What is ‘mothballing' and what rights do parents have?
Recent controversies across multiple local authorities have raised questions about how councils are allowed to 'mothball' schools and nurseries and what rights parents have to be involved in the decision.
Although the Scottish Government provides guidance on the process, local authorities have taken very different approaches in recent years.
So, what is mothballing, and what rules govern it?
Mothballing is a term for the temporary closure of a school, stage of education, or nursery class. Guidance explains that it is only to be used when a local authority believes permanent closure is the only other option.
Mothballed schools must be reviewed every year and either have their mothballed status renewed or be reopened.
If the local authority decides neither of these options is suitable, then it must begin the formal process of permanently closing the school, which includes a statutory consultation with the community.
Historically, it is rare for a school to reopen once it has been mothballed.
Particularly in rural communities where the school or nursery in question is the only educational option, temporary closure can dissuade new families from moving to the area and eventually lead to a more long-term decline in demand for the service and overall population.
This has led many parents and education campaigners to refer to the mothballing process as 'closure by stealth.'
Although mothballing a setting does not require councils to conduct an official statutory consultation as defined by the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010, statutory guidance for the Act explicitly states that it should not 'be a way of denying parents access to the statutory consultation process.'
In recent years, however, councils have used a number of strategies to attempt to close schools and nurseries and have not always engaged with the community ahead of the decision.
This has highlighted potential loopholes or points of confusion in the legislation, to the point that First Minister John Swinney recently promised the government was 'reviewing' its mothballing policy in order to better protect rural schools and nurseries.
How is mothballing described in the guidance?
Statutory guidance defines mothballing as a temporary closure which is 'only appropriate in very restricted circumstances.'
These circumstances are exclusively related to enrolment:
'A school can be mothballed where the school roll has fallen to zero and continues to be zero. It may also be appropriate where the roll or potential roll is very low and the authority considers the only other option to be closure.'
The guidance places emphasis on the term 'may.'
It goes on to state that, if there are children in the catchment area of the school in question then any mothballing decision should be made 'in consultation' with the parents involved. This means that, although the council does not have to follow the official requirements for a statutory consultation laid out in the 2010 Act, they must carry out some for of engagement with the community 'as early as possible, in order to ensure that families can understand the options open to them.'
According to the guidance, this step is important because councils need to be able to gauge whether affected families are for or against mothballing the school, nursery or stage of education. If a majority of parents oppose mothballing, then the council should begin the process of opening a statutory consultation on permanent closure.
'Mothballing should not be a way of denying parents access to the statutory consultation process required under the 2010 Act,' the guidance explains, and the statutory consultation process contains safeguards and includes a review of the decision by Scottish Ministers.
Where does the confusion come in?
Word choice is not consistent in the statutory guidance on mothballing. In the first mention of 'a school', the guidance specifies that it is also referring to 'a stage of education or a nursery class.'
This parenthetical is not repeated every time 'a school' is referenced, however. Section 65 of the guidance explains when mothballing is justifiable: when school roll falls to zero or where the roll has fallen so low that the council believes closure to be the only other option. The section does not repeat the clarification that it is also referring to a stage of education or a nursery class.
This may be what has led some councils to suggest that the full guidance does not apply to nursery classes.
When asked about a recent decision to mothball four nurseries–a decision made by officers with no input from the communities–an Aberdeenshire Council spokesperson told The Herald: 'The statutory guidance under the 2010 Act provides no specific guidance on circumstances where mothballing a 'stage of education' or 'nursery class' might be appropriate.'
However, statutory definitions state that the "schools" referred to in the guidance include nurseries under local authority management.
The Scottish Government has repeatedly weighed in on the question, telling The Herald that 'mothballing should only take place where the nursery roll falls to zero or is very low, and that decisions should be taken in consultation with the parents involved.'
Is anything being done to address the confusion?
During a recent session of First Minister's Questions, John Swinney was asked about an ongoing process in the Scottish Borders, which began when a council committee passed a motion to being the process of mothballing five nurseries.
The council has since voted to undo the initial decision and is now carrying out a separate consultation on alternative strategies. In response, Mr Swinney said that the government was already working to address the issue.
