This paper is based exclusively on the Midlothian Council's public consultation document and the cabinet paper of 26th February 2004 on Midlothian Schools Strategic Asset Management Primary and Nursery.

The public consultation at six different points refers to;

• seven new primary schools will be built by developers to meet the needs of children moving into new housing in Midlothian
• seven new developer schools are proposed and we wish to offer a similar standard of accommodation in as many as possible of our current schools.
• Cousland Primary School – pupils relocated to Woodburn Primary School until a new primary school on the Dalkeith schools Community Campus is built, using funding from housing developers.
• Dalkeith School Community Campus; 2-stream primary school with nursery provision.
• Building seven new schools using developer funding
• THESE PROPOSALS WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPERATELY AND WE WILL CONSULT ON THEM WHEN NEW HOUSING IS APPROVED AND TIMESCALES AGREED.

The Cabinet paper of 26 Feb 2004 states:-

• It is proposed that Cousland Primary School be closed and pupils relocated to Woodburn Primary School for August 2004. On completion of a new primary school at the Dalkeith Schools Community Campus the Cousland catchment area should be rezoned to this school.

Cousland Response: The public documentation clearly states the Cousland is subject to developer funding to secure improved provision. The above statements reaffirm that developer schools provision will be part of a future consultation proposal and we question why it is being included at this stage.

• ...we have put together a proposal which we believe offers the best way forward to provide excellent school and community facilities which pupils deserve.
• These 2-stream schools would also include nursery provision and provide for the integration of pupils with additional support needs and for community use of the facilities.
• In all but one case the schools are not used by the community.

The Cabinet paper states:

• Cousland has no community use of its facilities.

Cousland Response: Existing PPP provision in Midlothian has resulted in local groups having to find alternative provision to host their much needed out of school activities due to the prohibitive cost to hire rooms at the new purpose built Dalkeith Community Campus.

In the case of Cousland Primary School we were advised by the Director of Education that the cost to hire the facility and the lack of guarantee of janitorial cover for the required activities rendered the application impossible for ongoing groups looking to secure a regular meeting/activity.

• a team of staff from within the council, school representatives and external consultants looked at all primary schools in Midlothian and developed the Midlothian School Asset Management Plan. The took into account various factors including ….the educational context: aims, objectives and strategies …and …..the overall condition of the building.

The Cabinet paper of 26 Feb 2004 states:

• ...with a play ground in need of renewal. The roofs are flat and felt covered and are in need of renewal. External windows and doors are in need of replacements in the need future.
• The internal aspects of the school require refurbishment and as the layout is split level the buildings are not Disability Discrimination Act compliant.

Cousland Response: Cousland Action Group and School Board have proof that the original survey which formed the basis of the proposal was carried out in April 1998.

The Director of Education wrote to clarify the position stating that the windows and doors at Cousland were not in need of renewal despite the proposal citing this as a reason for closure. The Director of Education also publicly withdrew the original reference at the public meeting in Dalkeith Community Schools campus on 25 March 2004. In addition the playground was resurfaced in February 2002 to a high standard, with asphalt not a low specification bitmax.

We understand that an updated condition survey was submitted to Councillors on 25th March – over three weeks into the public consultation period.

• if you are a parent with a child attending or due to attend one of these schools named in these proposals you will receive a letter explaining in detail what is proposed for your school and detailing the opportunities to take part in the consultation.
• provide full details to every school board affected
• notify every parent/carer who has a child likely to attend the school in the next two years.

The Cabinet Paper states:

• Consultation may be in writing and/or by public meeting…….Requirements: Letter to parents of pupils not yet enrolled but who might attend mentioned schools. ….Letters to appropriate school boards. ….Advert in local press.

Cousland Response: Cousland School Board did not get a letter detailing the closure proposal. (Section 22 of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 and Statutory Instrument 1558 (s.159) states that "The education authority must supply the clerk of the School Board with full details of the proposal and request a written representation within a specified period not later than 28 days.")

Parents of children known to Midlothian Council through nursery provision were not contacted directly by letter or otherwise about the closure proposals.

Pupil Post at Cousland Primary School was used to disseminate, not only the public consultation document and the retraction letter by the Director of Education but also the extension to the consultation period.

Cousland Response: With such a wider community impact this is not regarded as being the most efficient or effective way to ensure that the whole community is kept abreast of local government policy. This proposal is wider than the sole implications of closing the school building.

It is with great concern that this consultation process, to be ratified by Midlothian Council Councillors, has yet to be clarified. Despite asking for an explanation of the full process, both Councillors and leader of the Council have yet been able to clearly define the process from hereon in.

Finally, the community of Cousland have participated whole heartedly in the public meetings to discuss the proposals. However we have been dismayed at the Director of Education's reliance on his belief reiterated at the various public meetings and in the public consultation ;- "we have put together a proposal which we believe offers the best way forward to provide excellent school and community facilities which pupils deserve."

Cousland Response: In the Oxford dictionary the term believe is defined as – to accept as true.

We hope to have shown to you so that you 'accept as true' that the Midlothian Council's Review of Schools in Midlothian 2003-2004 Public consultation is fundamentally flawed and should not be supported in it current form.