Closure threatened Howgate Primary is to hold an open day on Monday March 29 from 9.15am.

Visitors to the school will have the chance to see an Easter concert, view displays of the children's work and watch the children at work on the computer. Refreshments will also be provided.

The school's enterprise group will be selling teddy bears and Howgate pens. All parents, friends and former pupils are welcome to attend.

Midlothian Council's programme to merge, close and rebuild schools aim to provide youngsters with buildings designed and equipped for 21st century education, parents were advised.

Education director Donald MacKay added that it was the aim of the local authority to provide this for all youngsters not just some.

However, parents attending the first of five public meetings were critical of the reasoning and statistics being used by the local authority to implement its proposals.

In the Penicuik area, the council proposes to close Howgate Primary and merge Eastfield and Ladywood Primaries. Cuiken Primary will be extended. Strathesk Nursery will be relocated within the new Eastfield/Ladywood school while Cuikenburn Nursery will be housed within Cuiken Primary.

Putting forward the council's case, Mr MacKay said the authority was moving towards two-stream primary schools, which would incorporate nursery and community provision. He added that evidence showed that larger schools provided youngsters with greater curriculum opportunities as well as the chance to mix and be challenged educationally by other children.

the rebuilding of Eastfield/Ladywood would be under a Public Private Partnership agreement with the aim of the new school being completed by the end of 2006. PPP contracts would require to be signed by June 2005.

No site has been chosen for the new school although Ladywood has been first mooted given its proximity to the leisure centre and all weather pitch. However, parents were advised that a neutral site could even be selected.

Parents from Howgate supported Midlothian's intention of providing children with a safe and secure environment to learn and reach their full potential but rejected the proposal to close the rural school pointing to all the good things achieved at the primary.

Eastfield Primary school board had canvassed the views of parents - 61 per cent wished Eastfield to remain a school on its own. If the schools were merged however, parents favoured the Eastfield site as it was in a central location within the catchment area.

At Ladywood Primary, it was said that the majority of parents were not in favour of the merger and there were numerous concerns regarding the proposals including the transitional period when the merger takes place, school security and the selection of a suitable site.

Cuiken Primary parents said that while they supported proposals to invest in the school, they shared the other parents' concerns about the lack of information and detail over the proposals. They added that while they had much to look forward to, they reserved the right to make further comment if there was further feedback from parents.

Parents disputed the data being used by Midlothian to push forward its plans and there were suggestions that is was a programme being driven by accountancy rather than need to improve educational standards.

It was pointed out that using P7 attainment levels to promote larger schools over rural schools was flawed as statistics did not always reveal the true picture.

In last week's Advertiser, it was mistakenly reported that Temple Primary had a capacity factor of 56 per cent. This should have been 76 per cent.

Cranston parents have expressed their anger after being told school boards had just 10 minutes at consultation meetings to make a case to keep their school open. Representing the recently-formed Cranston Primary Parents Action Group (CPAG), Martin Walker said: "It's a sham. This is intimidation, not consultation.

"We all have concerns and thought we'd have every opportunity to voice them at these meetings. Instead, the council seems to be turning the tables.

"It seems the meetings are not about the councillors justifying their flawed proposals, but about us having to justify our school's survival."

He added: "For Cranston, not only is there only one public meeting which is also supposed to cover four other schools in an hour and a half, but this means there will be limited time for us to ask the questions we felt rightly should be answered. It seems more like a trial to me."

Cranston parent, Karen Beggs said: "Ten minutes to save a school? This just shows the council is only prepared to pay lip service to the cosultation required in these situations.

"The 28 days they've allowed us is too short for anyone to properly assess the plans, and while they will say they have given us the minimum time laid down in the regulations, I don't think the council is acting in the spirit of the Government's policy of putting the child at the centre, and the school at the heart of the community."

You reported in the Advertiser last week how "Midlothian councillors rounded on their officials after Scottish Ministers granted permission for a new house within Broomieknowe Conservation Area in Lasswade." Councillor Derek Milligan is reported to have commented that "it beggars belief" and that "our (planning) officials should hang their heads in shame."

This concern for Midlothian's historic environment is, of course, to be welcomed. However, the duplicity displayed in this instance is overwhelming. In particular, Councillor Milligan and his colleagues need reminding of the potential damage they have recently inflicted on the Howgate Conservation area.

Councillors agreed on December 18 to adopt the new Local Plan, including a proposal to allow windfall housing in Howgate "where such development should help to support the primary school." This justification for housing in Howgate was, in fact, false. Councillors were then fully aware that there was a high risk that Howgate School would be closed. Indeed Midlothian Council was most certainly not looking for support for Howgate School, it was at this stage working on its justification for closure.

Nevertheless, the Local Plan, including the proposal for housing in Howgate, was bulldozed through. Consequently, less than a month later, on January 15 Councillor Milligan and his colleagues felt able to approve an application from Miller Homes for a 24 house development in the heart of the Howgate conservation area.

