Islanders launch legal challenge over Mull school location
A spokesperson for the group said that the council's approach has been 'shoddy and biased' and that they have been left with 'no option' but to pursue legal action.
Argyll and Bute Council has faced significant criticism over its decision to locate the proposed new school in Tobermory, the main town on the island. The current school, also in Tobermory, incorporates a nursery, primary and secondary school, but surveys have shown that a majority supported moving the high school component to a central location in order to end the practice of some children being sent to board in Oban from the age of eleven.
Throughout the process, the council has insisted that only a single-site approach is viable, and officials ultimately recommended the new school be built on a site on the southern edge Tobermory. This advice was accepted by councillors at a special sitting of the council in Lochgilphead.
The situation has been described as an example of a 'wider democratic deficit' in Scotland, and islanders have told The Herald that the council has left them feeling 'silenced and belittled.'
The move to build a new school was originally referred to as the 'Mull Campus Project', but recent communication from council officials has stated that 'the Tobermory Campus project is focussed on creating an improved and enhanced learning environment for the pupils within the current Tobermory High School catchment area.'
The new legal action, being pursed by the Mull Campus Working Group, argues that the council's decision to limit itself to consideration of a single site, and the consequent narrowing of any consultation work, was 'inherently unfair'.
They also believe that the council acted 'irrationally' in failing to properly consider the offer of free land at a central location, and allege councillors were misinformed about the offer itself.
Finally, the group are challenging the failure to hold a formal vote on the proposals which they say contravenes the council's constitution.
The campaigners say that they were 'warned not to challenge' the council's decision to locate the new school in Tobermory, and that delays to the programme could 'jeopardise Scottish Government funding,' which they described as being told to accept the plans as they are or risk getting 'nothing at all'.
Building projects funded through the government's Learning Estate Improvement Programme (LEIP) scheme, which is being used for the new school on Mull, operate under set – and theoretically strict – deadlines, but education secretary Jenny Gilruth has confirmed in a letter to local MSP Jenni Minto that 'funding will not be withdrawn if the project faces delays, provided there is a clear and robust justification for Ministers to grant an extension to the completion date.'
The government recently announced an additional £2million for another LEIP project – a new Gaelic primary school in Glasgow – to ensure that it is completed, with the project running many months behind schedule.
A spokesperson for the Mull Campus Working Group said the council's processes were 'shoddy and biased from the outset'.
The continued: 'Before the LEIP (Learning Estate Investment Programme) application was even submitted, our community council asked to be consulted, but they were refused any input.
'The people of Mull - and in particular families and children from the Ross of Mull who currently cannot access the island's only high school – were cruelly deceived. What was sold to them as 'a school for the whole island' was never intended to be any such thing.
'We naively trusted our councillors and officials to look at this fairly, and deliver a high school that was accessible to all. But they have manipulated the process to make sure it would never be delivered. In effect they said 'sure, you can have your central high school, but only if we remove primary and ELC provision from Mull's largest town and move it 21 miles away'
'That's not a choice, that's moral blackmail.'
The campaigners say that attempts to find a mediated solution to the impasse were 'dashed' when the council refused to attend a roundtable event being organised by local Jenni Minto. They told The Herald that they had 'hoped for the best but prepared for the worst,' and that the council's decision to 'shut the door on a negotiated, constructive way forward' has left them 'no option but to take this to the Court of Session in Edinburgh.'
Argyll and Bute Council and the Scottish Government have been approached for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
5 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Scottish Labour says SNP ban on nuclear power should end
Speaking ahead of a visit to Torness Nuclear Plant in Dunbar, Mr Sarwar has said that the SNP's 'Student politics and dated views' on nuclear power are standing in the way of jobs, investment, and energy security for Scotland. Mr Sarwar's intervention comes as the UK Labour government has announced tens of billions of pounds of investment in new nuclear projects to secure our energy security and to deliver new high-skilled jobs. Today Mr Sarwar has said that a Scottish Labour government would allow Scotland to join the race to be a 'nuclear energy superpower' and unlock billions of pounds of investment. Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar MSP said: 'The global race towards clean power is on and I firmly believe Scotland should be at the forefront of it. 'Investing in clean power will not only deliver lower bills, but will create quality jobs and strengthen our energy security so we are no longer subject to the whims of tyrants like Putin. 'Communities elsewhere in the UK are set to reap the benefits of nuclear power, but the SNP is stopping Scotland from doing the same. 'John Swinney could unlock millions of pounds of investment in Scotland with the stroke of a pen by lifting his party's ideological ban on nuclear power, but he refuses. 'A Scottish Labour government would ditch the SNP's damaging ban, unlock billions of pounds of investment and get Scotland in the race to become a nuclear energy superpower.' A Scottish Government spokesperson said: 'The Scottish Government is focussed on supporting growth and creating jobs by capitalising on Scotland's immense renewable energy capacity rather than expensive new nuclear energy which takes decades to build, creates toxic waste which is difficult and costly to dispose of and does not generate power at a cost that will bring down energy bills." The Herald has teamed up with the East Lothian Courier for an in-depth series, The Future of Torness. Our team of journalists has worked together to look at everything from the current state and safety of Torness to ideas for its future, from decommissioning to fresh new options for the site. We will also look at what closure will mean for the many people in the area who have worked there, sometimes over decades, and been part of what the plant calls 'the Torness family'. We'll ask the big Torness questions. How safe are its aging and cracked reactors? How do new apprentices feel about their future in a Scotland where nuclear is considered not an option? What is it like to spend a day in the plant? What happens to the site when it stops generating power? And does Torness itself tell us anything about whether Scotland should grasp or reject the idea of new nuclear? Join us next week, on June 26, in both The Herald and East Lothian Courier. Subscribe to The Herald here for exclusive access to the series.
