Author: Forest Policy Group

Ownership of Forests is Now More Concentrated Than in 2012

In 2012, we (the Forest Policy Group) commissioned a report on the ownership of Scotland’s forests from the writer and researcher, Andy Wightman. His report showed that Scotland’s forests were owned by comparatively few owners and that this concentrated ownership stood in stark contrast to most of the rest of Europe.

In 2022, we decided to ask Andy to update the statistics and find out what changes, if any, had taken place over the ten years since the publication of the original report. His report, Forest Ownership in Scotland 2022 Ten Year Later, is published today. It is the first of two reports, the second of which, authored by Jon Hollingdale, reviews forest policy in relation to landownership over the year since 2012.

So, what has changed in the ownership of Scotland’s forests? The report contains an analysis of the ownership of woodland in the same four 50km x 50km squares that were examined in 2012 allowing for a direct and accurate comparison. The research identified the ownership of 221,053ha of forested land – 86.6% of all the forest in the sample area.

The extent of forest in the sample area increased by 7.7% compared with 2012 with publicly owned forests decreasing by 2.2% and the privately owned extent increasing by 11.6%. Private forest holdings have become larger with the extent of land held in holdings of over 200ha and over 100ha both increasing.

Over the samples area, 73.5% of all privately owned forest is held in holdings of over 200ha compared with 70.8% in 2012. Holdings over 100ha account for 78.7% of the privately-owned forest, a slight reduction on the 79.2% identified in 2012.

Whilst the extent of forest has increased, the number who own the majority of it has decreased resulting in a greater concentration of ownership compared with ten years earlier. In 2022, 75% of the privately-owned forest (130,979ha) was owned by 164 owners compared with 75% (115,955ha) being owned by 199 owners in 2012.

Ownership remains dominated by financial investment owners and estates with 44.2% of the extent where ownership was identified accounted for by financial and investment owners (41.8% in 2012) and 42.8% owned by traditional estates (46.2% in 2012).

The majority of private forest owners are absentee owners who account for 56.3% of the extent (56.8% in 2012). The majority of the extent is owned by owners who live out-with Scotland in the rest of the UK (68.3% in 2022 compared with 50.2% in 2012) whilst overseas ownership has remained much the same (24.3% of the privately-owned extent in 2022 compared with 23.6% in 2012. As a consequence, the percentage of the area owned by owners domiciled in Scotland has declined from 26.2% in 2012 to 7.4% in 2022.

In summary, therefore, the ownership of privately-owned forest in the sample area have become more concentrated overall and more focused on investment and financial interests based elsewhere in the UK.

Such a pattern continues to be an outlier in European terms where private ownership is far more diverse and small scale and where local government plays a much greater role (for example, 20% of the total forest area of France is owned by municipalities). The reasons for this are historical, legal and cultural but are rooted the land reforms that took place across Europe in past centuries.

These include the abolition of primogeniture and conferring inheritance rights to land on children (something still lacking in Scotland), the abolition of feudal tenure, providing tenants with ownership and strong local government.

The report concludes that ownership matters and that providing greater opportunities to individuals, businesses and communities can only be achieved through reform to land governance. In the immediate term, this requires better information on the pattern of forest ownership, something which is in the power of Scottish Ministers to collect in order to better inform public policy.

Both reports are available to download in links below:

Report 1 – FPG Forest Ownership

Report 2 – FPG Forest Ownership Policy Review

Author: Scottish Land Commission

New guidance puts local people at the heart of land decisions

The Scottish Land Commission is taking a groundbreaking step to ensure the well-being of local communities by introducing fresh guidelines that emphasise the importance of community-centred land use decisions.

As demand for rural land in Scotland continues to rise, driven in part by the emerging potential of natural capital, this new, practical guidance provides a set of fundamental principles for landowners to follow. These principles are designed to ensure that communities directly benefit from the evolving value and use of land.

The important new guidance outlines a series of key principles landowners should follow to ensure communities benefit directly from new value and land use change.

The major piece of work from the Scottish Land Commission entitled, ‘Delivering Community Benefits from Land’ is the first guidance on the subject and looks to guide government, landowners and investors to be able to deliver in practice on the Scottish Government’s clear expectation that investment in Scotland’s land should deliver community benefit.

The guidance follows the Scottish Land Commission’s publication of policy recommendations on making a just transition, which include proposals to strengthen regulation of carbon and nature markets, build the requirement for community benefit into public grants and market frameworks and build greater capacity supporting communities to act.

Emma Cooper, Head of Land Rights and Responsibilities at the Scottish Land Commission said: “Making the most of Scotland’s land means not only involving communities in decision-making about land, but also considering the many ways in which the community can benefit from the way land is owned, managed and used. This goes beyond engagement, to empowerment.

