Powys' smallest school to close doors as council agrees move
A meeting of Powys County Council's Liberal Democrat/Labour cabinet on Tuesday, June 10, saw members receive the objections report on the proposal to close the 25-pupil Ysgol Bro Cynllaith in Llansilin near Oswestry.
Cabinet member for education Cllr Peter Roberts explained that receiving the objections report is the 'final stage' in the process of closing the school.
Pupils from the school are expected to transfer to Ysgol Llanrhaeadr-ym-Mochnant.
But fears have been raised that children will leave Powys and attend primary schools around Oswestry, which is much closer to the village.
Director of education Dr Richard Jones explained that the proposal had received 20 objections during the period.
Dr Jones said: 'Having considered the objections received it is recommended that the council proceeds with the implementation of the proposal to close Ysgol Bro Cynllaith from August 31 as outlined in the statutory notice.
'It is recognised that the decision to proceed with the closure at the end of this term only provides a month's notice to the school community of this decision.
'It is the council's view that a transfer at the end of this summer term is preferable to pupils that are moving to a new school so they can move at the start of a new fresh academic year.'
Cabinet member for legal and statutory services, Cllr Richard Church (Liberal Democrat) brought up the issue of losing pupils over the border into Shropshire and the Oswestry area.
He questioned whether it 'would be right' to make an exception to keep small schools open because they are 'next to or close ' to an border either with England or another local authority in Wales.
Cllr Church said: 'Closing rural schools is difficult and unpopular.
'But we have to accept that a school with only 25 pupils is not going to offer the range of education that we expect our young people to receive in our day and age.
'I don't believe it is sustainable to continue operating schools of this size, we can't make exceptions.
'I believe we will be making the right decision to proceed with the closure of this school.'
Cabinet member for children's social service and the Welsh language Cllr Sandra Davies (Labour) pointed out that she had campaigned vigorously against school closures in the Ystradgynlais area in the recent past.
But she now saw things differently.
Cllr Davies said: 'Having bigger schools does enhance children as individuals they do thrive, and they are given more opportunities to grow.'
Cllr Roberts added: 'Regretfully the objections do not override the reasons for transition.
'We have met the terms of the schools organisation code.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ITV News
17 minutes ago
- ITV News
Kemi Badenoch labels Labour policy a 'disaster' for farming in Wales
Kemi Badenoch has said Labour policies have been a disaster for farming in Wales. The Conservative leader, Kemi Badenoch, has said that Labour governments in Cardiff and London have been 'a disaster for farming' here in Wales. Speaking at the Royal Welsh Show in Builth Wells, she said a Conservative UK Government would 'reverse' Labour UK Government plans to change inheritance tax, which she called 'the immoral family farm tax'. She told ITV Cymru Wales: 'We are promising to back farmers. Farming is a way of life. Standing up for farmers is standing up for Britain. And one of the things that Labour did when it first came into office was bring in the immoral family farm tax. It is going to destroy farming across our country. And I have said that once Conservatives get back into government we will reverse it.' As well as still reeling from a massive defeat in last year's UK General Election, which saw not a single Conservative MP elected for Wales, the party is also looking at losses ahead of next year's Senedd election. The most recent Barn Cymru poll for ITV Wales and Cardiff University suggested the Conservatives could end up in fourth place with as few as nine Senedd Members. In her interview, Kemi Badenoch acknowledged that her party faces an uphill struggle. 'Well, we know that we suffered a historic defeat last year," she said. "It's not going to be easy to get back on track, but that's the work that I'm doing. It's one of the reasons why I'm here, getting all across the country, trying to rebuild trust with the public, acknowledging where we made mistakes and showing that Wales has not thrived under Labour. It certainly won't under Plaid. It most definitely will not under Reform.' She was asked, too, if she has confidence in Darren Millar's leadership of the Welsh Conservatives in Wales. She said. 