Thursday 9 February 2012

Welsh Government makes a splash on school toilets

Lack of supervision, a laissez-faire attitude to defecation and bullying.
I'll be posting on the  AWEMA report another time.
(Pic : Time.com)

I like to pride myself on looking at issues in Welsh politics that might get overlooked. Sometimes that means looking under a rock and not finding anything particularly interesting. Back in January I noticed that the Welsh Government issued new guidelines for school toilets. As a challenge to myself I decided to actually try to blog on it and make it as interesting as possible.

It's easy to criticise present and previous Welsh Government's for focusing on minor "quality of life" concerns just so they can say they've done something. However in this case there's a serious side. Back in 2005 an outbreak of E-coli in south Wales schools affected 150 people, lead to 31 hospitalisations and the death of 5-year old Mason Jones from Caerphilly. There've also been smaller outbreaks since; Wrexham in 2009, Bangor and Swansea in November 2011.

In the Pennington Inquiry which followed the 2005 outbreak, it was recommended that the Welsh Government look at toilet facilities in schools. As a result Education Minister Leighton Andrews (Lab, Rhondda) and Health Minister Lesley Griffiths (Lab, Wrexham) carried out a joint venture between their departments. They surveyed 1,800 pupils and 71% described their school toilets as "horrible" or "quite bad". Only 3% described them as "nice".

The pan-UK campaign Bog Standard was set up in 2003 to raise awareness of school toilets and provide information to schools, architects, parents and pupils on what they can do to improve them. They published "Lifting the lid on the nation's school toilets", which was taken up by the Children's Commissioner for Wales, and formed part of the foundation for the new guidelines.

Poor school toilets can spread diseases, lead to health problems in later life if pupils are reluctant to use them (ie. chronic constipation, "small bladder syndrome") and as an "adult-free zone" can be breeding grounds for bullying and sometimes lack the basic essentials for privacy.

The new guidelines recommend several examples of "good practice":
  • Schools will require a written toilet policy with the participation of pupils and governors.
  • Toilets should be free to use at all hours a school is open.
  • Staggered checks of toilets by staff as a deterrent to bad behaviour.
  • Toilets should be warm enough in the winter.
  • No location of drinking water in toilet areas.
  • Proper supervision of hand washing amongst younger children.
  • Proper provision and disposal of sanitary products in girl's toilets for those aged 8 or over.
  • Toilets should be cleaned at the end of every school day, with cloths, mops etc. not used anywhere else in a school.
  • Toilets should be inspected, adequately budgeted and inspections properly recorded.

All well and good, a lot of common sense there, but you also have crackers like:


  • Disabled toilet cubicles should be big enough to manoeuvre a wheelchair (simply revolutionary).
  • Toilet paper dispensers should be mounted where they are easily accessible ( as opposed to hanging from the roof like a piñata?) .
  • All toilets should have seats and should be strong enough to cope with a high volume of users (I realise childhood obesity is a concern but....).
  • Malodours should be prevented within toilet areas (kids love the smell of fresh turd in the morning......smells like.....victory).
  • CCTV should be considered at the entrance/exit when "all other options have failed" regarding supervision (....yeeeeeah....good luck with that one).

As far as I know, the Welsh Government are the first in the UK to publish "good practice" guidelines like this. Very well intentioned, very relevant with regard good hygiene practice. I'm not criticising it.

However, like their approach to sex education, I wish the Welsh Government would learn that sometimes 45 pages of guidance can be whittled down to under 10 pages. Separate the guidance that goes out to relevant people/authorities (shorter, less bureaucratic) from the documents and studies justifying it (longer, more legalese).

Everyone's happier.



0 comments:

Post a Comment