“Sustainable communities need affordable housing, quality jobs, local businesses, access to outdoor spaces and so much more – land is key to delivering this. With so much at stake, we believe that landowners and investors can no longer afford to see community benefits as an optional extra but as a priority when making decisions about land.  

“We also know through our work that many land owners want to support local communities to achieve their needs and aspirations, but simply aren’t sure how to approach it. This guidance sets out practical ways this can be done.”

The guidance also features clear examples of land use that impacts communities directly and positively, delivering a range of benefits, from Tayvallich Initiative to Balcaskie Estate and Peatland ACTION.

Launching just after the Scottish Government’s commitment to develop a nature market framework, the guidance provides a definition on community benefits and sets out a range of opportunities for landowners, managers, communities and investors to deliver them.

The Scottish Government is committed to seeking private investment in land to deliver its nature and climate goals and to strengthening the approach set out in its ‘interim principles for responsible investment in natural capital’.

As well as creating new risks in the concentration of land ownership and increasing land values, this land use change also opens up opportunities to create better models in which communities have more agency in decisions and ownership. Clarity on what is expected in relation to community benefits is one part of realising this opportunity. 

Emma added: “As we see increasing demand in land acquisition for nature and climate action, potentially backed by significant private finance investment, it is critical that community benefit should be built in as a normal part of the approach by both aspiring and existing landowners. Much can be done in practice now, even while wider policy and market frameworks develop.”

The new guidance follows on from the Scottish Land Commission’s recently launched three-year strategic plan, which focuses on people, power and prosperity and how those key elements can help Scotland on its land reform journey.

The public body’s vision is that the ownership and use of land supports thriving people and places.

The Scottish Land Commission provides advice and recommendations for reforms to law and policy as well as leadership for change in culture and practice, working to create a Scotland where everybody can benefit from the ownership and use of the nation’s land and buildings.

To read the ‘Delivering Community Benefits from Land’ Guidance, visit landcommission.gov.scot/downloads/65572c79e77be_Guidance on Community Benefits–16.11.23.pdf

Author: West Calder & Harburn Community Development Trust

Find out more about the development of this project

Scotland has a proud history of co-operation and is a UK leader yet has no dedicated celebration of that. The centre will interpret and celebrate Scottish Cooperative heritage tracing the links from the local to the global. It will be a centre where the lessons from, and potential of, co-operative models (as well as other social and value driven enterprises) can be shared and taught. We are working with Cooperative Development Scotland, Co-operative Education Trust, local and national schools, universities and further education colleges to create in-centre and outreach resources that will promote co-operation as a real world solution to modern challenges such as inequality and climate change.

West Calder Co-operative Society was a strong regional society that went on to become part of Scotmid. Its iconic Central Bakery building was completed in 1909 and was designed by renowned Glasgow architect William Baillie – a rare example of an industrial building by him, find out more about the Bakery building. A significant and important building regionally and nationally (being a combined bakery and power station), it will be renovated thoughtfully with support from Historic Environment Scotland to produce 1200sqm of modern, sustainable and functional space.

The Scottish Cooperative Discovery and Activity Centre will be a £6m investment in a region of central Scotland that is home to many areas of disadvantage (many of which are ex-mining communities where co-op heritage is strong). It will create at least 65 construction jobs during development and 22 roles upon opening. It will offer training and work experience to over 150 students ever year (as well as numerous more through outreach in schools and colleges). We are working with The National Lottery Heritage Fund (£1.2m), Scottish Government’s Regeneration Capital Growth Fund (£1.4m), Historic Environment Scotland (£0.5m) among other funders, to deliver the capital works and community activities.

A community share issue is planned for summer 2023 and a strong funding strategy is being actively delivered. A £300k (NLHF and own funds)

Development Stage is being completed and the project has been positively reviewed and gathered impressive partner and community support.

We are discovering a large amount of artefacts, archives and stories – both locally and nationally. We intend to co-produce stories and interpretation with communities, schools and people often excluded and to do so creatively. With support from Museums and Galleries Scotland (MGS), The Cooperative Heritage Trust, Coop Group, Paisley Museums, Glasgow Museum, The Scottish Shale Museum, New Lanark and other key heritage partners, we will develop a Scottish Cooperative Collection that not only safeguards, interprets and celebrates a proud local and national heritage but which makes it relevant to our world today. We have had great support from West Lothian Museums and Heritage Service with whom we have a museums collecting and development agreement.

