Letters / Why the surprise?
Radio Shetland interviewed Drew Ratter and Gary Robinson on 13 September, the eve of the Education Committee debate on school closure proposals.
Councillor Robinson stated that although he had stood at the last election on a ticket supporting local schools, the financial implications were now so dire that he could not rule out support for closure of six schools.
I find his ignorance of the financial situation which is now forcing his hand rather puzzling.
Was he not a member of the last council which instigated investigation of school closures – due to the dire financial straits of the council finances?
Councillor Ratter also indicated some surprise to learn how bad the finances were, the detailed knowledge of which he had only obtained since the election.
Well Councillor Ratter, I find your ‘surprise’ rather surprising, considering that the first warnings of troubled waters were starting to be issued as far back as 1987 by Chief Executive Malcolm Green (perhaps even earlier).
These warnings have been a consistent part of council life from that day to this, sounded by Financial Officers and Chief Executives and some councillors.
You, having been a councillor for a good part of the ‘90s, must have been aware of these warnings, so why have your eyes only now been opened?
Shetland has been ill served by the last seven councils, all of whom knew of these warnings, but ploughed on regardless, substituting a responsible approach to problems by throwing money at them, in the vain hope that they would vanish.
I would also like to address a point which was brought up at the education meeting.
It was stated that the cost per pupil at the AHS is £6,600, for Aith it is £10,000.
I am making a broad assumption that the other schools are roughly about the same cost per head.
It was further stated that not to take these closures on board would result in a reduction of £1,000 per head per year for all pupils across Shetland schools.
What does this mean in the real world? Does it mean a few less computers, books, fewer day trips? A bit less of the top heavy administration? Would it mean lower staffing levels?
I think that this is a scare tactic – £1,000 sounds quite a lot to most people.
Assume that the average cost per head is about £8,000, therefore a £1,000 reduction would work out at about 12% per head.
This is no more than what is being asked elsewhere.
This would give a more equitable outcome shared equally across the islands, rather than the slash and burn proposal on the table at the moment.
At least there would then be the possibility of a review in the future to see if it was working, or needed change. Close a school and it will never reopen. Surely there must a case to examine this route.
Much was made at the meeting about the visionary outlook of the late Bill Smith in setting up a system which has served us well.
So councillors, which one of you will step up to the mark to be lauded as a visionary in future?
Going by events of the last few years, that is probably one expectation too far.
Finally I wonder if, during the selection and interview procedure, anyone bothered to tell the new Aith School head teacher that he could well be out of a job within a couple of years.
I note in the Shetland Times report at the commencement of his appointment, that he was looking forward to a long and productive period at a well appointed school with an enthusiastic staff.
Long may he reign!
J Sandison
Walls
Become a member of Shetland News
Shetland News is asking its many readers to consider paying for membership to get additional features and services: -
- Remove non-local ads;
- Bookmark posts to read later;
- Exclusive curated weekly newsletter;
- Hide membership messages;
- Comments open for discussion.
If you appreciate what we do and feel strongly about impartial local journalism, then please become a member of Shetland News by either making a single payment, or setting up a monthly, quarterly or yearly subscription.
Already a member? Sign in to hide this message.
