Deputation to the City of Edinburgh Council on 21 Feb by Tina Woolnough, chair of a registered charity Parents in Partnership which was formed in 2003 to create a voice for parents in Edinburgh. Ross Finnie, Lib Dem MSP, Conference Speech Feb 2007:“investing in the education of our people is the most important investment we can make” This budget proposes cuts – or should I say “efficiency savings” – to the Children and Families department of 2% for school budgets and 5% centrally – this is the wrong thing to do and gives out entirely the wrong message. School budgets are already pared and starved – headteachers are telling us that they have nothing left to cut. The central cuts are more horrendous – most of the support and services for children with additional needs is funded centrally. Contrary to the message that has been given out, these central cuts will have drastic impacts on frontline provision for vulnerable and needy children. One in five children has additional support needs. Support is patchy, intermittent, staff have inadequate training, there is a desperate shortage of educational psychologists and – for budget reasons only – children are still not being diagnosed so that support does not have to be funded. This is a disgrace. Children and young people who fall through the educational net are children whose dyslexia, dyscalculia and dyspraxia were not identified. Those young people who face poor prospects and whom this city lets down will invariably have learning difficulties that were not picked up or that were not addressed because of lack of funding. If you got funding for additional support needs right, you would begin to address the disastrous educational outcomes of many of Edinburgh’s young people. I wish to note Item 4.1 , the Policy and Management OverView Report: “School and pre-school populations increasing by over 5000 by 2016”; “A significant proportion of children leave the Council’s schools without employment, training or continuing education”; “many live in disadvantaged or deprived geographic circumstances. These are not now always concentrated solely in deprived geographic communities but are increasingly spread across the city”; “a renewed emphasis on early years work with vulnerable families”; In the context of a growing – not falling – child population, in the context of the shameful record of school-leavers who have been let down by an absence of specific learning support, in the context of scattered poverty, which requires the geographically-centred funding approach to be thrown in the bin, why then is the Children and Families budget being cut? Why have fulltime nursery places across the city been slashed? This is the wrong thing to do. Then I would draw your attention to Item 4.2 (a), The Revenue Budget 2008-11 3.22 “the three year revenue budget shows a surplus of available rsource…of £11.95m in 2008/9, with a futher £13.787m and £10.79 in 2009/10 and 2010/11 respectively”. Why then is the Children and Families department facing cuts – of 5% centrally and 2% in schools? The Children and Families budget which has been shared with parents showed this meant:
- Unacceptable increases in school meals, which will penalise lower income families and may deprive children of a crucial nutritious meal – the wrong thing to do
- See the axeing of the popular and highly successful Go4It and Play4It holiday schemes – if you want more young people roaming the streets in the holidays, this is the way to create more community youth problems – the wrong thing to do
- Uncertain futures for many voluntary groups working with children and families. In particular, I have been contacted by St Crispin’s parent council which runs its essential holiday play scheme. They – parents who already face the extreme challenges of caring for autistic children – are extremely fearful that their funding will be cut or removed or that they will not be notified in time to set up the play-scheme. Do you have any idea of the anxiety this causes parents? Putting families in this situation is the wrong thing to do.
- I understand long-term and well-respected providers of respite holiday care for children with additional support needs such as autism are being required to compete in a tendering process. This will delay organising provision and may result in the quality of provision being compromised.
- School premises charges are to rise. Has the impact of this on voluntary organisations been assessed? Will respite care and holiday clubs be threatened?
- Teachers are required to do 35 hours of CPD a year but schools can no longer afford the cover to let them go on courses during school hours. Is this the way to ensure we have fit for purpose teachers?
- Not every school has a fully trained Additional Support for Learning co-ordinator – again, school budget constraints are impacting negatively on vulnerable children.
Most of all, budget cuts like these give – yet again – a negative message to children and young people – that they are not worth it and that investing in their futures is not a priority. In the national context of every political party electioneering on an “education, education, education” ticket, we need to see some real financial commitment. Where is the CEC priority which makes this commitment?