West Calder & Harburn Community Development Trust is a community-led charity (SC043914) set up to take forward the local Community Action Plan for West Calder and Harburn in West Lothian. Alongside this project, they have met community aims by building a skatepark, running heritage festivals, upgrading paths, renovating the village square, running a community woods and garden, running a community café and organising regular community events including West Lothian’s largest free-entry fireworks display. They have negotiated 3 windfarm partnerships to manage £130K a year in community benefit funds and have managed local improvement and community development projects leveraging around £2m to date in outside funding into the community.

Community Ownership and Share Issue

West Calder & Harburn Community Development Trust (WCHCDT) have owned the building since 2020 and will retain ownership on behalf of the local community following the redevelopment. The Scottish Co-operative Discovery Centre attraction will be operated by a new company called The Scottish Cooperative Discovery Centre Ltd. This new company will lease the building from WCHCDT and gift any surplus (profits) back to them to be used for the good of the community. The relationship between the two organisations is shown

The Scottish Cooperative Discovery Ltd is a Community Benefit Society (regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority) and it is able to raise money through members/investors buying Community Shares – find out more about our share issues.

This structure has been designed to ensure that the local community ALWAYS retains ownership and ultimate control of the asset while also including those with expertise and interest in the heritage we will be celebrating.

Author: The Ferret

Members of a new white nationalist organisation formed after the “UK’s most dangerous group on the British far right” splintered are members of Scottish community councils, we can reveal, prompting calls for an urgent investigation.

Homeland was formed in April after some members of the white nationalist outfit Patriotic Alternative (PA) left to set-up their own group.

The former PA activists now with Homeland include Simon Crane, now a member of East Calder and District Community Council. Crane was also an executive member of the West Lothian Joint Forum of Community Councils. In 2022 he hosted extremists on a podcast with a co-host later jailed for sharing terrorist materials.

Another Homeland member, David Gardner, has remained treasurer of Forfar Community Council in Angus despite the local body promising a probe after research group Hope Not Hate unearthed racist comments he allegedly made online via a pseudonym. He continues to write blogs for Homeland using his real name.

David Gardner has remained Forfar Community Council’s treasurer despite the local body saying it was “shocked” by his association with Homeland

This is not the first time community council seats have been targeted by far right activists. In 2019, The Ferret revealed that the New British Union – modelled on Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists – planned to put candidates in Scotland.

In response to the latest revelations about community council membership, concerned politicians have written to the heads of their local authorities, urging them to investigate Homeland’s community councillors. One MSP said many would find it “chilling” that a group with “racism and extremism” at its core had community representatives.

However, Homeland defended its councillors as “upstanding members of their local communities”. “Left-wing extremists” and politicians who “abuse their power to oppress dissent” were attempting to smear its members with “perceived wrongdoing”, it argued.

In May, Hope Not Hate revealed that Gardner was Forfar Community Council’s treasurer. The group revealed racist and anti-semitic comments – including holocaust denial – he had allegedly made online under the name Gordon Freeman.

In 2020 The Ferret infiltrated a neo-Nazi chat group where someone using the name Gordon Freeman made racist comments and references to Nazism. Some in the group posed with weapons, shared a bomb-making manual, quoted a mass murderer, and said members should kill “for the greater good”.

The same neo-Nazi Telegram group also included Homeland’s chairman, Kenny Smith, who used the chat to recruit members of Patriotic Alternative (PA) Scotland – Homeland’s predecessor.

The group member using the name Gordon Freeman said they were “from up passed Dundee [sic]” and coordinated one of PA Scotland’s publicity stunts in which members pose with a “White Lives Matter” banner.

In the chat, Freeman claimed to have personally ordered the banner. In May, HNH alleged that Gardner was behind an August 2022 “White Lives Matter” banner drop in Dundee, supporting claims that Freeman and Gardner are one and the same. 

Members of the chat group also discussed starting an activist group. When names for the group were debated, Freeman warned against the name making reference to National Socialism (NS) – or Nazism. “The grug [caveman] brain is hard wired to ignore anything remotely NS until its ready to listen [sic],” Freeman said.

The user also appeared to make reference to a race war – a common topic in far right circles. “…if white lads can get tougher and stronger, teaching each other and having their backs when the SHTF [shit hits the fan], thats a good thing [sic],” said Freeman.

“Eventually they will realise that our way of life is incompatible with the majority of blacks and almost all of the jews. But by then, they might be a bit more prepared for whats ahead [sic]”.

On 7 May, a report in The Herald made reference to Hope Not Hate’s revelations about Gardner. A spokesman for the community council told the newspaper they were “shocked by the allegation that one of its new members has been associated with a far right organisation”.

“Membership of community councils is apolitical, but it is imperative that we all adhere to the terms of the Community Councillors’ Code of Conduct, which includes the Equality and Human Rights Commission rules, at all times,” they added.

“We are grateful that this has been brought to our attention and will investigate further.”

