Aberdeenshire nursery parents win review but concerns remain
Aberdeenshire Council has agreed to pause the mothballing of four rural nurseries.Parents were told in April that Ballogie, Crossroads, Glass and Sandhaven nurseries would close at the end of term.Councillors have now agreed to put those decisions on hold while it reviews its guidance around how it consults with families.Campaigners have welcomed the move, but said they had lost confidence in the local authority.
At a special meeting of the full council, councillors agreed to pause all future mothballing - which means closing premises but keeping them in a condition ready for future use - while a review of guidance was carried out.During the meeting, councillors on the local authority's ruling administration decided not to allow members of the public to give their views.Campaigner and parent Lindsay Love told BBC Scotland News: ''We all came hoping to speak on behalf of our communities and we were silenced.'''She said she had mixed emotions about the decision to pause mothballing.Ms Love said: ''I'm nervous that they are actually going to move forward with integrity. I feel like they're trying to control the narrative now. "We just need to make sure that we're protecting our nurseries and our rural communities as best as we can."She added: "Whilst is it a good thing that they've decided to pause the mothballing, I don't have a huge amount of confidence in them as an institution to do the right thing.''
Council leader Gillian Owen said the council had carefully reflected on what parents had been calling for.No timescale was given for the review.Ms Owen said: ''I think we're looking at doing a review quite swiftly but we've got to wait for the Scottish government guidelines.''She denied families had been "silenced" by not being allowed to speak at the meeting.The councillor added: "We've actually made the changes that they want.''They must look at that as an actual celebration, not as a slight.''When the move to mothball the nurseries was announced at the start of the Easter school holidays, it sparked a backlash from local communities.Since then, families have been campaigning to keep them open, arguing the decision was made without proper consultation.The Scottish government also wrote to Aberdeenshire Council to highlight the need to consult parents in such cases.Last week, the local authority's ruling administration said it wanted to pause the controversial plans.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
Why is Kemi Badenoch engaging in a new culture war on the burqa?
In clear evidence she is attempting to appeal to the right, Kemi Badenoch recently announced a review of Conservative policy on the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and promised the end of 'lawfare' against service personnel accused of crimes as well as curbs on 'activist' judges. Over the weekend, prompted by developments in Reform UK, she also said she wouldn't speak to any constituent who came to one of her surgeries wearing a burqa, and described sharia courts and cousin marriage as 'insidious'. It feels a bit desperate… What is Kemi Badenoch up to? You don't have to be an expert engineer, as she is, to work it out. Reform UK and Nigel Farage have been eating her lunch, opening up a 10-point lead in the opinion polls, taking eight county councils from the Conservatives, humiliating Tory candidates in the Runcorn and Hamilton (Scottish parliament) by-elections, grabbing media attention (albeit not always positive) and generally behaving like the 'real' opposition – more rallies, more headlines, more ideas, more presence and momentum. Even a leader as self-confident as Badenoch has cause to be worried. What is she doing? Exactly what her critics on the right demand: attempting to appeal to ex-Conservatives who have been abstaining or defecting to Reform UK. This explains the 'culture war' assault on the independent judiciary, net zero, and human rights legislation (plus the tentative interventions on the burqa, sharia law and cousin marriage). Badenoch does point out the complexities, such as how the ECHR affects the Good Friday Agreement, and the need to take time to get things right this far away from a general election. Badenoch's line is that Labour and Reform both promise all things to all people, and she's not prepared to do that. Why are some Tories unhappy with Badenoch's leadership? Sources grumble that she doesn't work hard enough, gives an arrogant impression, and that she's not very good at Prime Minister's Questions. There's also frustration at the lack of eye-catching initiatives (as Tony Blair once called populist stuff), failure to take on Farage directly, and sheer fear of more heavy electoral losses to Reform. The smaller the Tories' representation at every tier of government, the lower their profile and relevance and the more they look like a dying party. Unlike Margaret Thatcher in opposition