Mixed views on Bela Bill during public hearings in KZN

The proposed closure and merger of smaller schools deemed as non-viable has invoked mixed reactions from KwaZulu-Natal communities.

One of the clauses of the Basic Education Laws Amendment (Bela) Bill proposes small and non-viable state schools be merged. This is among a host of changes proposed for schools. .

For a school to be considered non-viable, it must have fewer than 135 pupils if it is a primary school or less than 200 if it is a high school.

There are 3,000 schools nationwide that have been identified as non-viable, more than 900 of them in KwaZulu.

The parliamentary portfolio committee on basic education held a series of public hearings in the province at the weekend, where residents raised varied views on the bill.

The committee held the Umgungundlovu district round of hearings at the Grange Community Hall in Pietermaritzburg on Saturday.

Bongiwe Mbinqo-Gigaba, portfolio committee chairperson, said the bill had been mostly rejected by residents who said the closure of non-viable schools and “overregulation of home schooling” would not enhance the public education system and might potentially drive skilled workers away from the basic education sector.

They also highlighted that the bill would deprive children of quality education closer to their homes.

“The participants pointed out the inherent risk posed by the transportation of young children to schools that become far as a result of the merger, and they cited many fatal accidents that involved learner transport.

“They argued that instead of closing schools with low numbers of learners, the department of basic education should provide support to those schools,” said Mbinqo-Gigaba.

The hearings were concluded at the Pinetown Civic Hall on Sunday where participants from eThekwini were largely in support of the bill. They said the bill would ensure development of the education system and ensure transformation and equitable access once passed into law.

Mbinqo-Gigaba said those who supported the bill during the Durban leg welcomed the proposal to include heads of department in the determination of language and admission policy, saying it would limit the power of school governing bodies (SGBs) to abuse their powers and perpetuate exclusion of certain pupils, considering “the legacy of exclusion and segregation within the schooling system remains a factor”.

Those in opposition argued that the proposed bill, in its current form, sought to take away the parents’ right to decide what was best for their children. They also argued that the community, through SGBs, should decide language and admission policy because it understood peculiar issues of the community.

“Clause 37 was also another point of contention between participants. Those supporting the bill welcomed the process to register homeschooled learners, believing it will enable the department to give full account of learners within the system.

“Meanwhile, those opposing clause 37 consider it to be departmental overreach, as parents and not the state understand the curriculum and their children’s learning abilities. The also believe that overregulation will increase the burden and cost of home schooling and will not serve the best interests of learners.”

It was also argued that clause 41 would remove the rights of parents “to make decisions about the management” of pregnant pupils..

There was also an agreement on the inclusion of grade R in mainstream school education.

TimesLIVE