But The Ferret has learned that Gardner has remained an active member of both the community council and Homeland. Minutes of meetings on 18 May and 17 August show that Gardner continued to attend meetings as a community councillor. Gardner has also continued to write blogs for Homeland’s website under his real name.

In one July post, which criticises opposition to the UK Government’s plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, Gardner wrote: “So a nation with statistically zero whites is too dangerous to send people to. I think we could be on to something here.”

Angus MP Dave Doogan said of Gardner’s role as community councillor: “This is a deeply concerning allegation and I have written to the chief executive of Angus Council asking for the council’s democratic services function to investigate this situation.

“Clearly membership of a far right organisation is incompatible with the aims and ambitions of any community council. These hard working organisations are there to represent and promote the views of all elements of our communities, not select sections.”

Tom O’Brien, Forfar Community Council’s secretary said: “We are unable to comment at this time as we are in discussion as a community council with the local authority.

Minutes of meetings held by the West Lothian Joint Forum of Community Councils in July, October and November 2022 list Crane as an executive member, and as an East Calder community councillor.

Crane did not attend a January 2023 forum meeting, according to minutes, but was still listed as a member. He was not named as a member or attendee in subsequent meeting minutes.

Simon Crane of East Calder Community Council hosted extremists on a podcast with a co-host later jailed for sharing terrorist materials.

The Ferret understands that Crane still sits on the community council, but it is unknown how long he has done so. The community council did not respond to requests to comment and has not published minutes since August 2019.

Local MSP Angela Constance promised to press the head of the wider local authority about Crane’s membership. ”These allegations, if true, are very worrying,” she said. “I am raising this matter with the chief executive of West Lothian Council asking him to investigate and respond to me as a matter of urgency.”

A video shared by Homeland on 1 September featured Crane, Gardner and two England-based members of Homeland, all of whom claimed to be community councillors. The video was shot outside the Bishopbriggs Library in East Dunbartonshire.

On 26 September the group claimed to have six community councillors, with the latest in North East Scotland. In a subsequent video, posted on 5 October, Smith claimed that his group had three councillors in Scotland, and three in England. The Homeland chairman also claimed to be a former community councillor. 

Scottish Greens MSP Maggie Chapman said: “Many will find it concerning and chilling that activists from a reactionary and bigoted group like Homeland could have any influence in their communities.

“In Scotland we have a long and proud history of standing against the far right and the racism and extremism that is at the core of their worldview. As their strategies adapt then so must ours. Organisations like The Ferret are playing a vital role by exposing them.

“The values and politics that groups like Homeland represent have no place in a modern or progressive Scotland.”

A Homeland spokesperson said: “We wholeheartedly reject the use of ‘white nationalist’ as it doesn’t reflect our political position at all – we are nationalists, plain and simple. We are not a skin colour; we are members of distinct ethnic groups with their own culture, religion, history and communities.

“Simon Crane and Dave Gardner are upstanding members of their local communities who have served their neighbourhoods as dedicated community councillors for several years without incident.

“Left wing extremists attempting to link them to perceived wrongdoing through various degrees of separation is ludicrous. They represent their communities as they should do and will not be intimidated by the lies of politically motivated cowards who would seek to outlaw all opinion but their own.

“Dave Doogan’s, Angela Constance’s and Maggie Chapman’s comments demonstrate that they believe only people who share their liberal views should be able to engage in local politics, and that Scots who stand up for the interests of Scots should be branded and excluded.

“These politicians don’t believe their role is to represent the people, but to tell the people what to think and abuse their power to oppress dissent. They all represent parties who’s [sic] politicians have been found guilty of offences ranging from embezzlement to sexual assault at an alarming rate in recent years; the crime in mainstream parties is of far greater significance than the non-crimes of Homeland Party members.”

Author: Harriet Sherwood, The Guardian

Among the challenges faced by the Windrush generation when they arrived to work in Britain in the 1940s, 50s and 60s was the refusal by many banks and building societies to allow them to open accounts, deposit savings or take out loans.

Instead, they set up their own community schemes, based on those that had existed for generations in the Caribbean and elsewhere, that relied on trust.

Now the Bank of England is hosting an exhibition in partnership with Museumand, the National Caribbean Heritage Museum, on “pardner hand” – a collective savings scheme that is still thriving 75 years after the Empire Windrush docked at Tilbury in Essex.

“Britain’s banking system didn’t welcome us as their clients,” said Catherine Ross, who came to England as a seven-year-old in 1958. “The reason why we came was to make money, but we had nowhere to keep it safe. People were forced to keep cash under their mattresses.”

The new arrivals turned to a centuries-old system whereby people banded together in groups for the purpose of saving, known as pardner hand. It was a type of Rosca (rotating savings and credit association), used by people around the world, especially when access to traditional banking services is limited.

