Why should pupils and families on Mull settle for 'good enough'?

There is a tendency in government to consider a decision as etched in stone, even if the outcome is not ideal: "live and learn", "we'll get'em next time", and all that.
Governments are reluctant to revisit decisions or grant special consideration because they risk setting a precedent in which every stakeholder in the future will demand an exception.
But is that such a bad thing? Surely one of the responsibilities of the government is to take every decision on its merits. Leaders shouldn't sit on their hands just because intervening means they will have to have an awkward conversation with someone later on, so what should the government do when it looks like things have gone wrong?
The question was raised this week at Holyrood, during a debate on 'empowering Scotland's island communities.' The recent decision by Argyll and Bute Council on where to build a new school on Mull was brought back into the spotlight, and highlighted by Conservative MSP Tim Eagle as an example of 'when things go wrong' when decision-makers ask island communities for their opinions but don't really listen to their answers.
Read more:
Lessons to Learn | The SNP reduced education targets and hoped no one would notice
The Herald covered the saga of the Mull Campus Project extensively and the council's eventual decision to locate the replacement for the island's crumbling school in the northern town of Tobermory. This effectively cut off the southern half of the island from attending. Those communities will continue with the longstanding practice of sending their children to board on the mainland during the week.
Parents who boarded as children and struggled with life away from home initially heralded the Mull Campus Project as a chance to break the cycle for the next generation. Increasingly, however, they became disillusioned with the process and felt that the project was moving to a foregone conclusion: the school would be put in the north, and things would stay as they are.
Their hopes were up initially in part because parents could not imagine how the project could be called a Mull Campus if it was not going to be built where the whole island could benefit.
In a way, they were proved right: following the decision, the council began referring to it as the 'Tobermory Campus Project' in all communications, even to the extent that nearly all previous mentions of the Mull Campus were replaced on the webpages that had been online for years.
Read more:
Mull school series – how to read every article
There were repeated calls for the government to intervene with extra funding, extra allowances or extra time for the council to explore options that islanders were raising repeatedly and passionately, but the government declined to act at every turn.
This, Mr Eagle said, was a mistake.
But it is 'not too late,' he added.
'I think, in all seriousness, that there is something we can do around this.
'For the whole island to be successful, it was vital all were listened to. And time and time again I was contacted by people across the island that raised concerns about the process of consultation.
'Because ultimately, and this is my own opinion, the financial impact on the council was a much bigger consideration for councillors in Argyll and Bute than what the residents of Mull thought themselves.'
Too often, he said, rural and island communities are reduced to a numbers game. This is how it plays out nationally, where these areas will always be dwarfed by larger population centres. But this is also how the decision played out on Mull, where the sheer weight of population repeatedly pushed the conversation towards Tobermory.
Decisions like these, Mr Eagle said, require a 'bespoke arrangement,' something that campaigners on Mull and my colleague James McEnaney argued during the course of our coverage.
Mr Eagle said the Mull decision 'needed community, government and council to come together' and create a plan that worked for the whole island.
Mr Eagle's comments came at the end of a debate that touched on the challenges of connectivity and how Scotland's islands have been underserved in this regard.
'Rural Life is built into our very cultural heritage, with traditions and languages and history baked into our national identity. And rural services delivery does come with a higher cost, but if we want rural areas to thrive, we want our islands to thrive, we must accept that point.
'Education, like on Mull, that relies on ferries and weather and the separation of families, to me, is never a good thing.'
He said the project 'necessitated' government involvement, and he called on the government to step in to revisit the decision and fully engage with the community and the council about alternatives.
Historically speaking, it seems unlikely that the government will do so but the calls for action remain consistent.
Even supporters of the campus in Tobermory recognised that it is not a perfect solution.
In fact, the council's own papers admitted that none of the options they put forward would serve every community:
'Under the constraints of the available funding, it is unlikely that either of the campus locations would be able to provide a fully equal solution for all children and young people living on Mull and the islands."
That leads to the real question at the heart of this decision and many others that affect life on Scotland's islands: why settle for 'good enough'?
If everyone agrees that policy, logistical and financial constraints will usually keep islanders from getting a fair shake, why can't we get creative now and then?
You can get in touch with our education writers by email:

