Author: RAGE / David Prescott

RESIDENTS of Judy Murray’s home town are considering holding a “funeral for democracy”, after the Scottish Government’s controversial approval of her planned sports academy on green belt land.

Ministers announced on Wednesday that they would grant planning permission for the £37.5 million project in Dunblane, Perthshire, despite an official recommendation from a public inquiry reporter that it be rejected.

Ann Shaw, 65, a collective member of the pressure group RAGE – Residents Against Green Belt Erosion – said the idea of holding “a funeral cortege for democracy” was one of several they would be considering, along with a march, or a mass picnic, while they waited for legal advice.

Under the “funeral” plan, the cortege could process from Dunblane to the green fields of Park of Keir, carrying a coffin representing the public will.

Mrs Shaw said: “It’s important we keep this in the public eye.

“The Reporter turned it down, and the Scottish Government overturned him. That’s a bonfire of democracy, a total farce, and we’re certainly not going to take it lying down.”

To read a detailed critique of this planning decision, local campaigner David Prescott gives his assessment of the Scottish Government Minister’s decision.

Park of Keir – Minister’s Notice of Intention

Summary

The Ministerial decision on the Park of Keir appeal was published on Wednesday 30 August 2017.  It is a “Minded to Consent” decision.  There are three conditions that need to be fulfilled before the Minster gives formal consent, which he has delayed initially for three months  They all fall to Stirling Council, who are required to conclude a Section 75 Agreement (or other legally binding agreement) which covers three (perhaps four points):

•             Secure education and affordable housing contributions in line with Stirling Council’s supplementary guidance.  This should be simple – the figures will arise from the Guidance and whilst there may be some debate about the base figures it is unlikely that the developer rise failing to get consent by not reaching agreement.

•             Ensure that no further residential development will be undertaken on the wider site.  This should be simple in that the developer has said this already, the CIC concept includes this.  So they will agree the concept to secure consent. 

•             Set out arrangements to ensure accessibility and affordability of the sports facilities.  This is a very surprising requirement.  It was rejected (in a different form) by the Reporter after considerable discussion at the hearing and where it was considered unlawful by some parties.  However the Community Council made the point that this linkage was the only justification for the “enabling” housing.

This last bullet point splits into two:  Accessibility and affordability;

Accessibility is likely to be covered by an agreement to provide a shuttle bus to Dunblane and/or Bridge of Allan stations.  This will add a considerable ongoing operational cost to the tennis and golf centre (of the order of £100k pa), which makes the affordability more difficult to achieve.

Affordability will be very difficult to agree, if it is done properly.  It may well prevent consent as it will require considerable work to develop a detailed Business Case to cover the all aspects, construction costs, operating costs and revenues, before it can be demonstrated that the arrangement will work. This is likely to require design work, funding agreements and an operating plan, all activities that the promotors refused to do prior to the planning application.  To give a credible affordability planning obligation this needs to be a rigorous and transparent process.

However the key point is that the Park of Keir decision now rests with Stirling Council.  If they agree these points the Minister will grant the Consent.  If they do not conclude an agreement the Minister cannot grant consent as set out in the Notice – although presumably he could amend his decision to ignore his earlier requirements.

Given that Stirling Council rejected the application, fought it through the appeal and public inquiry, at which the Reporter upheld their decision it would be perverse if they meekly roll over and give in.  The Council will need to agree a negotiating strategy that will stand public scrutiny, as there will be significant public interest in the outcome.

They will need to consider how the final agreement reached between the Council and King Partnership is ratified, which given it was rejected by the Planning Committee could be the full council.

They will need to look especially hard at the accessibility and affordability points, because this was Judy Murray’s mantra through the process, yet as the Reporter states the site is not readily accessible by public transport and he has raised concerns about the cost risks.

Clearly the Minister does not think this is a quick and easy task as he has (para 29) deferred the formal decision “in the first instance for a period of 3 months, to enable the relevant planning obligation to be completed to Minister’s satisfaction.”  This also suggests that there will be scrutiny by the Minister of the emerging agreement, and potentially involvement of Government officials in setting the parameters.