The National
a day ago
- The National
Why must we sow division between our native languages?
The Scots and Gaelic leids are now official languages of Scotland as of the Scottish Languages Bill passed on that day. The opinion piece says the focus is primarily on Gaelic, which is principally true, but ignores the fact that a lot of the bill in that instance is in reference to making amendments to the Gaelic Language Act 2005 which saw the establishment of Bòrd na Gàidhlig but failed to go as far as recognising Gaelic as an official language. Whereas the Scots leid has never had a significant piece of legislation until this one. There is then reference to a 'funding disparity' between Gaelic and Scots which is true, Gaelic receiving £28 million and Scots half a million. The article then goes on to reference the level of understanding of each language as according to the 2022 census: Scots 'a whopping 2.4 million' and Gaelic '136,000' people. This figure is incorrect and the number of people with an understanding of Gaelic is 130,161. In this moment there is a sense that because Scots has more speakers than Gaelic, it deserves more funding than Gaelic. But the reason why Gaelic has so much financial aid is just because of how precarious of a state it is in. Scots is far more likely to be heard on mainstream Scottish media than Gaelic, and 2.4 million speakers is exactly why it can endure less funding while Gaelic can't. There is a reason why people are so passionate about this minoritised language; Gaelic is Scotland's oldest living language. Here since 400AD, it contains words and phrasings used by the Picts and the ancient Norse who first came to these shores. It carries the memories of this nation from its very beginnings as a nation. The fact that there are any speakers at all after the centuries of oppression it has endured and the realities of bigger all-consuming languages denying it much breathing space is quite frankly miraculous and a credit to its worth. It is also of note that there are 1.5 million learners using the Scottish Gaelic Duolingo course if the number of people in a linguistic community is all that matters here. This is not in any way to somehow demean or devalue the Scots leid or the fact that it does indeed require more funding and deserves additional support. I do not want this to be an issue between our linguistic communities or source of division. I am writing this response in fear that this opinion piece comes very close to causing just that form of division – it reads as though the two languages must compete for survival. 'Even in the Government's overview of the bill, the focus remains on Gaelic, which is notably placed above Scots even in order.' I cannot believe that the order of which the languages are discussed in this bill is all that significant. And again, the focus on this bill being on Gaelic is primarily from adjusting existing legislation to the new realities of just how much assistance Gaelic linguistic communities really need. Apparently talk of road signs in Scots has been met with horror online '… despite Gaelic road signage being commonplace in Scotland'. This bit is quite frankly laughable. What purpose the 'despite' has there is beyond me as Gaelic road signage still faces constant criticism, insulting remarks and even vandalism. Gaelic road signage is also found only in areas where councils have supported such measures but there are plenty of places in Scotland in which Gaelic signage is non-existent. The fact that the Highland Council has 'bilingual signage' in places with Gaelic names where the English name is just a bad pronunciation guide is ridiculous. A great example of a redundant 'translation' being Rearaig to Reraig. The campaign for Scots road signs will have to just get used to online trolls as the Gaelic one has. I understand that, as the author puts it herself, she is 'critical of the Government's public focus on Gaelic', not Gaelic itself, but really, I see no reason why it should be viewed in such terms. The inclusion of Gaelic legislation does not detract from the Scots component in this bill, its official status and the leid being taught as a National 5 and Higher subject. An argument for more support and more funding for Scots, which it requires, could have been made without taking against the 'lauding of Gaelic' – a language which still can't be mentioned online without insidious and derogatory remarks being made towards it in the comments section. I understand the frustration felt by Scots speakers when the leid is dismissed as slang or bad English because it is the same frustration I feel when Gaelic is referred to as a dead language or a foreign language. This bill is a step in the right direction for our linguistic communities and provides the foundation for more to be done. So let our speaking communities, Gaelic and Scots, support each other's efforts instead of quibbling over which is more in the spotlight. Calli MacCeiteach Rearaig LOSING the recent by-election is seen by many Scots not so much, as unexpected, but more in despair. It seems so obvious – our FM should have been shouting 'Independence' from the roof tops. But he barely mentioned it. We are trying to find answers. Our Party SNP has been elected for so many decades to do two things – govern our Nation, and at the same time, get a divorce from the Union. This is a task that no other Nation in the World has to deal with. It appears that this is too difficult a task to do both at the same time. John Swinney is clearly a fine and administrator; a decent man but hardly a freedom fighter. And as many now feel, as clearly demonstrated in your 'letter' pages, he is unable to fit Scotland's withdrawal from the Union into his planning … or so it seems. Perhaps he is going to hold his fire until he sees the whites of their eyes, and close to the Election date, throw some magic dust on us to get the big majority he has promised. Few believe that. Our increasing percentage of pensioners, coupled with a low birth-rate asks us where the