from 1975-79, Badenoch can't just rely on the failures of a Labour government. Crucially, the Tories now have a formidable and unprecedented challenge from the right that makes Badenoch's lack of urgency look fatal. All she can do is say she's getting better at the job of leader of the opposition, which is a tough gig. One hopeful move is that she's allowed shadow chancellor, Mel Stride, to denounce the Liz Truss era mini-Budget (without actually saying sorry). Is Badenoch popular in the party? She won the leadership election last autumn among the membership by a clear but not overwhelming margin over Robert Jenrick of 56.5 per cent to 43.5 per cent, but among MPs by only one vote over Jenrick and five ahead of third-placed James Cleverly (42, 41 and 37 MPs respectively. According to the regular Conservative Home poll of activists, Badenoch is now incredibly unpopular given her role. She stands on a net zero approval rating, way below top of the flops Jenrick (+63), Chris Philp (+39) and Stride (+34). What happens next? A possible tricky by-election in North East Somerset and Hanham, where ex-Labour MP Dan Norris was arrested and bailed on suspicion of rape, child sex offences, child abduction and misconduct in a public office and is currently sitting as an independent having been suspended from the party. He ousted Conservative Jacob Rees-Mogg at the general election, and normally this would become an easy Tory gain; but now the question is whether the Tories and Reform will fight each other, potentially letting Labour back in; or will they cooperate (formally or informally) to get Rees-Mogg back, whichever party he chooses to run for.
The Independent
40 minutes ago
- The Independent
Rachel Reeves may have U-turned on winter fuel, but her problems are far from over
Standing in what appeared to be a garden centre to announce her latest U-turn on the pensioners' winter fuel payment, Rachel Reeves looked as if she was wilting a bit. Never at ease in front of a camera, the chancellor was more stilted than usual and didn't make much of an attempt to justify the change on any rational grounds. If this 'difficult decision' was the right thing to do last year, when the public finances were under pressure, one might ask: why is it the wrong thing to do this year, when the public finances are still under pressure, albeit for different reasons? She cannot, for reasons of pride, admit the U-turn is because of the recent electoral punishment-beating administered by an angry public – with the added force of Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage both declaring they'd restore the payment in full and immediately. She certainly cannot concede that this totem of her 'iron determination' to do whatever it took to achieve sustainable public finances has had to be tossed away, against her wishes, because the prime minister publicly ordered her to do so and her backbenchers increasingly demanded this hated policy be ditched. But she knows that everyone knows the truth – and to her credit, she cannot disguise her discomfort. She is in the worst of all worlds: she looks callous (even if she is not) but now she also looks weak, and will get few thanks for giving the winter fuel payment back (mostly). This is not a dream combination of attributes for a senior Labour figure or, for that matter, for a finance minister hoping to dazzle the markets. In fact, even in executing this U-turn she has somehow managed to botch things, by trying to retain some element of the means-testing she introduced last year, just to save face. So, even now, not all pensioners will receive their £200 or £300 (depending on age). Or rather, all will receive it initially, but some, not fantastically rich on an income of £35,000 or more, will find it entirely clawed back by HM Revenue and Customs through the self-assessment procedure. It would have been easier all round just to complete the U-turn: instead, Ms Reeves has stopped around the 170-degree mark. It hardly seems worth it. Even when it was first announced at the end of July last year, means-testing the WFP was an ill-conceived move. Of all the options available to her – and all chancellors, even in the tightest of binds, have choices – she plumped for the one that combined an incredibly modest saving (about £1.5bn) with the maximum political damage. Some 10 million active and motivated pensioners were ready to head to the nearest polling station at the earliest opportunity to make their displeasure clear. Too late, Ms Reeves and Liz Kendall pointed out how relatively generous the triple lock on the state pension was. Yet they didn't attempt to point out what a functioning NHS might do for the quality of life of older people. There was never so much as the faintest hint that an incoming Labour government would scrap something introduced by Gordon Brown and retained by the Conservatives since 2010. Making the U-turn announcement now, two days ahead of