Detailed Critique

Background

The Planning Minister, Kevin Stewart, issued a “Notice of Intention” with respect of the Park of Keir Planning appeal PPA-390-2042.  This “Notice of Intention” was the he was “minded to grant planning permission in principle, subject to conditions and the conclusion of a planning obligation or other suitable agreement”.

This means, at the moment, planning permission has NOT been granted, and that still has to be done.  This gives a little scope for action in that the Minister could still change his mind and not grant planning permission.

This note examines the “Notice of Intention” and makes observations about both it and the Reporter’s Report, as released

“Notice of Intention”

The Notice of Intention briefly reviews and comments on the Reporter’s Report.  The key points are:

Para 5.                  The Minister accepts and agree that the proposed development does not comply with the development plan.  However they consider “that there are material considerations which indicate that planning permission … should be granted.”  He did not agree with the Reporter’s conclusions on weighting the different components and have attached weight to the regional and national importance of the sports facility.  However they have not provided any evidence or justification for that view to counter that considered view of the Reporter.

Para 10.                The Minister agrees with the Reporter’s reasoning and conclusion that this development is not in conformity with the development plan and in effect is agreeing as the Reporter stated it is in the wrong place.

Para 15.                The Minister merely states that they “attach considerable weight” in their decision making to the Reporter’s conclusion that the proposed tennis and golf centre would make an important contribution to the aim of increasing participation in both sports.  This merely says that they want the sports facilities regardless of any other considerations.  There is no assessment of how the negative aspects of this site – such as only realistically being accessible by car impact on the usability and value of the Sports facilities.

Para 16.                The Minister uses Stirling Council’s observations about adding to the wider sports offer as support.  He does fully accept the sports facilities will largely be access by car, but then comments that “users of a golfing facility will generally be more likely to travel there by private car” which is counter to the concept of golf facility as an introduction or Trainer facility, which implies that many users will not have clubs to bring with them.

Para 19.                The Minister puts considerable weight on the job creation element of the proposal as does the Reporter, but the Reporter also warns of a “real uncertainty” about the number of operational jobs that will be generated.  There is no comment on this aspect. 

Para 20.                The Minister agrees that the proposed funding model contains assumptions, some of which may be optimistic.  He accepts the argument for “enabling housing” to allow entry charges for the sports facility to be as low as possible, which was rejected by the Reporter.  It is clearly stated that the agreement to ensure that these benefits are delivered has to be finalised between the developer and Stirling Council before consent is granted THIS IS A CRITICAL STATEMENT.

Para 22.                The Minister accepts the Reporter’s conclusion that it has not been proven an alternative site does not exist.  So whilst Ministers think the concept of a sports centre is a “good thing” they accept it could be elsewhere and (see 10 + 16 above) that it is in the wrong place.

Para 23.                The Minister accepts that this is not a sustainable development.

Para 24.                The Planning Conditions – these will be discussed separately. 

Para 26.                The Minister only considers the housing content in respect of the emerging local plan, which given the impact on the green belt and the substantial built development is selective.

Planning Conditions

The Minister accepts the vast bulk of the Reporter’s proposed Planning Conditions.

The significant change is Condition 8 where the Reporter applied Stirling Council’s proposed condition which stated that “Prior to construction of the residential units, the tennis and golf centre, together with associated works shall be completed and available for use.  The Minister has changed “construction” to “occupation”, which will allow the houses to be built before the tennis centre is operational.

This is a significant dilution of the condition and indicates that the developer, who had proposed a phased approach, has put pressure on the Minister.

Agreements required to enable consent to be given

The Minister requires three points to be included in a Section 75 Agreement (or other legally binding agreement) prior to giving final consent:

•             Secure education and affordable housing contributions in line with Stirling Council’s supplementary guidance.  This should be simple – the figures will arise from the Guidance and whilst there may be some debate about the base figures it is unlikely that the developer will not agree a figure as doing so will help deliver the desired consent.