future taxes are coming from. If we cannot imagine incentivising an increase in birth-rate, our future will depend on our planning to make migration a real economic opportunity for the whole Nation. For this to happen, we will have to plan now for the long term, for jobs, homes, infrastructure such as tunnel/ bridge/ causeway connections to all our Islands and Ireland, plenty, inexpensive energy, and inward investment in finance, know-how and international contacts. Hundreds of thousands of jobs will be created: our young men and women will be less inclined to emigrate, schools will fill up again, our rural communities will get better connectivity, more and better jobs, and the conservation of their local culture, languages, arts, and their environment. Our young citizens are disenchanted, have scant respect for our elected politicians, don't read the papers or watch TV, and no-one is talking to them on what they want for their future. Their major interest is in the climate change paradigm and are exasperated at the inability of the Nations of this World to meet the targets each have signed up for. They, according to the polls, are huge Independence supporters, but largely have not even registered to vote, far less vote itself. None of our present politicians measure up. To get our independence we must detail what the future is probably going to look like and get that vote. Our government talks of the past, its record on such as improving child poverty and NHS waiting lists, but very little on what the future will be. Our 'successes' are compared to those of England's – a nation ten times our size and a complete irrelevance. How would our present 'successes' compare with those of Scotland's neighbouring Scandinavian Nations, or Estonia, Singapore – all similarly-populated Nations? That, I suggest, are more meaningful data bases against which to measure our success. These are the levels of economic success, health, and wellbeing that our young citizens will want to reach. Planning for a Nation's future, exciting enough to intellectually interest and involve our younger population, is not a 5-year parliamentary term exercise. Aberdeen's AWPR (outer ring road) took 60 years to materialise, and although that may have been an exception, the planning, designing, financing, and building Scotland's immediate needs for the future will take many decades to complete, and must start now. This planning must start at community level, (the stakeholders), approved and professionally developed, with the Government in an audit and banking role. As a now retired urban planner-cum-developer who has worked in over a dozen 'developing' countries, I am impressed with the future planning being carried out in so many countries today: every Nation different, with totally dissimilar political regimes, but things are moving apace; they know where they are going. Scotland has all the resources to catch up but it needs to be independent to be other than a resource base for our neighbours. Lesley Riddoch is covering brilliantly the thinking and successes of the Scandinavian nations and then there are other countries with similar populations to Scotland such as Singapore, New Zealand, Estonia all the way up to China that are showing impressive progress over so many development and environmental fields over the last couple of decades, taking them forward to predicable economically viable and happy futures. In the apolitical talks I give to differing groups around the Northeast on 'Scotland's Future Through to 2100', there has been considerable interest in this unexplored potential. With inexpensive, environmentally friendly energy, huge seas, land ownership and use being reviewed, a well-educated population, success in terms of health, prosperity and wellbeing can be very doable, believable. As things stand, politicians must use their platforms to highlight the huge progress that is within the Nation's grasp. Where are the orators who must tell the story to our people, especially to our young citizens, asking them to put down their phones, register to vote, and get to the voting booths next year? It is their future that this election is all about – through to the next exciting 75 years to 2100, their time. not just another 'steady as you go' 5-year term. Scotland's young need a dream! Gordon G Benton Newburgh, Aberdeenshire
The Herald Scotland
2 days ago
- The Herald Scotland
Hundreds march through Glasgow in support of refugees
Chants of 'Say it loud, say it clear! Refugees are welcome here' and 'No nations, no borders! Stop deportations' rang out in the Trongate. Henry, a member of the University and College Union (UCU), told The Herald: 'I'm profoundly disturbed by the rise of the far-right across Europe, and think that decent people who care about humanity and social issues need to stand up to these people and challenge their narrative.' Read More: Another demonstrator said: 'My father moved from Ireland to Scotland at the time of 'no blacks, no Irish, no dogs', so his experiences have shaped my perspective on this.' A range of speakers from local trade unions also addressed the crowd. Photographer and activist Sadia Sikandar, herself a refugee from Pakistan, said: 'The way the Scottish people show solidarity and compassion with asylum seekers is different from the rest of the UK. Two women holding banners supporting refugees and asylum seekers, as part of an event organised by Stand Up To Racism (Image: Newsquest) 'It's part of the reason I came to Glasgow after living in England for six years. Now my friends tease me and say I'm an 'adopted Glaswegian'. 'Keir Starmer says we are here to create 'stranger island'. That will not happen in Scotland as long as you all are over here.' A 'anti-racist' carnival has been set up at the end of the parade route at the Old Fruitmarket. Stalls at the family-friendly event include face-painting, balloon artistry, and puppeteering. A range of music guests are also scheduled to perform, including Iona Fyfe, Tom Harlow, Pilgrim Society, and Mellow Party.