Under the system, a group of people agree to save money together over a set period of time, with each individual handing their cash to one of their number for safekeeping. Each week, one “pardner” receives a lump sum made up of that week’s total contributions.

“Trust was a huge factor,” said Ross. “But most people set up pardner hands with people from their island, so you knew who you were involved with.”

Her parents resented their exclusion from the banking system, she said. “We were invited to come to Britain, and we assumed we were wanted and there would be fair play. Instead, we had to work as a community to look after ourselves.”

For her parents, the pardner hands was a lifeline, she said. “But they also used the under-the-bed system.”

The exhibition includes interviews with and photographs of members of the Windrush generation that used pardner hands. Savings were used to fund businesses, buy homes and pay for weddings and funerals.

“Pardner hand is part of the extraordinary contribution that the Windrush generation and their descendants have made to life in the UK,” said Jennifer Adam, the curator at the Bank of England museum.

It is the first in a series of planned exhibitions at the Bank relating to themes of financial exclusion.

Pardner hand is still thriving in communities of Caribbean heritage in the UK, with many schemes run on apps. “It doesn’t matter if it’s only a small amount, it’s good discipline and can make a difference, especially now,” said Linda Burrell, Ross’s daughter.

“It’s good that the Bank of England is telling this story and acknowledging what happened. I hope people will reflect, and understand that financial exclusion is still happening today.”

Pardner Hand: A Caribbean Answer to British Banking Exclusion opens on 22 June at the Bank of England Museum and runs until June 2024

Author: Tim Harford

Just over a decade ago, Egypt’s Coptic Christians chose their new pope. The names of three favoured candidates were placed in a glass bowl, then a blindfolded boy selected from the trio at random. Religious people can appeal to the idea that the outcome wasn’t truly random; God himself decided on Tawadros II. Yet it is a seemingly unsettling way to deal with a serious decision.

In secular settings, randomness is usually reserved for gambling and games. The words “postcode lottery” are not uttered in joyous celebration. With the notable exception of jury service, we do not usually draw lots to allocate duties, jobs or privileges.

Perhaps that is a mistake. Why not — bear with me here — allocate academic funding by lottery? Traditionally, a grant-maker would have a pot of money, invite applications, then rank them all and give grants to the best. But an alternative is to deploy a simple cut-off: every application that seems credible enough to take seriously goes into the pot and the grants are distributed at random.

Ten years ago, the Health Research Council of New Zealand began awarding funding along these lines. Several other grant-makers have followed suit, including the British Academy, which now awards about 500 grants each year using a lottery.

One benefit of this approach is efficiency. The British Academy grants are not large, £10,000 at most, and a thorough evaluation might cost nearly as much as the grant itself.

Another attraction is diversity. Hetan Shah, chief executive of the British Academy, has been pleased to see more grants go to researchers from ethnic minorities and to researchers from institutions that previously hadn’t been funded. This is partly because such researchers have been more willing to apply under the randomised process.

While a quick, transparent and even-handed process is simpler, randomisation can offer us much more than that. Whenever there is an idea, policy, treatment or procedure of uncertain value, randomly giving it to some and not to others is the ideal way to figure out what its effects truly are.

Again and again, we have assumed that expert judgment is enough, only to find that the experts didn’t really know. That is the lesson of medical history, where doctors would confidently prescribe a course of treatment that turned out to be harmful. That was true in the time of bloodletting and is still true in the modern age.

For example, antiarrhythmic drugs were widely deployed in the 1970s and 1980s in the belief that they calmed errant heartbeats and therefore saved lives. That belief was only properly tested in 1987, when a large five-year randomised trial began. It was stopped halfway through when it became clear that, while the drugs did indeed stop the errant heartbeats, they had a tendency to stop the regular heartbeats too. According to Druin Burch’s Taking the Medicine, these drugs killed 50,000 people in the US alone. It took a proper randomised trial to put a stop to the well-meaning but fatal error.

The stakes are lower at the British Academy, and the variables that might be studied are less stark than the death rate. But the principle is the same: once you randomly allocate anything, you can compare the recipients with those who missed out and start to gauge the impact.

Philip Clarke, a professor of health economics at the University of Oxford, was part of a team evaluating the New Zealand grants and will also be assessing the new approach at the British Academy. He hopes to be able to figure out, for example, whether receiving a grant enables a researcher to stay in academia, to publish more, to be cited more by other researchers, to secure other grants or to win media coverage in their research.

Without randomisation, all of these impacts are nearly impossible to gauge. Did being selected for a grant help you to publish a widely cited article? Or was the grant itself irrelevant, and you received it because you were the kind of person who publishes good work anyway? With randomisation, the impact of the grants can be measured, at least in principle.

