Avoniel Primary School plan 'treated with disdain'

Education authorities treated a potential alternative to closing an east Belfast school with "disdain", the High Court has been told.

A judge was told the possibility of Avoniel Primary School instead being amalgamated with nearby Elmgrove Primary was never properly considered.

A barrister for the school said: "It was the solution that dare not speak its name."

Education Minister John O'Dowd announced the school's closure in May.

A judicial review challenge has been brought on behalf of one child at the school with special educational needs.

With the school set to shut at the end of this month, lawyers for the child want the court to overturn Mr O'Dowd's decision.

Mr O'Dowd announced its closure as part of a rationalisation process that will see increased admissions and enrolment at Elmgrove.

Parents of pupils at Avoniel reacted with anger to the decision, claiming they have been left with little time to find a new school by September.

Lawyers representing the pupil claimed that the minister's decision should be quashed because a prior consultation process by the Belfast Education and Library Board was not properly or fairly conducted.

According to their case the parents believe that when this exercise was carried out, back in 2014, the board's proposals were already at an advanced stage.

The barrister told the court that Avoniel had been performing well.

"This is not some sink school, the closure of which is inevitably going to save pupils therein from further bad education. This is a good school," the barrister said.

Alleged failures by the education authorities to consider and consult on the possibility of amalgamation rendered the whole process flawed, it was claimed.

Accusing the board of "dismissively" turning its back on the option, the barrister added: "They treated it with disdain."

He contended that an expanded Elmgrove could ultimately end up moving into new or refurbished buildings on Avoniel's current site.

The barrister urged a judge to quash the outcome reached.

"This consultation process was flawed, and resulted in a flawed decision by the Minister," he said.

However, Attorney General John Larkin QC, representing the minister, questioned the merits of the legal challenge.

"This is an application characterised by needlessness and utter pointlessness," he said.

"It cannot achieve any substantive advantage to the applicant."

He also said the minister was never misled during the process.

The hearing continues.