling public school system. You can imagine how this might have gone down at HQ. We're trying to help them; why are they giving us shit? Why aren't these nobodies tugging their forelocks like a billionaire at an autocrat's inauguration? Another thing about billionaires: they get bored very quickly. One of the alleged reasons that Zuckerberg and Chan are shutting their charitable school in East Palo Alto, is that, reportedly, Chan was frustrated by the slow pace of progress. It is baffling, isn't it, given the geniuses involved; and yet these kids seem determined to stay poor and not get into Harvard. The rock-solid certainty among certain tech leaders that their skills are infinitely transferable is, however, a hard one to unseat. Consider the Bezos Day 1 Academies Fund, in which the world's third-richest man promises to 'operate a network of tuition-free, Montessori-inspired preschools in under-resourced communities', rather than, say, compel his $2.36tn company to pay its fair share of taxes to fund state education coffers. Meanwhile, back in the Zuckerbergs' Crescent Park community, things are getting a bit tense. In an area popular with Stanford professors, the Zuckerbergs bought 11 properties, turned them into a compound, and like low-rent oligarchs in Holland Park, west London, promptly put in a pickleball court and dug out the basement. Years of noise, construction and traffic from the school – oh, boy, were neighbours ready when the New York Times reporter came calling. 'No neighbourhood wants to be occupied,' said one, whose home is surrounded on three sides by Zuckerberg properties. 'But that's exactly what they've done. They've occupied our neighbourhood.' Substitute 'neighbourhood' for 'world' and he's summed it up nicely. Emma Brockes is a Guardian columnist