•             Ensure that no further residential development will be undertaken on the wider site.  This should be simple in that the developer has said this all along, the CIC concept includes this and they will agree the concept to secure consent.  However there is also the potential issue of the sports facilities failing financially and potentially a replacement with residential properties.  This would be unacceptable and should be specifically incorporated into the Section 75 planning obligation

•             Set out arrangements to ensure accessibility and affordability of the sports facilities.  This is a very surprising requirement.  It was rejected (in a different form) by the Reporter after considerable discussion at the hearing and where it was considered unlawful by some parties.  However the community Council made the point that this linkage was the only justification for the “enabling” housing.

This last point will be very difficult to agree, if it is done properly.  It may well prevent consent as it will require considerable work to develop a detailed Business Case to cover the affordability point, including construction costs, before it can be demonstrated that the arrangement will work.  Accessibility is more likely to be covered by an agreement to provide a shuttle bus to Dunblane and/or Bridge of Allan stations, but that will add a considerable ongoing operational cost to the tennis and golf centre (of the order of £100k pa).

Wider Issues

The Minister has “attached weight to the regional and national importance of the sport facility.”  But he has also accepted that the Reporter’s view that this is not the right location in planning terms for development, because it does not offer access to sustainable means of transport.  He has fully recognised this deficiency in the location at Park of Keir by insisting on the need for a planning obligation to cover the “accessibility and affordability of the sports facilities”.

It seems that he has confused the absolute desirability of a tennis facility of this nature (Because it is only the tennis facility that could possibly be described as of regional and national importance, the golf facility only has local impact) and its ability to deliver that outcome, which is significant diminished by the choice of location.

As the location of development is the fundamental aspect of planning this is a perverse decision.  Moreover it is likely to be used as a precedent in future for other developments, which will have a much wider impact across the whole of Scotland.

So, in accepting the Judy Murray arguments about the importance of the tennis facility, he has then chosen to locate the facility at a place where it will cost more to deliver and operate. This will frustrate the much of the stated ambition of being to develop the “grass roots” of tennis in Scotland.  He is establishing a tennis facility which is planned to fail in its stated objectives and in in effect going down the same path as the failed Roehampton experiment by the LTA which was so heavily criticised by Judy Murray.

Overall the decision is perverse, lacks logic, has not been supported by any evidence as to why the Minister places greater weight on certain aspects than the Reporter in his detailed and impartial analysis of the case and indicates that the Minister has had a closed mind to the outcome, having called it in to ensure that Judy Murray gets her desired monument to the Murray family.

Conclusions

This case is not yet concluded:

The three points listed above need to be agreed before the Minister gives consent.  He has initially suggested a deferral of their formal decision for three months (para 29).  The relevant planning obligation has “to be completed to Minister’s satisfaction”.  This puts Stirling Council firmly in control of the outcome.  Whilst the first two are, in the scale of the development immaterial sums, Stirling Council should hold out for as larger sum as possible as the developer is unlikely to want to lose the development for the sake of a few thousands of pounds.

However on the third point this is entirely open-ended.  The accessibility point may be agreed by providing a shuttle bus or similar transport arrangements/support, at a cost, but this will put even more pressure on the already weak finances of the sports facilities.  It is almost impossible to understand the affordability issue without a full understanding of capital costs, operational costs and income streams.  There is a need for Stirling Council to decide what is required and how to decide what is affordable.

A major concern in the case of the last two conditions is that they will be agreed, but will then lapse/cease in the future and that the place will have been built so there is no enforcement mechanism.

In incorporating the accessibility and affordability requirement into the final consent he Minister has shown what a poor choice this site is in terms of the desired outcomes, especially accessibility, which requires a planning obligation to be agreed, where on other more suitable sites these would be a natural outcome. 

There are wider implications in terms of local democracy, for future planning decisions and the Scottish Government’s decision making process.  These all suggest that this decision is a very important one and is one that will be subject to wider exposure and debate. 

David Prescott   3 September 2017

Author: Jamie Hailestone, New Start

Donna Hall is chief executive of Wigan Council. She talks to New Start, Jamie Hailestone about the council’s transformative approach to delivering public services, The Deal and the local authority’s upcoming conference.

What is the key philosophy behind The Deal?

