We come now to the members' business debate on motion S1M-1206, in the name of Lord James Douglas-Hamilton, on Abercorn Primary School in West Lothian. The debate will conclude after 30 minutes, without any question being put. I ask members who are not staying for the debate to leave quietly and quickly, so that the debate can begin.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament registers its concern about the possible closure of Abercorn Primary School in West Lothian which provides a first class education to its pupils, notes the opposition expressed by the parents to the proposed closure by West Lothian Council and calls upon the Council to keep the school open.

On Tuesday 14 November, West Lothian Council's education committee voted by 17 votes to 9—with one abstention—to close Abercorn Primary School. However, as the school is operating at well over the 80 per cent criterion that would not permit the council to proceed with closure without reference to the Scottish Executive, the final decision on Abercorn's future rests with the Minister for Education, Europe and External Affairs.

I intend to highlight four reasons why the minister should reject the school's closure. First, as the motion makes clear, Abercorn Primary School is a centre of educational excellence. The children at the school have a wide range of abilities and come from diverse backgrounds. Despite the starting level of attainment being noticeably lower than that of many from the list of the top 10 non-denominational schools in West Lothian, Abercorn achieves the second highest rate of improvement and has the third best performance overall from the list of schools that attain or exceed national targets.

Year on year, standards at Abercorn are among the highest nationally and in West Lothian. Indeed, West Lothian Council's only inspection report acknowledged that good results are evident in check-up tests, national tests and end-of-week tests. The school's academic strength, therefore, lies in its excellent standard of educational achievement and, in particular, in its ability to improve the performance of its children. I ask the minister to listen with great care to his inspectors, who are due to visit the school next week.

Secondly, Abercorn Primary School is a small school in a rural setting and it lies at the heart of the community. Set in the countryside, the school serves a predominantly rural farming community and is situated equidistant from the small rural communities of Newton and Philpstoun, whose facilities have declined in recent years. Each has only one shop and a community hall. The school binds those villages and many rural families together.

Will the member give way?

I will give way to the member in a moment.

The school not only provides the children with an excellent education, but it is the focus for many community functions to raise funds for parking improvements and for landscaping for the school. Funds have been raised recently to make a play area on the additional half acre of land that Hopetoun estate has made available to the school.

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton mentioned the village of Philpstoun and, even at this stage, half the children of Philpstoun attend the Bridgend school, which Abercorn children could attend should the school close.

I have no doubt that Mrs Mulligan was correct to use the word "could". However, my point is that Abercorn Primary School is a centre of educational excellence and that it would be a tremendous shame to shut a school in a rural setting that is a centre of educational excellence.

Dr Roulston of the University of Edinburgh wrote that he deplored the closure of Abercorn Primary School and said that

"The closure of a failing or near-empty school is sad although understandable; to close one which is neither seems an act of educational vandalism."

He went on to say:

"I would urge all who are involved— including Mrs Mulligan—

"in the decision-making process to think hard and long about this. In the end it affects us all."

Tonight, the minister has the opportunity to prevent an injustice to the local community by supporting an extremely good school in a rural setting.

I mentioned functions—

Will the member give way?

Yes.

I am grateful to Lord James for giving way. He and I share deep concerns about rural schools.

Does Lord James believe that one of the challenges that lies ahead for the Parliament's Education, Culture and Sport Committee is the putting in place of a national strategy with national standards, to ensure that rural schools can continue?

I agree with Mrs Ewing. Brian Wilson made a statement about rural schools, but Abercorn Primary School is, technically, a school in a rural setting. However, I think that the same principles apply.

I mentioned functions, which included a recent ceilidh that was organised by the school, annual fetes, Halloween parties, Christmas parties and the annual Christmas service and nativity play, which is performed at Abercorn Parish Church. There is no church in Newton, and Philpstoun's church was converted recently to a private house.

While there is a presumption against the closure of a small school in a rural setting—such as Abercorn Primary School—in England, the minister must appreciate that the school's future represents a litmus test of good will towards Scotland's schools in rural settings.

Thirdly, as I have seen for myself, the atmosphere at Abercorn is charged with enthusiasm. The children and teachers are highly motivated and the children display a keen interest to learn and real thirst for knowledge. The school is well maintained and structurally sound. Any maintenance that is required is minimal—that is, of not more than £10,000 in value. Development is possible to the rear of the school—a fact that was confirmed by an independent structural survey.

The school is economical to run, using well under 1 per cent of West Lothian Council's education budget, and it represents best value as defined by the Accounts Commission for Scotland.