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Scotsman

19 minutes ago

• Scotsman

The 'difficult' fight by Scotland's LGBT+ community to repeal section 28 remembered, 25 years on

Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, 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... LGBT+ communities have been "strengthened" by their experience of section 28, it has been claimed, as Scotland marked 25 years since the law was repealed. Section 28 was part of the Local Government Act 1988, introduced by Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It stated councils could not 'intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality', or 'promote the teaching in any maintained school the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship'. Scotland had only legalised gay sex eight years before section 28 was introduced - 13 years after it was decriminalised in England and Wales. The law was repealed on June 21, 2000, making it one of the first major pieces of legislation in the newly-devolved Scottish Parliament. England and Wales were to follow suit three years later. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Scottish Greens co-convener Patrick Harvie was an LGBT+ youth worker in Glasgow at the time and campaigned in support of the repeal. He said he still finds his memories of the fight 'difficult', particularly when he thinks back on the 'horrible, nasty' media coverage at the time. Scottish Green co-leader Patrick Harvie. | Jane Barlow/Press Associaton 'My memories of the repeal campaign are still quite difficult in some ways,' he said. 'None of us expected this would be the biggest issue in the Scottish Parliament. 'In the early days of devolution, there were anxieties about what the Scottish Parliament would do with human rights. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'There was still a strong story that Scotland was more socially conservative and more religious than other parts of the UK. Now that story of Scotland was not true, but it still held power in people's minds. 'When we realised the first Scottish Executive was going to repeal this, there was initially a lot of optimism and happiness. But suddenly we realised what a horrible, nasty, homophobic campaign was run against us by the media.' Mr Harvie told The Scotsman it was a 'frightening experience' for him to grow up queer in the west of Scotland, describing schools at the time as 'not a safe place'. Some of the loudest voices in the 'Keep the Clause' campaign were Cardinal Thomas Winning, head of the Scottish Roman Catholic Church, and bus tycoon Brian Souter. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Sir Brian Souter (left) and Jack Irvine from the 'Keep the Clause' campaign. | David Cheskin/Press Association Mr Harvie said: 'Cardinal Winning compared us to Nazis, which is astonishing now. But we survived it - some people say what doesn't kill you makes you stronger, and our community has been strengthened by this experience. 'It didn't feel like it at the time - it felt like an attack. But it has strengthened us. 'On some level, if it hadn't been for Brian Souter I would never have got into politics, so perhaps I am his greatest legacy.' Mr Harvie was planning to spend the 25th anniversary, which was marked on Saturday, reflecting on his time campaigning and giving evidence in the old Scottish Parliament building. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad First Minister Donald Dewar and Communities Minister Wendy Alexander, pictured immediately before Mr Dewar speaks on repealing section 28. | Ben Curtis/Press Association He said he hoped the anniversary could be used to highlight increasing levels of transphobia across Scotland. Mr Harvie said: 'I will remember being on the front bench of the temporary chamber before I was an MSP and giving evidence on the Ethical Standards and Public Life Act that repealed section 28. 'It genuinely felt like this new parliament had doors open and was willing to participate, and that is when we see Parliament at its best.' The Glasgow MSP added: 'Up until the last few years we have consistently seen Parliament vote in favour of LGBT+ equality and rights so it is painful to see that unravel with the growth of transphobia and prejudice against inclusive education.