When austerity hit we realised that closing a few libraries, changing bin collections and reducing school crossing patrols was not going to close a £160m budget gap. We needed something big and radical to fundamentally change the relationship between citizen and state. We created a dynamic, two-way psychological contract with all of our residents so we could weather the storm together. We called this ‘The Deal’. The Deal is a strengths-based model of service co-design with residents and community groups. We explain simply, clearly and repeatedly that we need to work differently with residents to drive out increasing demand for public services. This is how we have made it work: Stop doing things to people. It doesn’t work and costs a fortune. Start doings with people.

How has it changed the relationship between the council and the local community?

The Deal has fundamentally transformed our relationship with residents. Previously we were a big, well-run but paternalistic organisation with quite staid, traditional relationships with our residents. Our resident satisfaction with the council was low. People didn’t think we provided value for money and they didn’t trust us. That has all changed for the better through The Deal. We introduced the approach initially in adult social care, but quickly realised the benefits and its application to all areas of public service. Just one example of success is how we have tackled loneliness and social isolation thorough The Deal. Connecting lonely people into networks on their doorstep that are usually free or very cheap is better for them and better for our budgets. We have seen packages of social care reduce from over £1,000 per week to £17 per week with happier, more connected service users.

Can you give me an example of how the council has transferred an asset to a community group under The Deal?

One of our fantastic community interest companies, Abram Ward Community Cooperative, took ownership of a community building – Platt Bridge Community Zone – via a community asset transfer in 2014. The council also supported the cooperative with community investment funding. The community cooperative now has the right accommodation to empower social enterprises in their local community through business advice and funding support as well as provision of business unit accommodation and hotdesking. The cooperative also develops projects for ‘community connecting’ from developing neighborhood plans to projects to support healthy living, social isolation and mental health with more than 60 community businesses helped so far. This is a great example of how investing in the third sector can create sustainable community-led success and empowerment.

What outcomes has The Deal delivered for the council?

Since the launch of The Deal demand for council services has reduced. Between March 2015 and March 2016 there has been a 13% reduction in the number of looked after children; welfare desk presentations have reduced and the number of people receiving formal adult services has fallen from 8,818 in 13/14 to 7,782 in 16/17. The return on community investment is significant, with every £1 spent equating to £1.57. Local swimming pools, libraries and community centres are now being run by the community for the community. There’s also been a significant increase in resident satisfaction with 65% (2016) of those asked satisfied with the way the council runs things compared with 41% in 2008, whilst perceptions that the council provides value for money increased from 30% to 50%.

Can you see more local authorities taking a similar approach?

We are proud and humbled that high quality organisations from across the country are looking to Wigan to help shape their approach to working successfully with their communities and managing service demand reduction. We have Manchester City Council and Greater Manchester Police both rolling out their own Deal-inspired programmes and we have many other organisations, including from abroad, who have contacted us and visited us to learn more about The Deal.

Tell us about the upcoming conference and why you are holding it?

Because there has been a significant amount of interest in our approach, we are holding a national conference on the Deal on 27 September here in Wigan. Andy Burnham, Greater Manchester mayor, our resident anthropologist Dr Robin Pharoe will be speaking as well our local community groups. The chief executive of Leeds City Council, Tom Riordan and deputy chief executive of Manchester City Council, Sara Todd, who have developed similar approaches to redefining the relationship between citizen and state. It will be a brilliant opportunity for us all to share best practice and learn from each other.

In the future, do you think local authorities will have more of an enabling role?

Councils which fail to tap into the power in communities will really struggle. Neighbourhoods are the essential building blocks for public services. GP surgeries and schools are where real transformation takes place. I would urge other leaders to be bold enough to close the things that don’t work. Keep the things open that build and connect people into their local community and make it stronger, such as libraries. We haven’t closed any, but have massively reduced their operating costs by thinking differently. Listening is crucial. Not just as a one-off but as a rolling programme of regular listening events both with staff and residents. They can be challenging but always rewarding. They avoid us getting into a bubble of self-delusion. Invest in all things digital to connect staff and residents with the future as well as saving loads of money. Engage your partners, community, public and private sector in this new approach. It simply won’t work if it’s just the council and not the NHS etc. Finally build a leadership team of officers and members with bags of energy and enthusiasm that are public service reformers and really believe in this different way of working.

