Campaigners fighting against the closure of small rural schools are hailing a major victory after a new statutory panel blocked plans to shut four primaries in north west Skye.
They claim that from now on councils across Scotland, seeking to close schools, are going to have to conduct meaningful consultation in the communities affected, rather than just going through the motions.
In its first decision the School Closure Review Panel, refused to allow the Highland Council to proceed with its plans to close: Dunvegan, Knockbreck, Edinbane and Struan primaries and their respective nursery classes.
A new community school was to have been built at Dunvegan to accommodate them all.
But there was considerable parental opposition with claims young children would be travelling much longer than the estimated 30 to 40 minutes council officials had estimated.
Struan school is 8.8 miles from Dunvegan, Knockbreck 11.6 miles and Edinbane 8.7 miles, but some pupils have to travel from outlying addresses.
There was also criticism of the procedures.
The decision to go out to public consultation on the closure plans was taken in May last year and the consultation closed on July 11. It had due to be debated in November but the final decision was not taken until January 2015.
New regulations came into force a year ago, which were based on the presumption against closure. Local parents believed the consultation was held earlier to get round this.
The council always denied this but the review panel has now found it had not fulfilled its obligations under the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010.
Although provision for the establishment of the panel was made in the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014, it acts independently of the Scottish Government.
From March 30 it took over the responsibility from ministers for school closure decisions which are called in.
The Scottish Government called in the Highland Council's plans in May and now the review panel has found the council "failed in a significant regard to comply with the requirements" imposed by the legislation.
In one section in its wide-ranging report, the panel said that "Beyond the School" factors were not considered appropriately. "In fact were dismissed with no explanation. These factors were community identity, interaction with the community, travel distance, time, risk and impact on the community, community use of facilities, wraparound care and planned housing development."
Sandy Longmuir, chair of the Scottish Rural Schools Network, said: "We are not only pleased with the decision on the Skye schools, it is also the clarity of the whole report which is so welcome. We haven't seen anything like it before.
"When we set out to do this in 2005 (founding the network) , we were not saying that no small school should ever close. What we said was that the reasons for any closure should be clear and the savings transparent. All too often the decision was made, then reasons were found to fit that decision. Thereafter the so called consultation was a sham. This decision by the panel shows that consultation must be meaningful."
The council has 14 days to consider whether it should lodge an appeal.
Tim Spencer, a parent from Edinbane welcomed the news "I think what this underlines is that a public consultation should be genuine and not just a paper exercise."
Edinburgh-based Caledonian Economics, the consultants who advised the council, declined to comment referring inquiries to the local authority.
Highland's Chair of the Education, Children & Adult Services Committee, Skye councillor Drew Millar said: "We undertook an extensive consultation, taking account of the ideas and aspirations expressed by all of those involved. We listened to parents when we came to our decision, and we sought to accommodate the range of views. Many parents will share our disappointment, and we shall now take stock and consider the options, including whether the council will lodge an appeal."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article