'We are reviewing guidance on mothballing to provide greater clarity on whether it is an appropriate action to take.
'This will ensure local decisions are based on effective engagement with communities and better reflect the needs of rural families.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
2 hours ago
- South Wales Argus
Ruth Jones MP on need to ban fur imports and sales
We have a real history of leading the way on animal welfare. Two years ago, Wales became the first part of the UK to ban the use of snare and glue traps. Scotland then followed, and last year Labour committed to do the same in England. Twenty-five years ago, we did the same with the Fur Farming (Prohibition) Act, raising the bar and setting an example for our neighbours to follow. Countries like Austria (2005), France (2021) and even Norway (2025) have all implemented 'fur bans' of their own, showing we were ahead of the curve. I am proud of our record on animal welfare. But before we absolve ourselves of being complicit in the fur trade, there is another step we can and must take: banning imports and sales. Two decades ago, we were right to ban fur farming on moral grounds – but still it is legal to import fur from beautiful, intelligent animals like foxes, mink and chinchilla. I have seen footage from a fur farm in Finland showing foxes with raw wounds, deformed feet and infected eyes. Then there were the obese, 'monster foxes' which were the result of selective breeding to increase their yield. Make no mistake – our ancestors may have used fur to survive the winter, but there is nothing natural about the fur industry today. Five years after covid, experts are warning us the next pandemic might come from one of these farms, where conditions are appalling for animals but perfect for viruses to mutate and make the leap to humans. This issue is urgent as the risk of a zoonotic outbreak looms large. I have been pushing for this change with my own piece of legislation, called the Fur (Import and Sale) Bill. If passed, it would ban the import of real fur products into Britain. Last week I carried a petition to Downing Street for the Fur Free Britain campaign with more than a million signatures and support from singer Will Young and TOWIE star Pete Wicks. Carrying the signatures to the famous black door, we were greeted by Chief Mouser, Larry, who showed great interest in our box. Afterwards an X account belonging to 'Larry the Cat' shared our photos, asking his nearly 900,000 followers to 'leave the fur wearing to the professionals'. I know Argus readers will agree that if an animal product like fur is too cruel to make in Britain, it's also too cruel to import from overseas. It is cruel and unnecessary, and high time we put the fur trade out of fashion. Ruth Jones is MP for Newport West and Islwyn.
BBC News
4 hours ago
- BBC News
Scottish parliament to vote on scaled-back social care reforms
It started life with a promise from Nicola Sturgeon that it would be most ambitious reform of the devolution when MSPs vote on the final stage of the Care Reform (Scotland) Bill later, the proposals in front of them will be a shadow of what the former first minister pledged in 2021. At the heart of the revamp of social care services was meant to be a National Care Service - but this was dropped by SNP ministers following widespread opposition to how the shake-up would have worked in the planned law to enable this flagship change has lived on and will now deliver changes to social care procurement, family care home visits and a new right to breaks for unpaid carers. When it became clear the National Care Service was not going ahead, the Scottish government was left with a Bill it was trying to get passed that was carrying the same name as its defunct policy. This was solved by renaming it the Care Reform (Scotland) Bill and now the planned law focuses on a series of important, but less high-profile, changes to health and social care across the country. What changes to social care are planned? One of the big changes planned under the new law is a legal right to breaks for unpaid mean councils will have a duty to decide whether a carer is able to take sufficient breaks from their caring they are not, then the local authority will provide support to enable this, such as providing funding for short respite breaks. This policy, given Scotland has around 700,000 unpaid carers, will cost between £196m and £315m by 2035/36, according to the Bill's financial it remains a fraction of the £13.9bn that unpaid care is currently saving Scotland every year. Improvements to the way information is shared in health and social care - to make it less likely that people will have to repeat their information - as well changes to procurement rules in the sector are also up the powers that watchdogs can take against failing care providers is also part of the bill. What about Anne's Law? The most high-profile part of the Care Reform (Scotland) Bill is Anne's Law, which allows people in care homes to receive visits from a named loved one even in restricted is named after Anne Duke, who died aged 63 in November 2021 after being cut off from her family while battling early-onset dementia during the Covid daughter Natasha Hamilton started a petition about the issue at the height