With the school now facing closure, the justification for a major development of this kind in Howgate is no longer known. Given that the existing village envelope contains just 15 houses, the character and appearance of the conservation village will inevitably be destroyed. The traditional, linear feature of the village will be lost as will the open setting to the Pentland Hills, which the previous Local Plan sought to protect.

Numerous local residents objected to the Miller Home plans, but their objections were dismissed by the council. Moreover, even the few supporters who wrote in favour of providing support for the school and to welcome the arrival of affordable housing appear to have been duped on both counts.

The cavalier disregard shown for the Howgate conservation area should be of great concern to all residents in Midlothian particularly those resident in the other 19 conservation areas in the county. In 2002 Midlothian Council was asked by the Scottish Executive, following an audit of planning procedures, to sharpen up its act with regard to conservation areas. The Howgate proposals therefore presented the first opportunity for the Council to demonstrate its new caring policies. Needless to say, an extremely worrying precedent has now been set.

If Councillor Milligan is genuinely concerned about the Broomieknowe Conservation Area and would like to pre-empt the possibility of any more "Disneyworld" housing applications, then he might like to persuade his colleagues to revoke the decision made in January with respect to the Miller HOMES development in Howgate. Midlothian Council has every legal right to revoke its previous decision, no official consent has yet been issued and no compensation costs would be incurred. If Miller homes chooses to appeal, then so be it - let the application be considered on its true planning merits and against a background of changed circumstances with regard to the school.

The cost to Midlothian's historic environment would be considerable if such action is not taken.

Adrian Fitzgerald
Pomathorn Farmhouse
Penicuik

The proposal from Midlothian Council to close Cranston Primary School is unsubstantiated and fundamentally flawed and will undoubtedly have a detrimental effect on our children.

Cranston Primary school is faultless. The teachers are second to none and the facilities are commendable. There is ample playing area both outside and inside, plenty of information technology equipment, an extensive library, the building is structurally sound with security doors in place, recently double-glazed with a new heating system installed and the roof has recently been examined and given the all clear.

Our children now have to watch the biggest part of their life come to an abrupt end in such a pointless way. When children are asking why, no parent can answer them. All we have is a proposal containing ridiculous out of date reasons backed up by pathetically incorrect so-called facts and figures.

There are children at Cranston and indeed the other rural schools in the area who have special needs and the teachers at these rural schools have the time to spend with these children who need a little bit more attention. Life will become difficult enough without the added trauma of having their school unnecessarily closed down. This closure will inevitably result in many friendships they have made being severed. The children have formed bonds with pupils and teachers alike.

How can Midlothian Council possibly expect these children who are midway through their primary education to cope with the transition to a larger school and on top of that spend 'approximately' two years in temporary portable buildings?

We, as parents have so far had a certain amount of choice with regards to where our children are educated. Due to the fact that we live in a rural area, the close knit and community friendly environment of these rural schools is essential to our children. Where will this essential foundation end up if our schools are closed and our freedom of choice is taken away?

The children are better off where they are.

Mr & Mrs Church-Olney
Address supplied

It is with some astonishment that I continue to read the groundless, hollow propaganda from Midlothian Council regarding the closure of rural schools in the area.

In spite of a direct admission from Donald MacKay he Education Director, that the report on the condition of Cousland School on which the proposal was based, was inaccurate and out of date, we are still being subjected to the council's weak argument. This was highlighted in last week's Advertiser, which carried a full page of so called justification for closure.

The proposal for closure makes no reference to these schools' impressive track record of offering quality education and bringing on children many of whom have gone on to great success in both their secondary education and full-time careers. Indeed, the only consideration from council members appears to be "about securing the highest possible quality of school and community facilities" as quoted directly by Councillor Peter Boyes, the cabinet member for education with absolutely no reference whatsoever to the quality of education itself. My own schooldays may be but a distant memory, however, the primary purpose was to learn and gain quality education.

In the same publication (Midlothian News) Councillor Boyes is also quoted as saying. "The new St Andrew's (school) replaces a building that was cramped and had to use temporary portable classrooms." Yet we are expected to accept the ridiculous situation of having our children moved from perfectly good school accommodation to be housed in the same temporary portable classrooms, in Woodburn, until such times as a new "Super School" can be built. Not only this, but Woodburn School, according to the council's own propaganda in last week's Advertiser is "in poor condition and needs extensive refurbishment."

The whole strategy from the council is ill-judged and poorly thought through and thus far there is no evidence of the wishes of the very people who elect the councillors being taken into consideration. Indeed the only credible driver in all of the council's arguments appears to be the rush to secure PPP funding.

It is clear that this proposed 'campaign of closure' is not based on 'hard facts' but is based solely on 'hard cash'. The wishes, needs and well-being of several rural communities are being completely ignored in the rush for funding.

Dr W B Lumsden
Hadfast Road
Cousland