the comprehensive spending review was, presumably, an attempt to manage the news cycle – getting the good-but-embarrassing news out of the way. That might be shrewd, if the review does indeed show how the public services will 'live within their means' in the coming years, with welcome extra resources for the NHS, schools and the defence of the realm, restoring Ms Reeves's prestige. Yet the authority of the chancellor has been badly compromised by the missteps she's taken in her first year in office – unforced errors compounded by poor presentation. The so-called 'tractor tax' and an over-reliance on employers' national insurance contributions have also landed badly. As some old Treasury hands suggest, it feels very much as though her civil servants reached for their favourite policies when the inexperienced chancellor asked about options, and she accepted the recommendations all too readily, in a way her predecessors did not. Maybe the very real 'black hole' she inherited panicked her. It looks like it. At any rate, she is finding it even more difficult to resist her more powerful colleagues in the spending departments when they push for politically expedient solutions. We need not exaggerate matters, though. Ms Reeves is not like Kwasi Kwarteng being recalled from an IMF summit to be sacked by Liz Truss for delivering (her) mini-Budget in 2022. Nor is this a repeat of a dazed Norman Lamont staggering into Whitehall to announce that sterling was leaving the European ERM in 1992. Unlike in those episodes, the government's economic policy has not been destroyed by an adjustment of about £1bn in a social security budget of more than £300bn. But she knows that she is in a weakened position – and, with no following in the party, depends heavily on the confidence of the prime minister to survive. Sir Keir Starmer knows, as she does, that if he were to move her this early in the life of the government it would only make matters worse in every respect. For now, they're still in this together.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
State is ‘stifling criticism of Islam over fear of violent mobs', says Tory MP
The state is stifling criticism of Islam because of fears of a violent mob reaction, a senior MP has claimed. Nick Timothy, a front-bench Tory MP, issued the warning ahead of his Bill aimed at protecting free speech and the right to criticise religions, including Islam, being presented before Parliament on Tuesday. It follows the conviction of Hamit Coskun, 50, for setting fire to a Koran outside the Turkish consulate in London earlier this year while declaring that Islam was a 'religion of terrorism'. He was found guilty of committing a racially aggravated public order offence during a peaceful protest. Politicians and free speech campaigners claimed the 'grotesque' prosecution was an attempt to revive long-abolished blasphemy laws. In an attempt to prevent future prosecutions, Mr Timothy, who is a columnist for The Telegraph, is proposing a Freedom of Expression (Religion) Bill that would rewrite the Public Order Act to prevent it being used as a 'de facto' blasphemy law. His bill, which is co-signed by 11 other MPs, would extend legal provisions – which protect the freedom to criticise religion in specific circumstances – to the whole of the Public Order Act. 'The Public Order Act is increasingly being used as a blasphemy law to protect Islam from criticism. The Act was never intended to do this. Parliament never voted for this, and the British people do not want it,' said Mr Timothy. 'To use the Public Order Act in this way is especially perverse, since it makes a protester accountable for the actions of those who respond with violence to criticism of their faith. This is wrong, and it destroys our freedom of speech. 'We should be honest that the law is only being used in this way because the authorities have become afraid of the violent reaction of mobs of people who want to impose their values on the rest of us. 'My Bill will put a stop to this and restore our freedom of speech – and our right to criticise any and all religions, including Islam.' At Westminster magistrates' court, Coskun was found guilty of a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly conduct, which was motivated 'in part by hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam'. Coskun, who is an atheist of Armenian-Kurdish descent, attended the Turkish Consulate on Feb 13 while holding a burning copy of the Koran above his head and shouting 'F---- Islam' and 'Islam is religion of terrorism'. He was ordered to pay £240, but despite the conviction he has pledged to continue burning Korans and intends to go on a tour of the UK, visiting Birmingham, Liverpool and Glasgow where he will set fire to the holy book. It is unclear whether he will resist doing so until the case is heard at the Court of Appeal where it will be decided whether he is able to challenge Monday's verdict.