Everybody who is associated with the school takes a great pride in its ethos. The education it provides is wholly modern—information technology is exploited to the full and all aspects of the five to 14 curriculum are taught well. Public speaking and the performing and expressive arts play a significant part in the children's education. We seek to preserve Abercorn's ethos and its high standards and quality of education.

Finally, there is a need for diversity in education. The school is extremely popular and is currently operating at nearly full capacity—almost 90 per cent—with the vast majority of children living locally within the catchment area or very close to it. A census has confirmed that pupil numbers will remain high for the foreseeable future, with increasing numbers of children in the catchment areas nearby.

It is important to note that closure of the school would not address the underlying issues of educational provision in West Lothian, but it would result in reduced parental choice, less diversity in educational provision, the permanent loss of a valuable educational resource and increased pressure on local schools, particularly those in Linlithgow, which are already struggling to meet Government targets for reduced class sizes. Abercorn Primary School has provided and provides local children with an exemplary standard of education, and the case for allowing it to continue to do so is overwhelming.

The Deputy Minister for Education, Europe and External Affairs has the opportunity tonight to show his good will towards those who live in rural areas in Scotland or in a rural setting in Scotland, and he will be judged by his decision. We hope for the best.

Children, parents and staff from Abercorn Primary School are in the gallery this evening.

I have no intention of criticising Abercorn Primary School, because I appreciate what Lord James Douglas-Hamilton has said about its advantages. However, I am unhappy that we are having this debate and that we are criticising the decision by a legitimately elected local authority. Despite the Tories' attempts during their 18 years in power in Westminster, we still have a strong, legitimate local authority set-up in Scotland. I know that the relationship between local authorities and Parliament is still developing and I am concerned that we should be careful not to overstep the mark.

Is the criterion money or education?

The criterion has to be education first, but I shall come to that later.

Any suggestion that the consultation process was anything other than thorough is wrong. It included all the parts that one would expect: the production of consultation documents, various meetings in the locality and the attendance of many of the parents who are here this evening at council education committee meetings and at meetings with the Labour and SNP groups.

Will Mary Mulligan give way?

I will not give way. I have only three minutes to speak and I know that Fiona Hyslop will be called next.

Despite the thoroughness of that consultation process, I hear comments from parents regarding their concerns on consultation. I am happy to be convener of the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, which has already called on the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to review the consultation procedure. However, I am not aware that James Douglas-Hamilton made any changes to that process, even when he was the Scottish Office minister with responsibility for education.

I make no criticism of the present Abercorn Primary School. However, I recognise the right of the local authority to review its education provision and to seek to improve it—that is the key. The present facility is cramped and it would be difficult to improve it. There are benefits to be had from a new building or from other established schools in the area. There would be a wider range of professional experience, expertise and support to the teaching and learning situation, more robust management structures and the avoidance of the multi-stage composite classes—an issue that is raised constantly with MSPs. There would be viable social and educational pupils' groups. Only this morning, Mike Russell said that we should not see schools only in terms of education and the ability to pass exams, but as a forum for social development. There would also be a purpose-built modern educational facility and access to the full range of equipment and resources required for five to 14 curriculum.

The one thing that worries me about schools that are achieving good results is that they can become complacent. West Lothian Council is working hard to ensure that all schools seek continually to improve the education that they provide.

I am surprised that Robin Harper supports a school to which a number of children are transported by car, when schools are available to them that would allow them to travel by other means. Those children also have to be transported to Bridgend School for physical education lessons.

I have said that the decision should be left to the council, to which I have made representations on behalf of my constituents. However, a new school is being offered that would provide all the facilities for a full education. It is not much bigger than the school that the children currently attend. Technically, Abercorn Primary School is not a rural school. I am reassured that, should the school close, the local authority will manage the process sensitively, and that the children will always have the valuable and essential support of their parents.

I welcome the representatives from Abercorn school, particularly the children. It is their education that will be determined by what the minister decides in the review.

Only yesterday I visited the school. I should declare an interest, in that my daughter attends one of the neighbouring primary schools. Lord James Douglas-Hamilton made a pertinent point when he said that the closure of Abercorn primary would have an impact on schools in Linlithgow that are approaching capacity, particularly primary schools.

When I say that I am an MSP for Lothians, people think that that means only Edinburgh—it does not. It includes West Lothian and Midlothian. I dispute Mary Mulligan's suggestion that Abercorn is not a rural school, because it is. Philpstoun community council explains the situation far better than I can. It points out that the shale mines that once existed in the area have been swept away and that farm jobs are disappearing. However, the community has survived and is flourishing because of the sense of community that that small school engenders. Lord James Douglas-Hamilton also made that point.