Scottish Sun

3 hours ago

• Scottish Sun

SNP's blame game and ‘grievance' politics is out of control – voters are fed up

Anyone following public debate will have been aware of this dreary, dismal sound for the past decade or so CHRIS MUSSON SNP's blame game and 'grievance' politics is out of control – voters are fed up A DARK cloud has lingered over Scotland for years now – pumped out and replenished daily by the doom-mongering SNP. With less than 11 months until the 2026 Holyrood elections, the daily drumbeat of despair from the machinery commanded by Nats chiefs is starting to grow ever louder. 2 Chris Musson has his say on the SNP's blame game rhetoric under John Swinney Credit: Andrew Barr 2 The First Minister recently said Scotland is 'prey to a broken system and a failing economic model' Credit: Alamy Anyone following public debate will have been aware of this dreary, dismal sound for the past decade or so. More often than not, it emanates from the industrial-scale, taxpayer-funded grievance machine which the Scottish Government has morphed into under recent incarnations of the SNP. The person currently at the control panel, twiddling the dials of misery and blame, is Captain Glass Half Empty himself, First Minister John Swinney. Those who don't tune into Scottish politics may be blissfully unaware of the gloom and grumbles. I envy them. They may even think that Scotland is a pretty good place to live in the grand scheme of things. Which it is. Despite being tuned in daily, as a journalist, I sometimes forget about the monotonous moaning, given it's become like background noise. But every now and then, the beat grows louder, the shrieking more hysterical, making you sit up and pay attention. Recently, that's happened again, with Swinney's return to focusing on independence ahead of next year's election. The 'grievance' dial has been turned up to ten, culminating in Swinney's deranged, paranoid drivel in a self-billed 'keynote' speech last week. Fresh from an event where he claimed the 'status quo is broken' - ignoring the fact he has been the status quo since 2007 - Swinney dusted off the decades-old nationalist playbook. John Swinney defends Gray's car use after minister was 'driven to pub' He told an Edinburgh audience that Scotland has been left to 'thrive on what amounts at worst to poison pills and at best policy scraps from the UK table'. We are an 'afterthought' for Westminster, he complained - ignoring the fact that devolution means that we are, by and large, left to our own affairs with key services. As the SNP says it wants. And with a bizarre, anti-capitalist flourish, Swinney claimed Scotland was 'prey to a broken system and a failing economic model'. Has he got one eye on another coalition with the Scottish Greens next year? Or maybe Swinney has been coming out with this nonsense for so long he actually believes it. Find out what's really going on Register now for our free weekly politics newsletter for an insightful and irreverent look at the (sometimes excruciating) world of Scottish Politics. Every Thursday our hotshot politics team goes behind the headlines to bring you a rundown of key events - plus insights and gossip from the corridors of power, including a 'Plonker' and 'Star' of the Week. Sign up now and make sure you don't miss a beat. The politicians would hate that. SIGN UP FOR FREE NOW After all, this is the man who, in 2001, appears to have invented the SNP's claim that rivals think Scotland is 'too wee, too poor, too stupid' to be independent - a charge levelled only by the SNP. What Swinney actually said all those years ago, during his first, disastrous stint as SNP leader, was that Labour and Tories were 'terrified of the idea that the lives of millions of Scots would be improved if control of Scottish resources were in Scottish hands'. He then said: 'And that is why they will always say we are too stupid and too poor to be trusted to run the affairs of our own country.' Swinney's frankly bonkers suggestion - in 2001, and now - that leaders in England desire and indeed plot for Scotland to be impoverished and miserable is the kind of zoomery you might get from a basement-dwelling conspiracy theorist. This sort of nonsense has a ceiling in terms of public support. We're seeing that now, borne out by polls showing the SNP nowhere near a majority next year. Listening to Swinney last week, I found myself asking a question which the SNP of 2025 should also ask itself: Is this really what we want to be as a country? Because, by God, this party of devolved government has lost its way. A movement which had flirted with sunshine in those latter years under Alex Salmond, has turned into a thunder cloud that's hung over the country ever since. Optimism is snuffed out as they look inwards. Their primary aim is no longer to better Scotland's lot. That is the only way to independence, and if the SNP were to get there by those means, then they would deserve it. But their underlying and self-destructive mission since Nicola Sturgeon took the helm, and continuing since she left, seems to be to persuade people that Scotland is terrible because it's part of the UK. Of course, everything is far from ideal. Not only for the UK, but for Europe and for much of the world. The economic headwinds which have battered the world, from the pandemic to wars, have taken their toll and continue to. But let's get some perspective. We are a successful, advanced nation. We have leaders who are generally trying to do their best. We're not oppressed or subjugated. At the last count, for 2023/24, a staggering £22.7billion more was spent on public services in Scotland than was raised here in taxes. That's £2,417 per head MORE than the UK average - meaning all those universal freebies, that extra cash spent on benefits, the higher public sector pay despite lower cost-of-living than elsewhere in the UK. Is that the 'poison' Swinney refers to? In the past decade it's seemed at times that nothing - not even cold, hard figures - can stop the SNP-run grievance machine. But as we've seen in the past year or so, the mood music of the nation is shifting. More and more people are looking at the downbeat drudgery of a party who claim to speak for Scotland, and are thinking they no longer speak for them. If the SNP don't change their tunes, then come next May, voters may finally show them the door.

