By Bill Heaney
She told MSPs, some of whom are still laughing at the absurdity of it all: “As Tess White will be aware, the Scottish Government has no plans such as she mentioned. Contributions in the chamber last week were based on a wilful misunderstanding of examples of mitigations that local authorities may implement, under certain circumstances, to improve ventilation in problematic spaces in schools.
“Those examples, which included use of air-cleaning devices, installation of small mechanical vents and adjustment of doors, were used as means to generate the overall costs for the up to £5 million top-up fund that has been made available to local authorities to improve ventilation in schools. That was set out in a letter to the Education, Children and Young People Committee, stating: ‘the precise remedial measures used in each problematic space should be informed by local circumstances and expert assessment by local authority teams’.
“Our guidance on reducing risks in schools supports expert local authority teams and makes it clear that local authorities must consider legal health and safety obligations, including on fire safety. Officials have spoken with the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service regarding that matter, and it has confirmed that it understands the Scottish Government’s approach in seeking to improve ventilation in schools. In line with its usual practice, it is happy to provide advice and support to local authorities regarding any changes to structures that might have an impact on fire-risk assessments.”
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon was raging that Douglas Ross (centre) challenged her on chopping doors but left Shirely Anne Somerville to take the heat.
The Tories were like a dog with a bone, however. Tess White pressed on: “The cabinet secretary said, ‘a wilful misunderstanding’? In recent days, we have had two significant interventions on, or ‘misunderstandings’ of, the plan.
“The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service said that it would strongly advise those who are responsible for making the changes—I am talking about the “misunderstandings”—to contact its fire safety enforcement teams before doing so. Given that, can the cabinet secretary say whether those proposals are definitely ‘misunderstandings’?”
Shirley-Anne Somerville was becoming irritable, just as her boss, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, had before her when confronted initially about it by Tory leader Douglas Ross.
She said: “: The interpretation by Opposition parties is absolutely a deliberate misunderstanding. I have already said what the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service has said, and I absolutely concur with its view—as I concur with its views on all aspects of fire safety—that the discussions on those specific examples should continue at a very local level.
“However, the absolute truth of the matter is that the reports that Tess White mentioned are misleading. When the Covid-19 ventilation short-life working group was asked to look at media reporting, following misinterpretation in the chamber, it confirmed that adjusting the undercut of a non-fire door can be necessary if, for example, the installation of a small mechanical vent system changes the air pressure in a room in a way that makes a door difficult to open, which could, in itself, present a hazard. That is exactly why that specific measure was included as an element of the example scenario.”
Disbelief was written across the faces of everyone in the chamber, except the SNP government members of course, whose faces were tripping them in the sure and certain knowledge they would be ragged about this for weeks to come.
Ms Somerville continued: “Ventilation must be viewed systematically. Introduction of changes such as mechanical ventilation can have knock-on impacts on other aspects of ventilation and of health and safety. That is exactly why the examples were given as they were—as part of a specific scenario.”
Tess White gave a who’s kidding who here response: ” The cabinet secretary talks about ‘deliberate misunderstandings’. Parents the length and breadth of Scotland are looking at the plans—or, as she says, they are misunderstanding them—with consternation and concern. Even securely closed non-fire doors can help to slow the spread of fire and prevent smoke inhalation. That is common sense.
“The Scottish Government has had two years to sort out the “misunderstandings”, as she calls them, yet it is still making proposals that should have been considered in 2020—not in 2022. Can the cabinet secretary confirm that spending £300,000 on chopping off the bottom of doors is not going to happen?
Shirley-Anne Somerville said testily: “Again, I will get into the absolute specifics of a scenario in which that would happen. The example scenario had three elements: use of an air-cleaning device as a temporary mitigation; installation of a small mechanical vent; and adjustment of the door, through undercutting, to improve airflow.
“The latter element is absolutely required because, as I have already said, installation of mechanical ventilation can change the air pressure in a room, which can lead to the door being harder to open, which is, potentially, a health and safety issue.
“With the greatest respect, I say to Tess White—who has, I am afraid, joined her colleagues in the Scottish Conservatives in adding deliberate misunderstanding of the issue—that we will continue to listen to the experts on health and safety.
“Local authorities, which are responsible for making changes that are specific to the requirement of each room, will, of course, continue to have discussions at a very local level, specific to local examples. That is exactly what I think parents, young people and, indeed, teachers would expect.”
Labour could not resist putting the boot into the beleaguered SNP. Dundee MSP Michael Marra told the chamber: “It should be a matter of considerable regret that the Government’s handling of the issue has descended into a matter of ridicule and concern such as we see in newspapers across Scotland. I have raised the matter with the cabinet secretary on no fewer than 12 occasions in the chamber and in committee.
“It is vital, in order to rebuild confidence among teachers, families and pupils and to ensure good ventilation in Scottish schools, that the Scottish Government finally backs Labour’s plan to install two air filters in every classroom. Will the cabinet secretary acknowledge that that plan could sort out the problem?”
However the answer was No. Shirley-Anne Somerville told him: “With the greatest respect, I say to Michael Marra that he continues to come back with the same plan and my answer continues to be the same. That plan is not based on expert advice. We listen to what the ventilation experts suggest we do; I will base my advice and the guidance that the Government produces on that.
“I will continue to listen to what Michael Marra has to say, but I am sorry to say that if he continues to come back with the same proposal, which is not based on evidence, on advice or on what is happening in the rest of the United Kingdom, my answer will continue to be that I will listen to the experts and our guidance will be based on what they say.”
LibDem education spokesperson Willie Rennie urged Ms Somerville to concede that “the proposal was not an example: it was costed. It was costed for 2,000 classrooms at £150 a time, which is £300,000. The cabinet secretary is now being laughed at across the country for her proposals. She should ditch them and, as Michael Marra said, invest in air filters. If they are good enough for 2,000 classes, they should be good enough for 50,000. She should invest in air filters and stop the nonsense about cutting the bottoms off doors.”
Stupid. I worked in construction. It’s obvious these fools don’t know the first thing about doors. They’re like “I’ve got a toothache. Better phone the car mechanic.” People should be asking for their money back. These fools are being paid to talk rubbish round the clock.