It is interesting that the school is situated in the north-east of West Lothian. That sounds a bit tortuous, but we must remember that decision-making power is located in the south of the county. It is true that decisions are made by a democratically elected council, but most of the members who voted for the closure of Abercorn primary come from the south of the county and are members of the Labour party. SNP and Conservative members of the council voted against the closure.

I agree that there were problems with the consultation process. I attended the Bridgend meeting, where the educational reasons for closing Abercorn school were not explained fully to parents. I also understand that some of the budgetary information that should have been made available was not available for the first consultation meeting, which took place at Abercorn.

We should address the transport issues. Mary Mulligan seems to be arguing that it will be easy for children to get from Abercorn to Bridgend. I dispute that. I believe that financial considerations are a key factor in this case. There has been an overspend on the building of the new primary school at Bridgend, and the money that would be saved by the closure of Abercorn school could be used to offset that—that worries me. I agree with the report that Cathy Peattie made to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, in which she stated that no rural school should be closed solely on the ground of cost. Not having facilities for PE or art is a cost issue, rather than an educational one. That is the nub of the matter. The criticisms that have been made of the school on educational grounds relate to facilities, not to the quality of education that is received. It is a special school and it is a successful school.

Will the member give way?

I am winding up.

We should remember that the children are here to see what Parliament can do. This is an important test for us. Will we stand up for successful schools? Will we stand up for rural schools? I hope that the minister will consider the important points that have been made both by the SNP and by Lord James Douglas-Hamilton.

I would like to pick up on a number of the points that Mary Mulligan made, particularly in relation to the consultation process.

Before I do that, I want to draw Parliament's attention to an important point of principle that she seemed to be making. In essence, she appeared to be saying that, because the council had made its decision in relation to the overall pattern of school provision in West Lothian, that decision should not be subject to a review process. It is a feature of the statutes that govern school closures that, in the case of schools in a rural setting that have a capacity above a certain level, there is a process for ministerial review of councils' closure decisions. I would be interested to know from the minister whether it is the Scottish Executive's policy to change the relationship between ministers and councils, and to give back to councils the unfettered right to close schools without any possibility of review at ministerial level. That would be a significant change in the policy and in the relationship between ministers and local councils.

The consultation process was flawed. That has been demonstrated by the papers that the Abercorn school action group has produced. It was unfortunate, to say the least, that the notification of the closure plan came to parents in the form of newspaper articles and rumours that were brought home to them by their children, rather than through official intimation by the council before it embarked upon its consultation process.

That consultation process' documentation did not take into account fully the requirement in the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 that educational, financial, demographic and social factors must be taken into account in an authority's consideration of a potential closure. The council failed to gather accurate information about those factors. The school's academic record has been almost totally ignored in the process. Much of the public consultation document is inaccurate, vague, subjective and open to serious challenge by those who have examined it.

For example, the consultation document states that the

"redevelopment of this building is not considered feasible due to the limited size of the site and a number of constraints that reduce the scope for suitable development of the building, i.e. semi detached building".

That statement fails to acknowledge that the option exists to purchase the other part of the semi-detached building in order to develop the school. The document also mentions "property title deed constraints". That is misleading because the title deed constraints are that the land must be used for a school. The land was given in the first place to enable the school to be built.

When statements about costs were challenged, it subsequently came to light that council officials did not have plans of the school on which they could base its viability for redevelopment. Those plans had to be produced later.

Those who have examined the figures on behalf of the school board dispute many of them. For example, the council has costed the wholesale redevelopment of the school at £0.5 million. The board believes that the figures that the council has produced for capital and maintenance costs to keep the school as a viable option have been inflated by a factor of four in order to back up the council's case for closure.

The council's consultation document fails, on several tests, the requirements on it to produce comprehensive but precise information, to emphasise the educational and social advantages of any rationalisation proposal, and to present financial arguments in respect of securing best value for money from limited overall resources.

The consultation document fails to meet those tests. It fails to properly explain why the school should be closed. In the light of the points that James Douglas-Hamilton and Fiona Hyslop have made in this debate, it is clear that the process has been fundamentally flawed. The minister should take that into account when arriving at his decision, which I hope will be to reverse the closure decision of West Lothian Council.

I congratulate Lord James Douglas-Hamilton on securing the debate, and I congratulate the parents and pupils of Abercorn Primary School on ensuring that the debate was secured. Their campaign has been influential. They have been writing and e-mailing and have even erected signs that are visible from the motorway. I understand that the council objected to them. The Stalinism of West Lothian Council clearly knows no bounds.