'Absolutely. Darren is here with me. We get on famously. We speak all the time. He is absolutely the right person to be First Minister.' And she was asked, too, about the status of his leadership. When Andrew RT Davies was first in charge of the Welsh Tories, the then Prime Minister, David Cameron, said publicly that Mr Davies was considered the leader of the wider party in Wales. Since then, other leaders have held varying views. I asked her: 'Who is the leader of the Welsh Conservatives? Not just the group in the Senedd: who leads the Welsh Conservatives?' KB: 'I do.' 'And where does Darren Millar sit in that?' KB: 'Darren is the leader of the Welsh Conservatives in the Senedd but this is not what the public are asking about. They want to know who's going to deliver for the people of Wales and that is the Conservatives.' 'The only reason I ask is because different Conservative leaders have given different answers.' KB: 'Well you've asked me the question. We are a united party. We are the Unionist party. We're not interested in carving ourselves up and having lots of little, you know, different groups and factions. We are the Conservative and Unionist Party. We believe in the United Kingdom. We want Wales to be very much a part of the United Kingdom, not what Plaid Cymru is offering. Labour will end up sectioning Wales off the way they're going.' And she backed the decision to insist that Conservative candidates in next year's Senedd election should not be opposed to devolution, saying: 'That is the settlement that we have now. Devolution is a process. What we need to make sure is we have the best people. It's the people that matter.' Asked if she was sceptical about devolution, she said: 'Well, yes, because people think devolution is a solution in and of itself. It's not. It's how you use it. And that's why you have to look at the people. If you put bad people in, then it doesn't matter whether you're devolved or not, if you have great people then yes, devolution would work.' The Conservative leader said: 'That's that, honestly, in terms of the top 100 things that this country needs, that's not one of them.'
Spectator
17 minutes ago
- Spectator
The Liaison Committee summed up Starmer's woes
If you want a sign of how badly things have gone wrong for this government, compare Keir Starmer's third Liaison Committee grilling with his first. Back in December, it was all stonewalling and smiles, as the Prime Minister gently dead-batted questions in front of a (largely) sympathetic crowd. Seven months on, the audience remains the same: 18 of the 26 select committees in the Commons are chaired by Labour MPs. But now the tone has hardened considerably. Today's session focused on poverty and international affairs. Normally, these might be regarded as areas in which a redistributive social democrat premier would excel. But after the benefits U-turn a fortnight ago, Starmer found himself subjected to some hostile grilling. His worst moment came when Debbie Abrahams, the chair of the welfare panel, said that his ditched reforms were 'so far removed from Labour values of fairness and social justice I have to say I felt ashamed.' In his wearisomely-familiar style, Starmer gave Abrahams a set of stock lines which any No. 10 spokesman could have mustered: he wants more people back in work and has commissioned a review to ensure it. A similar formula was deployed when Florence Eshalomi, the chair of the housing select committee, asked about the Budget's freeze to local housing allowance. Starmer defended the decision – before pledging 'there will be a chance to look again across the board.' As the recent Ashes series has shown, there is often merit in a Geoffrey Boycott-style approach to defence. But refusing to even attempt to score some runs can certainly tire the patience of the crowd. The frustration on the face of Liam Byrne and others was visible as Starmer made his way through the 90-minute grilling, stubbornly refusing to enlighten his assembled colleagues. Challenged multiple times on the detail of an answer, the PM begrudgingly promised to write in due course. A classic case was offered in an exchange with Meg Hillier. 'What other accomodation are you planning to take over to provide temporary accommodation for families?' she asked in a discussion on migrants. 'Oh, there's lots of housing in many local authorities that can be used and we're identifying where it can be used', Starmer gaily replied. 'Have you got any examples you can give us?' retorted Hillier. 'No but I'll write in and give you details', he answered, haltingly. It says something when Gaza offers easier ground for a Labour PM to discuss. Pressed by Andy Slaughter on how the government will 'protect Palestinians from mass killings', Starmer offered the usual line about the need for an immediate ceasefire and aid to enter the region. It was a depressing and predictable note on which to end an underwhelming and angst-ridden first year for Starmer. Asked by Hillier for the highlight of his initial 12 months, the Prime Minister responded 'walking into Downing Street.' Being something, rather than doing something – with this government, the jokes all too often write themselves.