The Herald Scotland

4 hours ago

• The Herald Scotland

Our industrial decline gives a lie to Better together claims

The collateral damage has been massive with whole communities, dependent on these jobs, being virtually abandoned. The subsequent social damage is all too obvious with the skilled jobs that sustained previous generations being replaced by a gig economy characterised by short-term, poorly-paid and often unskilled work. The consequences are there in plain sight – growing levels of poverty, lengthening queues at food banks and the scandal of children going to school poorly clothed and hungry. Of course, a healthy economy depends to a certain extent on inward investment but over the last decades the ownership of a whole host of British companies has moved overseas. Scotland has been hit particularly hard with the loss of control over our once-famous banking and finance sectors. Scottish Power and SSE are largely owned by Iberdola and a Qatari investment company. While foreign capital investment must be welcomed, it brings with it the constant threat of closures and asset-stripping. Regrettably however, it is not just our industrial and financial sectors that have been taken over but vast sections of our utilities and public services as well. In a famous speech in 1964, Harold Wilson slammed the Tories for glorying in a country "where the rewards go to land racketeers and property spivs". It was Neil Kinnock who described the then Conservative government's privatisation policies as "selling off the family silver". However successive governments both Tory and Labour have overseen vast swathes of our public services falling into private hands. So, for example, there are now 27 separate rail companies operating in England and Wales and 10 water companies. The long-suffering public have experienced worsening standards of service and ever-mounting costs while huge bonuses and dividends are being paid out to bosses and shareholders. What makes the situation even worse is that the Government pays out vast sums in subsidies to these failing companies. When you consider that in England large sections of welfare, care, probation, prisons, schools and even the NHS are now in private hands then it is no wonder that our national debt continues to soar while public complaints about failing standards rocket. Is this really the future promised by the Better Together campaign? Eric Melvin, Edinburgh. Read more letters Indy would mean 'normal' politics John NE Rankin (Letters, June 20) is obviously a stickler for accuracy. He castigates attributing the "ongoing ferry shambles" to Calmac rather than Caledonian Marine Assets Ltd and, ultimately in Mr Rankin's opinion, the SNP Government. He cannot then resist taking a swipe at supporters of this government, which he says "could not run a country". Whether or not the SNP could successfully run an independent Scotland is a matter of opinion. What is a matter of fact, however, is that Mr Rankin's opinion of the SNP would be tested by the Scottish electorate in all subsequent elections post-independence. The SNP would stand or fall on its record of government alone. In other words, we would have "normal" politics where voting would be dominated by the same concerns as every other Western European democracy. And, oh yes, the Scottish electorate would not have its near neighbour's choice imposed on it by sheer weight of numbers. David S McCartney, Forres. Make Scotland a beacon for peace Watching the latest developments in the Middle East war from Scotland can make you feel depressed and powerless. Yet Scotland is involved, and should be taking a strong stance against the war. Firstly Scotland is acting as a staging post for the US bombing missions in Iran and their assistance to Israel's war. Prestwick Airport, which is owned by the Scottish Government, has seen large numbers of US war plans landing and being refuelled on their way to wage war on Iran and to assist the Israeli war effort. It's time the Scottish Government closed this route for war by banning US warplanes at