We shouldn’t stop there. Randomisation presents a golden opportunity to learn. And once you start looking for those opportunities, you see them everywhere. Not long ago, Ben Goldacre and his colleagues at the OpenPrescribing project analysed the prescription behaviour of clinics around the NHS, figuring out who was quick to follow the latest prescription guidelines and who was prescribing expensive or outdated treatments.

When Keith Ridge, then chief pharmacist of the NHS, saw the results, he asked for a list of the worst offenders, planning to upbraid each of them personally. Goldacre had another suggestion: conduct a randomised trial of Keith Ridge, by giving him a random assortment of the worst offenders to see whether those berated actually improved as a result.

I’ve written before about researchers who used random allocations to study the impact of substantial business development grants to Nigerian entrepreneurs, or small grants to tiny Sri Lankan businesses rebuilding after the terrible tsunami of 2004. Since there is a limited amount of cash, and many deserving recipients, and since everyone can see the fairness of drawing lots, why not turn scarce resources into insight?

Perhaps it is a stretch from the Coptic pope to Keith Ridge, but it should not be a stretch to use more lotteries — and to learn from them.

Author: Joyce MacMillan, The Scotsman

As the climate crisis intensifies, and the political architecture of the post-war world continues to collapse around us, one thing we can safely say about the 21st century – with its politics of continuous crisis management – is that we do not live in an age of reform.

Reform, in its true sense, means planned, deliberate and hopeful change towards the greater wellbeing and empowerment of every citizen; and so it’s perhaps not surprising that in these apocalyptic times, the practice of real reform – as opposed to deregulatory pseudo-reform – has withered on the political vine.

Yet despite the times, it seems almost beyond dispute that there is one area of Scottish public life now crying out for major reform; and that is Scottish local government, battered and bruised by a generation of broken promises, stripped of most of its autonomous powers, increasingly treated as an inadequately-funded delivery arm of central government, and hit by a further blow last week, when Humza Yousaf used his SNP conference speech to announce that after a short period of relaxation since 2021, when councils were briefly allowed to vary local council tax rates, the Scottish Government would once again be imposing a council tax freeze.

Now it is – as many have pointed out – difficult to count the ways in which this announcement was an exceptionally bad idea. In the first place, it was made on the basis of no consultation at all, with the Scottish Cabinet, with parliament, with local authorities, or with the SNP’s partners in government the Scottish Greens; and demonstrates just how far the worst top-down practices of an abysmal era of Westminster governance have come to influence the Scottish Government.

Secondly, the abrupt announcement represented a blatant breach of the Verity House Agreement, concluded between local authorities and the Scottish Government only four months ago, which envisaged a new era of close joint working between government and local authorities.

Then finally, of course, it was potentially a bad idea for all those who depend on vital local authority services. Freedom to vary council tax at least enables councils to enter into a conversation with local communities about what they are willing to pay to keep those services going. The council tax freeze, by contrast, shuts down that local conversation, and once again places those services at the mercy of hard-pressed central government funding.

The SNP’s repeated failures in dealing with local government, though, are only part of a wider picture, the roots of which lie in poorly-conceived changes dating back to the 1960s; and, of course, in the failure of all parties, once in power at national level, to treat local government with the respect it deserves and needs. This is certainly a subject on which neither of Scotland’s major opposition parties has a better record than that of the SNP. Conservative “austerity” has starved all UK local authorities of vital resources for more than a decade, since 2010. And only three weeks ago, during the Rutherglen by-election, Scottish Labour was deploring the end of the council tax freeze as a cruel new cost for cash-strapped voters; before suddenly, after the freeze was reimposed, discovering previously unplumbed depths of concern about its unfair and regressive nature.

The whole subject of local authority finance has become a mere political football, in other words; and meanwhile, the underlying structure of our local government only adds to its continuing weakness. Scotland’s last major local government reform – the abolition of the regions, in 1996 – left us with a fractured and messy single-tier pattern of 32 local authorities which, as many have observed, are mostly neither big enough to act as strategic regional authorities, nor small enough to be considered truly local.