of the pandemic, which attracted nearly 100,000 signatures, and this led to a wider campaign about the rights of people in care homes."I find it sad that it gained that much traction, it showed it was just not me who was affected, but I felt like I had to do something," she explained. "It was the most vulnerable point of my mum's life, she really needed her family and I still can't believe the separation that happened."But I'm proud that I did this for my mum and for everyone else who had to endure the torture of isolation during Covid."Changes to ensure people living in care homes have the right to visits from a loved one were introduced by the Scottish government in 2022 via national standards for the the bill is passed by MSPs, the right to have a designated visitor into care homes to support loved ones will become a legal right instead. Why was the National Care Service ditched? The original proposal for a National Care Service, inspired by the NHS, was to take social care provision and staff away from local authorities into a new national was then dropped in favour of creating a national care board to supervise service delivery and improve consistency - but this failed to win over a growing number of body Cosla and trade unions then withdrew their support for the project, while a number of health boards and care organisations also expressed plan, which was also subject to a series of delays, was eventually scrapped in January after £30m was spent on the process. Social Care Minister Maree Todd said at the time she was "still committed to the ambitions of the National Care Service" but added the SNP no longer had the support it needed in parliament to pass its original plans into is left of the plans today is the creation of a national care service advisory board on a non-statutory basis which will try and improve social care support services.
Edinburgh Reporter
5 hours ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Winter fuel payment announced in England and Wales means uplift for Scotland
In England and Wales, people who are old enough to receive the State Pension and who have income of less than £35,000 will receive a Winter Fuel Payment this winter. This adds up to 9 million pensioners south of the border – which the UK Government says is around three quarters of all pensioners living there. Winter Fuel payments are no longer paid to Scottish pensioners. In winter 2024/25 pensioners were paid Pension Age Winter Heating Payment through the DWP, but in 2025 The Scottish Government announced that the Pension Age Winter Heating Payment will be paid by Social Security Scotland to all qualifying pensioners. The payment will be either £200 or £300 and £100 to other pensioners. Payment will be made to everyone born before 23 September 1958, who lives in Scotland – and who is in receipt of certain other benefits. The UK Government also confirmed that the change – which is a u-turn on Keir Starmer's previous announcement – will cost around £1.25 billion in England and Wales. It is believed that means-testing of the Winter Fuel Payment will save around £450 million, subject to certification by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) compared to the system of Winter Fuel Payments for everyone regardless of income. In Scotland this payment is devolved and the UK Government said the government will receive a 'mechanical uplift' in their funding as a result of the change in England and Wales. It is thought that might be around £100 million. Social Justice Secretary, Shirley Anne Somerville, said: 'The UK Government's decision to cut the winter fuel payment was a betrayal of millions of pensioners and that is why the Scottish Government took action to introduce a winter heating payment for all pensioners in Scotland. 'I welcome any extension of eligibility by the UK Government, but this is a U-turn the Chancellor should have made a long time ago. But there is still no detail about how the Chancellor intends to go about that. Unfortunately, it still sounds as if many pensioners will miss out. 'We have once again not been consulted on the policy and its implications in Scotland and will scrutinise the proposals carefully when then are announced. I would therefore urge the UK Government to ensure the Scottish Government is fully appraised of the proposed changes as soon as possible. 'The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government wrote to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury last week to urge the UK Government to share its plans with us as quickly as possible, so that we can understand any implications for our own programmes and, crucially, our budget.' Previously the UK Government announced that Winter Fuel Payments would be restricted to pensioners in receipt of Pension Credit. When First Minister, John Swinney, attended the round table meeting in London at the end of May he asked the prime minister to restore winter fuel payments to all pensioners regardless of means. The costs will be accounted for at the Budget and incorporated into the next OBR forecast. The Chancellor said she will take decisions on funding in the round at that forecast to 'ensure the government's non-negotiable fiscal rules are met', and confirmed that this will not lead to permanent additional borrowing. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, said: 'Targeting Winter Fuel Payments was a tough decision, but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government. It is also right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest. 'But we have now acted to expand the eligibility of the Winter Fuel Payment so no pensioner on a lower income will miss out. This will mean over three quarters of pensioners receiving the payment in England and Wales later this winter.' HMRC will reclaim the payment from anyone earning more than £35,000 and no-one is required to take any action or register for the payment. Winter Fuel Payments are worth £200 per household, or £300 per household where there is someone over 80. Shared payments are made to pensioners not on an income-related benefit. Scottish Labour Scottish Labour Social Security spokesperson, Paul O'Kane, said: 'This is welcome news that will bring even more money to Scotland – on top of the record funding settlement Labour delivered in the budget. 'The last Tory government left our public finances in chaos but Labour has made good progress cleaning up the mess it inherited. 'The Winer Fuel Payment is a devolved payment in Scotland and Scottish Labour has long been clear that we want to see it reinstated for the majority of pensioners up here – but despite their loud spin, the SNP voted against our attempts to do so. 'The SNP must not go ahead with plans that would rob poorer pensioners in order to fund payments for millionaires. 'The SNP must re-examine their own proposals in light of this game-changing announcement, ensure payments reach those most in need, and give a cast-iron guarantee that no struggling Scottish pensioners will be left out of pocket under their plans.' Scottish Greens Scottish Greens Social Security spokesperson Maggie Chapman MSP said: 'Cutting the Winter Fuel Payment was one of the first acts of this Labour government. Elected on a promise of 'change' they brought in sweeping austerity that harmed older people across the UK at a time when the cost of living remains sky high. 'There is no doubt that the damage has already been done, families will have lost loved ones, and illnesses will have been caused over the winter months because of the brutal decision by Rachel Reeves and the Labour Government. 'Labour's cutting of the Winter Fuel Payment, refusal to end the two-child benefit cap and regressive austerity measures are forcing people into poverty in Scotland and across the UK 'The reinstatement of the Winter Fuel Payment for some is a welcome move, but we must go further, the Labour government must end the two-child benefit cap which hits working class families the hardest, and they must reverse their cruel austerity policies. 'Poverty isn't inevitable. It's a political policy, a policy which Rachel Reeves has forced upon hundreds of thousands of people across the UK. If Keir Starmer has any shame, he would finally call an end to her disastrous time as Chancellor.' Independent Age Chief Executive Joanna Elson, CBE, said:'We are pleased that the UK Government has listened to the voices of older people on a low income and reconsidered what was an incredibly damaging change to the Winter Fuel Payment. By widening the eligibility criteria, more older people in financial hardship will now receive this vital lifeline in time for winter. 'Our helpline receives thousands of calls from older people making drastic cutbacks just to get by and the changes to the Winter Fuel Payment made this worse. For millions living on low incomes, the entitlement supports them to turn their heating on and stock up on food during the colder months. 'While the changes to the Winter Fuel Payment are positive, they are not a silver bullet that will end pensioner poverty. Around 2 million older people still live in poverty, and measures must be taken to ensure the long-term financial security of all people in later life. There needs to be a cross-party consensus on the adequate income needed in later life to avoid financial hardship. Once this is established, every older person should be supported to receive this amount. Nobody should have to live in poverty as they age.' Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: 'Commonsense has finally prevailed as the winter fuel cut is reversed for most pensioners. Whilst this is an important step forward, questions will be asked about how this disastrous decision was made in the first place, the damage may not easily be reversed. 'Leadership is about choices and the choice to pit workers against pensioners was simply wrong. 'Instead of what seems to be a never-ending cycle of cuts, Labour needs to revisit the fiscal rules and bite the bullet on a wealth tax. Britain is the sixth richest economy in the world, the idea that we would be picking the pockets of our pensioners was unnecessary and unforgivable.' When the government announced it was cutting the winter fuel payment, Unite mounted a campaign to get the decision overturned. This included organising a vote at Labour conference opposing the cut in winter fuel payments, and grassroots campaigning which got the cut partially reversed in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Westminster Like this: Like Related