Prestwick. Secondly if this war in the Middle East extends to a global war Scotland's nuclear base at Faslane will be the number one target for attack and if it's hit then much of Glasgow will disappear surely it's time that this expensive and ineffective nuclear base was closed. Thirdly Scottish arms industries are supplying the Israeli war machines with vital spare parts and it's time this was ended. Of course I realise that none of this can be achieved while Scotland is part of the UK and where Keir Starmer's Labour Government is guilty of failing to condemn Israel for genocide in Gaza or the US for its warlike interventions' instead they are grovelling to Donal Trump in the hope of crumbs from his table. Support for Scottish independence has reached a new high of 56% recently. Now let's turn that into a pro-independence majority in the Scottish elections next year. If that happens the Scottish Parliament should declare our independence and end our complicity in war and instead make Scotland a beacon for peace in the world. Hugh Kerr, Edinburgh. • I'm an idiot. I admit it. I believed Donald Trump when he said before his election that there would be no more of America's endless wars far from America's shores. Instead he has thrown in his lot with America's triad of evil – the military industrial complex, the Neocons, and the powerful Israeli lobby. Benjamin Netanyahu, facing three charges of corruption at home, has achieved his long-held ambition of bringing the United States into a war with Iran. Trump promised to end the war in Ukraine. He hasn't. He promised to bring peace to the Middle East. He hasn't. Instead he has continued with his country's history of bombing countries and killing thousands. Hiroshima. Nagasaki. Vietnam. Cambodia. Laos. Iraq. Somalia. Libya. Syria. Yemen. Iran. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. William Loneskie, Lauder. Donald Trump (Image: PA)Give us back our licence fee BBC Scotland boasts that Scotland gets 90% of its licence fee for funding. Given the heavy Anglo-centric bias of the BBC platforms funded by the UK-wide licence fee (BBC News 24, Radios 4 and 5 etc), why don't we have 100% of our licence fee back, and use it in Scotland to make programmes relevant to us, our history and culture? Scots traversed Europe for 500 years, then the globe for the next 300, so it need not be parochial. There is also income from BBC Commercial, which brings in a couple of billion pounds a year. Why does Scotland not share in that? GR Weir, Ochiltree. Politicising the bus pass The US Government's cackhanded launch of a 'Trump card' golden visa scheme, its promotional card bearing the visage and signature of that country's current elected head of state, conflates state functions with the personal identity of an incumbent officeholder. That sort of nonsense befits authoritarian tyrannies not democracies Sadly but somehow not surprisingly, the shambles echoes the sorry state of Scotland's bus passes. Rather than simply calling them bus passes, as happened for decades, the separatist regional government emblazons them with the crux decussata. They carry the irrelevant legend 'Saltire cards' (not even their formal name), predictably stylised without a space. English bus passes are at least more suitably named to reflect their purpose. They do bear a St George's Cross though: Scottish separatists' divisive identity politics have spread poison down south, alas. Ought one, though, to call Scotland's bus passes merely 'bus passes'? The scheme's website describes what is properly known as the national entitlement card as 'Scotland's National Smartcard', again grammatically wrong as well as ideologically questionable. In principle, enabling some local government services to be offered digitally could be a helpful move. But an overtly politicised design combined with the Orwellian whiff of identity cards introduced by the back door bear the grubby fingerprints of nationalist authoritarianism. Witness their unthinking use on buses even by primary school pupils. Christopher Ruane, Lanark.