The local government changes of the 1970s, in particular, often simply destroyed local government at the town and county levels that meant most to people in community terms. Scotland is full of ancient burghs of great dignity – from St. Andrews and Arbroath to Falkirk and Kelso – which now, absurdly, have no town councils of their own. And the final blow is that the poor structure and resourcing of local authorities in Scotland, over two generations, has reduced public interest in and respect for this level of government to the point where a positive restructuring of it, necessarily involving some investment, would not be a popular cause.Yet in the whole field of Scottish governance, there has probably never been a stronger case for a root-and-branch, well worked out reform of an entire system – one conducted not by the Scottish Government, but at the level of a fully-fledged Royal or National Commission, at a substantial arm’s length from day-to-day politics. As the Scottish Government’s current consultation on more power for local communities acknowledges in its title, Democracy Matters; and democracy at local level arguably matters most of all, in developing a truly democratic culture, in empowering ordinary citizens to help shape their own future, and in generating national policy that enjoys widespread support, when it comes to effective implementation.What is needed, though, is not yet more tinkering with an increasingly broken system, but a fundamental re-think, which looks towards the richer and more multi-layered local government landscape of some of our north European neighbours, and entrenches the powers and rights of local government in our constitution.Nor should the current absence of widespread public support for such reform be used as an excuse. Whether Scotland becomes independent or not, the times now demand a new settlement that brings our towns, villages, rural areas and cities back to life as political actors with real power, and real agency in shaping their own future and that of the country; and the sooner we begin a process of real reform, towards that goal, the brighter that future is likely to be.

Author: Eve McLachlan, P&J

As Community Land Week events continue across the country, eyes are on the current state of community ownership in Scotland.

Published earlier this month, the ‘Community Ownership in Scotland 2022’ report lays out the most recent figures.

A staggering 72% of community-owned land in Scotland is in the Na h-Eileanan Siar constituency.

That reflects a succession of community buyouts in the Outer Hebrides in recent years.

Overall, however, there has only been a 2% increase in community-owned assets in Scotland since 2021.

“We’re not surprised, but we’re disappointed,” says Linsay Chalmers of Community Land Scotland, regarding the figures.

While the trends around community land ownership were already known, she says it was “stark to see it laid out like that”.

So why has community land ownership not caught on as successfully outside of the Western Isles?

Finlay MacLennan runs Community Land Outer Hebrides (CLOH), which works to support community ownership across the Western Isles.

He says that it’s not just one factor that led to so many community buyouts.

It’s true, he says, that people in the Western Isles have a strong “connectedness to the place” where they live.

“But that’s not unique to the Western Isles – it’s not unique to Scotland.”

Community land buyouts ‘righting historical injustices’

It is painful recent history combined with that cultural background that has, he says, motivated communities to reclaim their islands.

“The opportunity of land ownership […] played at people’s heartstrings a little in terms of righting some of the historical injustices there have been, in terms of people’s relationship with the land.”

He points not only to the Highland Clearances, but to the promise of land after the First World War that “wasn’t realised until [islanders] forced the issue themselves”.

“So it’s kind of like we owe it to ourselves as a community, historically, to take the opportunity.”

Eigg was the first Scottish island bought by the community in the 1990s.

That opportunity came after the buyout of North Assynt Estate in 1993 proved it community ownership could work. The island of Eigg quickly followed suit – and that kicked off a chain reaction across the Western Isles.

Help from the Government came soon after, with the 2003 Land Reform (Scotland) Act and the Scottish Land Fund.

Mr MacLennan points out that, for one big reason, community ownership was able to catch on in the 2000s more quickly than it might have today.

“Land valuations were low,” he says. “It wasn’t so much of a financial stretch for communities.”

But money, Mr MacLennan points out, is only part of the equation.

‘The right people, at the right time’

“It’s people,” he says. “The right people, at the right time, with the right skill set to be able to build the appropriate connections and bring their community along with them on the journey.”

And it’s not just the people in the individual areas themselves that help the buyouts happen.

One of the reasons community land ownership took off in the Western Isles, Mr MacLennan says, is through the work of Stornoway-based solicitor Simon Fraser.

Mr Fraser, who died in 2016, worked on the legal side of buyouts across the islands.

But despite their shared history and background, Mr MacLennan says every community-owned area is unique. And that’s where CLOH comes in.

South Uist Estate, which includes South Uist, Benbecula, and Eriskay, was bought by the community in 2006. Photo: Sandy McCook

“It’s about coordinating between the groups when they’re all coming across the same opportunities and the same challenges,” he says. “So they’re all learning from each other and sharing their own experiences […] and ultimately all trying to achieve the same thing, of sustainability for their own communities.”

But even as they learn from each other, the community landowners of the Western Isles are teaching the world.

What can the rest of Scotland learn from the Western Isles?

Mr MacLennan says that the Outer Hebrides are important not just as an example of how community buyouts can be achieved, but of what happens next.

“These are the experts – they’re the people who have been and done it,” he says.

“For a lot of them they now have 10, 15 years of experience of what it looks like on the other end.”

Part of CLOH’s work is now not only supporting community land ownership in the Western Isles, but helping other communities learn about what a buyout might look like for them.

Earlier this year, there was an “exchange”, where groups from across Scotland came and visited the Western Isles.

