At last night's Education Committee, when we discussed the potential move of Eastern Primary School to the buildings formerly used by Grove Academy, I was not allowed to speak in support of my amendment where I was requesting a deferral of this report until the next meeting of the Education Committee in August.Here is what I would have said had I been given the democratic opportunity by the Chair of the meeting. Education Convener, SNP Councillor Liz Fordyce.
This proposal is hurried and the report before us is incomplete. It does not contain key details that are required by the people to be consulted and it is skimpy on the detail which we require to make a judgement as to whether or not to approve such a proposal. It is not that I am necessarily against this proposal but I need to be convinced that what we have before us is robust and well thought through and will be of benefit for current and future pupils of Eastern Primary School. Given the history of chopping and changing on the future use of the former Grove Academy buildings and the rush to bring this to the Education committee late, I think I am right to be cautious. In my experience in life and on the council, rushed decisions are often ones we live to regret.
More specifically, here are as yet the unresolved matters I think are significant for us as a Committee.
Firstly, moving Eastern Primary School to the Grove site will mean that it would sit at the western extremity of its catchment area. Will this mean that the catchment area will need to be changed?
Secondly, the report offers the future option of providing classroom space for expansion making Eastern Primary School, three rather than two form entry. The bottle neck in primary classes however is in the north eastern part of the Ferry at Barnhill Primary school whose catchment area includes current and future house building developments. It's a long distance from expansion areas such as Balmossie Brae to Camperdown Street. If primary school places were to be expanded in the relocated Eastern Primary School, I think the catchment areas of at least two primary schools would need to be altered.
Thirdly, this proposal is skimpy about the standard to which the old Grove buildings are being improved apparently at less cost than the office conversion proposed. If so little work is required, by comparison with other school moves, why is the schedule of accommodation that will be available for the school not specified?
I understand that the number of office staff going in to share this building has yet to be tied down. Furthermore, I understand from the Director of Education that the portion of the building where these office staff are to be accommodated has yet to be identified. These are crucial details.
Fourthly, if space is abundant inside the old Grove Academy, space is certainly very constrained outside. I presume that the tarmac old playground and staff car park on the south side of the old Grove buildings is the only outside space for play, sports and games? Because of these constraints, I very much doubt that this area of ground will comply with the requirements of the School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Regulations 1967. If, as I suspect, the new site will not meet those requirements, will the Director of Education need to apply to Scottish Ministers for dispensation from the regulations, which was the case with the West End and Lochee schools proposals?
Fifthly, the previous plans for the Grove House offices for council staff were controversial because of road safety concerns in the vicinity of Grove Academy and because of increased pressure on parking in the streets surrounding the school. This proposal does not solve those issues. If, as we are led to presume, the tarmac area of land to the south of the old Grove buildings will be the new playground for Eastern Primary School then where, but the surrounding streets, will the near to a hundred staff from the school and the offices park? This proposal will make for a net increase in parking by the office and school staff. Dropping off and picking up will also generate more road traffic and pedestrian movements in the streets surrounding the adjacent Grove Academy and Eastern Primary School.
Sixthly, this is the first time that the Education Department have undertaken a consultation with the wider range of stakeholders required by the provisions of the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010. In addition to teachers and parents, the community and pupils are to be consulted as well. How is this to be accomplished? As we embark on a new process of consultation, should we not expect more detail to be laid before us before offering our approval?
In conclusion, this is a rushed proposal and one that lacks key details. I suggest that it is premature to give our approval tonight. I ask you to support a deferral until the next meeting of the Education Committee scheduled on 23rd August.