I must say to Mary Mulligan that I do not accept that the chamber should not debate the issue. Mr McLetchie made the point that it is now a decision for the minister; it is right and proper that the chamber should call the minister to account for a decision that he may make. Even if that were not so, if—as when the Education, Culture and Sport Committee intervened on the Argyll schools—an injustice is being done and a group of people feel badly done by so that they do not trust the democratic process, who else should they go to but the Scottish Parliament? That is what we are here for.

The Education, Culture and Sport Committee intervened on rural schools because we had doubts about the consultation process. I disagree with what David McLetchie said; the council has honoured its commitment to consultation on the matter.

Mary Mulligan will not be surprised to hear that my second point centres on the consultation process.

This consultation process was as deeply flawed as the consultation process on the Argyll schools, as indeed are all consultation processes on the closures of small schools. When I visited the school yesterday, I heard the same things that I have heard almost endlessly on such matters—parents feel that the rules are set by the local authority. Dealing with local authority consultation documents is like herding cats; every time there is an answer to one of the issues, they change the argument.

I agree with Margaret Ewing that we need a nationally agreed set of criteria for closing schools. Brian Wilson attempted to set such criteria at a meeting in Dunoon. I was standing outside that meeting demonstrating against the closure of my wife's school and was not allowed inside. Now that I have been allowed into this Parliament, I want to pursue the issue so that we have a nationally understood set of criteria for school closures on educational—and no other—grounds.

Having spoken to parents and others, I am convinced that this is a case of gerrymandering. It is gerrymandering to fill up a school elsewhere and to affect the catchment area of secondary schools. The council, the director of education and the people around him want this school closed; they intend to close it and have found the arguments to do so, no matter what democratic opposition there might be.

I am not necessarily making the point against West Lothian Council. The situation happens elsewhere and I will support the right of small schools to exist everywhere in Scotland because of the quality and intensity of the educational experience. No evidence anywhere in the world suggests that small schools are not effective. Indeed, there is increasing evidence from all over the world—for instance, from America—that learning in smaller units is very valuable. The children of Abercorn Primary School are privileged to go to that school; although there are one or two disadvantages, there are huge advantages. We should be glad of that situation and make sure that it continues. I ask the minister to address that issue, because today is a test of the attitude not just towards rural schools, but towards the quality and vision of education that we have and want to provide for the whole of this diverse nation.

I thank Lord James Douglas-Hamilton for raising the important subject under debate tonight and welcome the parents, teachers and particularly primary school children who are in the gallery watching the debate.

First, I reassure Lord James and others that I will be making no decisions tonight. Of course, from his previous capacity as minister with responsibility for education and housing at the Scottish Office, Lord James has direct experience of how the Government handles school closures. It is important to recap on that process. An application for consent to close Abercorn Primary School was received on 17 November by the Scottish Executive. We usually suggest that it takes three months to reach a decision; although we want to consider these matters thoroughly, we do not want the process to drag on for too long and leave uncertainty and unhappiness. We should be able to reach a decision by mid-February at the latest. The Executive is already making progress on its preparations to consider the matter. As Lord James Douglas-Hamilton suggested, Her Majesty's inspectorate will visit the school on Monday 18 December. At the same time, HMI will also examine the receiving schools.

Will the minister give a commitment that, when the inspector visits, he will not only speak to the acting head teacher and staff, but talk fully and comprehensively to the parents, the school board and, above all, the children and that he will reflect their views in his report to ministers? I think that that will reassure the people who are in the gallery today.

As Mike Russell knows, HMI has been acting as a separate agency on a shadow basis from 1 December and will do so until next March. It would be wrong to issue directions to HMI or an individual inspector; however, I am sure that the Official Report can be drawn to their attention.

As I said, the HMI will visit the receiving schools to discuss any issues relating to the two schools—

Will the minister give way?

If Fiona Hyslop gives me a second, I will finish the point and then give way.

The HMI will visit the receiving schools to discuss issues related to the two schools to which the council is proposing to send the pupils from Abercorn Primary School if the closure proceeds. Therefore, the primary schools at Winchburgh and Bridgend will both also receive a visit from HMI.

Parents may choose to consider schools in Springfield and Linlithgow as well. I suggest that HMI should also speak to the surrounding schools—Low Port Primary School, in Linlithgow, and Springfield Primary School—as they are also relevant. Although the council may want to suggest the schools at Winchburgh and Bridgend, parents may want a choice of the four.

