AN SNP committee convenor stopped an opposition councillor quizzing Glasgow’s education director about cuts to teacher numbers in the city.

At the council’s Education Committee, Fiona Higgins, Labour councillor, asked about the impact cuts to teachers would have on equality work.

But when Douglas Hutchison, director of education, said he didn’t recognise her figure of a 10% cut the councillor wanted to pursue it further.

READ NEXT:Three days to to search banana boxes for cocaine court hears

However, Graham Campbell, convenor of the committee, ruled the question couldn’t be taken, leading to a lengthy argument about standing orders -the committee rules- and accusations of "making up the rules".

Higgins said she was interested in the culturally responsive curriculum and the amount of development work going into it.

Higgins had said: “I know development work is time-consuming. Given that we are losing 10% of teachers in the city I want to know how we plan to mitigate that to manage to do this curriculum work.”

Hutchison said: “We are not losing 10% of the teachers in the city, that would be the first point to make.”

He added: “That work continues. It is showcased at the promoting anti-racism together in education event each year.”

Higgins asked: “So you don’t perceive that there will be an unmanageable time pressure on development work such as this when we do lose teacher numbers?”

Mr Hutchison repeated: “I said already, I don’t recognise your claim of 10% so the short answer is no.”

The councillor persisted and said: “So if we are losing 172 teachers, my question is valid”.

READ NEXT: Nine year-old girl's nose bitten off by bull dog in attack

Councillor Campbell, who was chairing the meeting, then intervened and stopped any further questions being put.

He said: “I think I’m going to stop you there because it’s not germane to the paper in front of us.”

He added there were other places she could ask the question.

A discussion about council standing orders ensued with Higgins arguing her question was valid and Campbell adamant it was not.

Higgins said: “Standing orders point 32 sub par 3. I can ask this question because it pertains to the business of how we enact policy. Equality is impacted by losing teachers.”

Campbell replied: “It’s not actually. It’s not about numbers of teachers. I’m going to rule and I think I made myself clear on this one.”

Higgins countered: “You’re in breach of the standing orders chair.”

Campbell said there had been previous opportunities for questions to be asked at other meetings and they weren’t taken, adding “even though I encouraged you to do so”.

When Higgins asked him to read the standing orders Campbell told committee staff to “stop recording”.

The spat became heated when Campbell said: “I’m not going to do that” and Higgins replied: “You shouldn’t have to. You’re the chair, you get paid to know it.”

Campbell replied: “Excuse me, I’m not liking the way you’re speaking to me. I’ve already made it a ruling and you know that it’s tangential and not related to the paper in front of us.

"You know that and you’ve had chances to ask this question.”

Higgins hit back adding: “But you’re wrong and you can’t make up the rules.”

After a short conversation with a committee official who said her advice was “If you wish to proceed or wish the question answered then it gets answered.

“If you’re happy it's been answered and you wish to move on, you move on.”

Campbell then ruled: “I’m going to say this very carefully to you. I’m satisfied the director has answered the question correctly and I’m satisfied it is not germane to this report.

“However, I’m certainly happy for it to come to a future meeting where a report with some facts comes.”