A mix of groups got involved, Mr MacLennan says. “There were some there that had been involved in the community land journey as long as some of the groups here, but were still interested to hear what developments had happened here.”

“Sharing and learning is very key.”

Author: Morag Lindsay, The Courier

When residents in Glenfarg learned their public bus service was being axed, they grabbed the wheel themselves.

The Perthshire village already had a community minibus to take groups on outings.

So, organisers decided to step up a gear and take over the running of the 55 service to Kinross.

They now have a charitable company – the Glenfarg Community Transport Group – with three salaried bus drivers and a 10-strong squad of volunteers.

The Glenfarg-Kinross service runs 11 times a day in both directions, and carries 250-300 passengers a week.

That’s twice as many trips a day as there were previously.

And they have just introduced a 7.10am commuter service, which connects with the bus to Edinburgh at the Kinross park-and-ride site.

It’s been quite the journey, says Glenfarg Community Transport Group chairman Drew Smart.

“What we’re doing is unique – this mix of community and service routes,” he said.

“I like to describe us as a cross between Dad’s Army and On The Buses.”

The villagers had never set their sights on becoming the next Stagecoach.

But when they learned the 55 service was under threat – for the second time in as many years – due to the closure of the local operator Earnside Coaches, they realised radical action was needed.

They held talks with Perth and Kinross Council and it was agreed that they would enter into a public social partnership with a view to taking over the route.

Volunteers were sought, professional drivers were recruited and a pilot scheme earlier this year demonstrated that they were more than up to the job.

In the first week of operation the group surpassed their own target and clocked up more than 200 passenger journeys.

Last week, they hit a new record with 81 passengers in a single day.

That’s dozens of car journeys saved, says Drew.

It also means people who don’t have access to a car can get to work, school, doctor’s appointments, haircuts, pharmacy pickups, optician appointments, family visits… the list goes on.

“When you get in that seat you’re not just a bus driver, you’re a social worker,” said Drew, who’s a GP in addition to being one of the volunteers.

“I can’t tell you how many problems have been solved between here and Kinross.

“For the community, it’s as much about the banter, the discussions, the giggles and songs, as it is about the transport.”

Beyond the 55 bus service, the Glenfarg Community Transport Group is thriving.

It does the school run, taking pupils from outlying homes to Arngask Primary School.

Around 100 people a week enjoy outings on the community bus to destinations including the theatre, shops, garden centres, social events, open gardens and golf outings, as well as a regular Tuesday Perth shopping trip.

The professional drivers do the 55 service and the school bus, while the volunteers take care of the community bus.

And demand for their services is so high they’re now looking to add a fourth vehicle to their fleet.

Because the 55 service prizes community over commerce, they can offer a “wiggly” route, deviating to other places – Duncrievie, Drunzie, Caulders Garden Centre etc – if that’s what passengers ask for.

It means passengers with limited mobility can be picked up at their home and dropped at the door of their destination.

And the next step is to secure a low floor accessible vehicle to open up the service to people in wheelchairs.

Where Glenfarg leads, others may follow

Drew and the team reckon their model could help to halt public transport decline in rural areas.

Tickets for the 55 service are £2 a time, or £5 for 10.

And other communities are looking at the Glenfarg experiment with interest.

Christine Morton (volunteer driver), Drew Smart (chairman of the transport group and volunteer driver), David Brooke (volunteer driver), Erin Fulton (community development manager with Planning Aid Scotland) and Robert Morton (volunteer driver). Image: Steve MacDougall/DC Thomson

Drew says the group have had excellent support from Perth and Kinross Council and others, including Community Transport Glasgow and the Community Transport Association.

And they’re not stopping at buses either.

Glenfarg FreeWheelers e-bike hire will be coming soon.

And the group hope to introduce a mobile phone app that will take bookings and payments, show the current location of the bus and give an accurate estimate of pick-up time.

Funding has come from Smarter Choices Smarter Place, Robertson Trust, Lottery, Binn Wind Turbine fund, Perth & Kinross Council and various grants.

Author: Culture Collective

Culture Collective is a network of 26 participatory arts projects, shaped by local communities alongside artists and creative organisations. Funded by Scottish Government through Creative Scotland, these projects are taking place across Scotland from March 2021-October 2023.

From Shetland to Inverclyde, Aberdeen to Hawick, each unique project is designed and driven by the community in which it is rooted, playing an important part in shaping the future cultural life of Scotland. Some projects are working to creatively engage with older community members; some provide opportunities for young women and non-binary people to find their voices; and others address disconnection, loneliness and mental health in a post-lockdown world.

For the projects themselves, the Culture Collective provides a network: opportunities to share resources, learning and experiences. For the sector as a whole, the Culture Collective shines a light on the crucial importance of participatory arts projects for artists, for communities and for the future.