I cannot direct, but I am glad that that point has been raised. If a formal visit from HMI is not possible, I hope that contact can be made.

Following HMI visits, advice is prepared. In due course, the education department, not HMI, makes a recommendation to ministers and the final decision is for ministers to make. We will receive the recommendation from the education department as well as the report on the council's plans to close the school and the reasons for that proposed closure. We will also receive a copy of the representations that the council has received during its consultation process leading up to the closure decision. Needless to say, we will receive direct representations, which will also be considered. There is no suggestion that the gate has been put down and we have stopped considering representations. All the representations that have been made since 17 November will be considered.

A point was made earlier about people having to drive their children to the school. The Green party's attitude has always been that it is not against the proper and rational use of cars. The argument to move the school simply because people have to drive their children to it would not stand up. There is perhaps an argument for better provision of public transport in the area.

I understand and accept Robin Harper's point. As well as having green credentials, he has educational credentials.

It would be inappropriate for me to comment on the specific circumstances of Abercorn Primary School this evening. The council's application for consent to close it has been received, and officials are examining all the background information before they prepare their advice. We must await the full and proper consideration that the proposal to close the school requires.

Will the minister give way?

I would like to make some progress. I shall give way later if Mrs Ewing still wants to make a point.

It would be regarded as prejudicial to proper consideration of the case if I were to comment on the specific proposal. However, it has been extremely useful to hear the points that members have made about the closure proposal, all of which will be taken into account before any decision is reached.

I understand that proposed school closures can generate strong feelings in the communities that the schools serve. As well as being involved in such matters as a minister, I was, for around 10 years, a member of a regional council that was responsible for education and I had direct experience of such matters from the council side of the fence. I know that the parents who are associated with Abercorn Primary School have been active in making their views about the closure proposal known. They not only set up road signs, as Mike Russell mentioned, but set up a website that has attracted considerable attention.

Although I accept that the minister does not want to comment on this individual case, I should point out that this is not the first time that the issue of rural school closures has come before the Parliament. What emphasis is the Executive placing on the development of a strategy to ensure the continuation of rural schools throughout Scotland?

The Education, Culture and Sport Committee has examined the issue of rural school closures, and Jamie Stone—who was here earlier—and Cathy Peattie have looked into the matter. The Executive would be pleased to consider the matter further in close consultation with the Education, Culture and Sport Committee.

I must focus on the proposal that we are discussing. Setting to one side the position of specific schools in specific areas, I remind members that local authorities have a general responsibility to keep the position of schools in their areas under review. In keeping with that broad principle, there will be a number of circumstances in which authorities question the future of individual schools. We may, from time to time, wish that it were not so in the case of particular schools, but it is a duty on the authority to do so.

Is the minister aware that his predecessor, Brian Wilson, said this on 20 March 1998?

"do the educational and financial gains deriving from a closure stand up to scrutiny and do they outweigh the negative effects—on that rural community and the children and their families—which that closure will have?"

If that was the test that Brian Wilson was prepared to apply to schools in rural areas, is the minister aware that the case for Abercorn is established overwhelmingly?

It is important to underscore that, generally, these are matters for local decision making. I can quote back what Lord James Douglas-Hamilton has said:

"it is for local democracy and local authorities to determine provision of education in their areas. The Secretary of State is not entitled to intervene, except in a few cases in which the Secretary of State's consent is required by statute".—[Official Report, House of Commons, 31 March 1993; Vol 222, c 347.]

We have that circumstance here, because Abercorn is more than 80 per cent full, but we do not have, there has not been over the years, and I do not think that there was in Lord James's time, the sort of detailed guidance that is being sought by members.

Will the member give way?

We are almost out of time.

It is a short question.

It is the minister's call.

I will not give way.

We all realise the issues, but I urge members to understand that intervening in this matter and setting detailed guidance for councils would not necessarily be welcomed, because it would be the Executive and the Parliament intervening in local democracy. We have to leave considerable discretion with local councils, but I am not against returning to the matter and considering the future of rural schools.

A decision has to be taken on Abercorn, given that it is more than 80 per cent full. That is why the proposal is with the Scottish Executive. It is also, unfortunately, why I cannot comment in greater detail. I will, as Lord James Douglas-Hamilton asked, think long and hard within the time scale provided. I will discuss the issue with Jack McConnell. I take the issue seriously. I realise that there are strong views, and they have been made clearer by the debate this evening.

I thank Lord James Douglas-Hamilton for bringing the matter to the Parliament's attention.

Meeting closed at 17:38.