Scotsman
17 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Why letting 16-year-olds vote could give Gen Z as much political power as pensioners
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... So the government at Westminster has announced that, in time for the next general election, 16 and 17-year-olds will be allowed to vote. As you will know, this has been the case in Scotland since 2014 and democracy has not ground to a halt. Some opposition parties are saying this is just a cynical attempt to gain the youth vote for the left, and, indeed, it seems that, in England, the main beneficiaries would be Labour and the Greens (who are, in England, a very respectable and sensible bunch relative to the screaming bag of cats they are here in Scotland). Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This is, of course, to be expected and indeed welcomed: to misquote someone (no, it's not Churchill): 'If you're not left wing when you're young, there's something wrong with your heart, and if you're still left wing when you're old, there's something wrong with your head.' That's not to say that, in due course, some young people won't vote for Reform (along with the rest of their family). Increasing the youth vote by lowering the voting age should give the young generation a stronger voice in politics (Picture: Mark Runnacles) | Getty Images Young people made me proud The arguments being played out in England now echo those from 2014, when young Scots of 16 and 17 were allowed to vote in the independence referendum. It would seem they mainly voted 'Yes', though their turnout was lower than their grandparents, who mainly voted 'No'. I was at that time a head teacher, and was lucky enough to get Kenny MacAskill (then still with the SNP) and Sir Menzies Campbell, the former leader of the Liberal Democrats, to come and debate independence with our S5 and S6 students, almost all of whom were about to vote for the first time. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Two of their number spoke with these highly experienced politicians. This was, in fact, one of my very happiest teaching memories, because the contributions of the young people, both in questioning and in giving their own points of view, were wonderful, causing even Sir Menzies – not the least grumpy of grumpy old men – to tell me how proud I should be. I was. I've never accepted the argument that teenagers are too ill-informed or immature in their thinking, too fickle and easily swayed, too uninterested to vote. I think 16 is the right age. Only dafties (this is a technical term) advance the argument that – this being the case – then why not 14-year-olds or five-year-olds? Well, simply because, as with many things, there has to be a lower limit and periodically society has to review it. Personally I think voting is probably easier than being in the army or, indeed, having sex. Obviously, some young people will lack the acumen and intelligence to vote, but then that's true for many people of all ages. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Our parents' politics If someone wanted to start a 'disenfranchise stupid people' movement, and it succeeded, then I think that would have a profound effect on elections – but nobody is seriously going to advance that, with its echoes of voter suppression in the USA. Most people who vote have, in truth, only a fairly sketchy idea about the policies of the party they are voting for are. There are exceptions – like Greens on the environment; the SNP and Alba on independence – but there are apparently hordes of people ready to vote for Reform, and, possibly beyond their opposition to immigration, almost nobody knows what their policies are. Of course, we are all influenced to some extent or other by our parents' political views. I grew up in a very heavily political household (suffice to say the First Minister was kind enough to speak at my father's funeral). But still, the first vote I ever cast was in the European referendum in 1975 and I voted in favour of Europe, and just lied to Mum and Dad about how I had voted, the SNP at that time being highly anti-European. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It would be very interesting to know what proportion of young people vote the same way as their parents do. We are also all now influenced in one way or another by social media – in many respects young people, attuned to the vagaries of TikTok or Instagram, may better be able to make their own minds up than those of us enslaved to X/Twitter or 'the News'. Increasing Gen Z's political clout However, the central argument in favour of extending the franchise is that this is the most difficult time to be young for a long, long time, certainly in my lifetime, and letting more young people vote might well be a means of getting politicians to take their views and needs further into account. For example, our elected representatives are obliged to protect the triple lock on the old age pension, when in fact a great many pensioners are very well off, relative to those under 25 working on their first jobs. Young people, if they are interested in politics at all, tend to focus on issues – currently, they worry about Gaza, the climate crisis, equity, and they would – in the main – support parties willing to take these things on. Maybe we need a few more 'naïve' voices casting votes that might lead to higher taxation on rich people, or more Draconian rules being applied to water companies. If nothing else, the old established parties might need to shake up in their thinking. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Nationalists are predictably rubbing their hands in glee at the prospect of England 'copying' the Scots by this move: unusually in these days of Scottish exceptionalism, I agree with them – extending the vote to older teenagers doesn't seem to have done them, their parents or the country any harm. At their best, our young people are superb – confident, articulate, kind and clever – and we are right to put our faith in their judgment.
