WHY do people choose to move to rural communities? It's not for the nightlife or the good public transport links. So why?

I moved to the village of Edgehead from the town because I wanted to be part of a community - a place where you get to know your neighbours and they in turn get to know you.

Edgehead doesn't have a local shop, post office or community hall.

What Edgehead does have is a building which is the focus for our community and the heart of the village, where my daughter attends and my son will start in August, providing Midlothian Council's proposals are not approved.

Cranston Primary School, along with four other rural schools - Cousland, Borthwick, Temple and Howgate - have been earmarked for closure with no apparent consideration for the dedicated staff, community and, above all, the effect this upheaval will have on the children.

Cranston Primary is the largest of the five and celebrates its bicentennial anniversary this September.

Hundreds of children have spent their formative years in this safe, secure and happy environment, where every child from P1 to P7 knows and cares for each other, and that ethos hasn't changed in its 200-year history.

Why would the pupils of Cranston Primary School want to move anywhere, let alone to the proposed grey, soulless, pre-fabricated eyesore which Midlothian Council seems intent on foisting upon them?

According to the proposal put forward by the suits at Midlothian House, our rural schools have restricted and dated facilities, limited accommodation, poor recreational areas and a lack of adequate security, and they suffer from an increasing need to transport pupils by bus to nearby sports halls for physical education twice weekly.

Has no-one from Midlothian Council visited Cranston Primary in the last ten years? Not only do we have a sound building in keeping with its surroundings and enhanced by recently installed heating and double-glazed windows, the school comfortably accommodates its 58 pupils.

Within its Victorian walls there are ample IT facilities, an extensive library, state-of-the-art security at all main doors and a substantial hall with foldaway gymnasium apparatus used daily.

Also, the school regularly uses the hall for assemblies, choir rehearsals, school productions and performances, meetings, presentations and discos.

WITH reference to the so-called "poor recreational area", detailed as one of the reasons for closure in the council's proposals, Cranston Primary has three large play areas which are accessed by all of the children at the same time.

This builds relationships between the children from P1 to P7. This would be lost in a PPP development. This bond between the children is transferred from the playground into the classroom, providing confidence and stability cited by educational experts as the main contributory factor in how rural schools achieve better attainment levels.

Having established the fact that Midlothian Council's reasons for the closure of Cranston School are fundamentally flawed, to add insult to injury our children are to be temporarily relocated to "modular units" (portable buildings) in a field behind Pathhead Primary School for "approximately" two years. Not only would this be detrimental to Cranston pupils, but also the pupils at Pathhead will have to share their already limited and cramped facilities. A recent Her Majesty's Inspectorate Report made statements to this effect.

Rumour has it (and we can only rely on rumour as we have not received any official notification of the temporary proposal) that three portable buildings will be placed on a small area within a field which backs on to the school.

Two of these will act as classrooms, while the third will be used for physical education and as a dining area. This is yet to be confirmed, but the prospect causes concern.

Apparently, this temporary complex will have separate recreational areas resulting in my children not having the opportunity to mix with some of their friends, peers or siblings.

Also, whereas my children now play in an area beside fields and lanes, they will soon be required to spend their playtime beside the very busy A68, one of the main local trunk roads.

When it comes to lunchtime, in order to feed this amount of children, the school would either have to have several sittings, or have a lunch break spanning three hours.

While secondary pupils may be able to cope with this kind of segregation and separation at the new campus at Dalkeith, it is questionable whether primary children could cope with this level of chaos.

Midlothian Council's proposal to close Cranston Primary School is, in my opinion, a rash move based on dated and flawed information which, if it goes ahead, will remove the heart and soul of the community.

HOWEVER, proposals to relocate children in their formative years to inadequate accommodation for an undetermined length of time leaves me asking the question why?

Midlothian Council's strategic objectives which relate to the rural environment are to protect and enhance Midlothian's countryside and rural environment, as well as its towns and villages, and to identify measures to regenerate rundown urban areas and revitalise rural communities.

How can this be achieved when they intend to close our rural schools, which in turn will discourage young families with disposable incomes moving into the same areas that the council plans to revitalise?

This sentiment is echoed in the personal accounts of many people who have posted their experiences on the Midlothian Rural Schools Action Group website www.mrsag.org.uk

I can't speak for every parent in Midlothian. Some may want a soulless, pre-fabricated school, but the level of support from MSPs, parents, teachers and members of the community seems to suggest that an established seat of learning, which has stood the test of time, shouldn't be reduced to a memorial of how things used to be, purely in the name of progress.

• Arlene Stuart is a presenter with Forth 2