Author: Senscot

To read Senscot’s briefing on Loneliness and Isolation – click here

Author: Susan Smith, TFN

Just over a quarter of Scots entitled to Self Directed Support (SDS) are getting it seven years into a 10 year strategy to transform social care.

And despite the Scottish Government spending £60 million on promoting personalisation since 2010, only 5% of people are choosing direct payments.

An Audit Scotland report out on Thursday says health and social care boards have a lot of work to do to ensure that the 208,000 adults and 17,000 children needing social care services get more choice and control. Currently an estimated 53,000 are choosing an SDS option.

The report highlighted at catalogue of challenges including budget cuts, poorly informed social workers, lack of support for service users, lengthy procedures for applying for SDS (in some cases up to two years), problems with staff recruitment and retention, poor data management and inconsistent approaches across local authorities.

The report also gives examples of where SDS is working, showing it does achieve its objective to improve the quality of people’s lives.

Since 2014, councils have had a legal responsibility to offer SDS to people receiving care at home. This involves choosing one of four options: a direct payment to manage their own support, choosing their own support but getting the council to manage and pay for it, choosing to continue with council services, or a mixture of the previous three options.

However, the report states: “The Scottish Government and partners underestimated that scale of challenges needed and the challenges in implementation”.

Ronnie Hinds, acting chair of the Accounts Commission, said: “There is a growing body of evidence that SDS is helping many people with support needs to live more fulfilling lives. However, there is no evidence of the transformation required to fully implement the policy.

“Radical change of this kind is never easy but we are in the seventh year of the 10 year SDS strategy, and it’s been three years since the legislation was introduced. Authorities must respond more fully to provide services that make choice and control a reality for everyone who needs social care.”

Social care services are provided across Scotland by local authorities, third sector bodies and private sector bodies.

The report also highlights concerns that the move to integrate health and social care, which came into effect in April 2016, has distracted local authorities and health boards from implementing SDS.

It contains a series of recommendations to improve access to SDS, however Florence Garabedian, chair of support body Self Directed Support Scotland, said it is difficult to see how these could be achieved.

“Nationally and locally many committed people (supported people, carers, volunteers and professionals) invest daily energy, resources and expertise to make SDS work for themselves, or the people they serve,” she said. “Ultimately, however, the lack of accountability and leadership in a sector that over all is disinvesting, prevent the systemic change at the heart of the strategy.

“If this is not addressed it is difficult to see how the recommendations of the report can be implemented. For disabled people and their organisations, who believe that SDS can make a difference to the life of people, the major lesson of this report is that SDS should be at the heart of the health and social care transformation, rooted in human rights of all people, and lead towards a genuine review of what social care support means in 21st century Scotland.”

Dee Fraser, deputy director of the Coalition of Care and Support Providers in Scotland (CCPS), which represents third sector social care providers, also called for more sustainable funding.

“We welcome the findings of the Audit Scotland report on SDS. It reinforces the experiences of CCPS members and other voluntary sector care and support providers that despite significant effort and investment we’re not seeing the pace and scale of change needed,” she said.

“Providers can and do provide flexible, personalised services. However good quality, effective support can only happen where funding is sustainable; commissioning is collaborative and we move away from our current environment of price based competitive tendering.”

Responding to the report the Scottish Government announced it would be extending funding for SDS advocacy and support projects for an additional six months until September 2018. Minister for public health and sport, Aileen Campbell, also said she has asked the Care Inspectorate to lead a thematic review of SDS as part of its future inspection programme.

However, she stressed the government’s expectations that councils will ensure greater take up of SDS in future: “We expect local authorities, who are responsible for implementing Self Directed Support, to make progress on implementing these recommendations. People must be able to make decisions about what is important to them within their social care support. They must be actively assisted to understand the choices open to them and supported to recognise the assets they already have in their lives – friends, family and community interests.”

Older people and people with mental health issues were the two groups least likely to be using SDS, according to Audit Scotland.

Keith Robson, chief executive of Age Scotland, said older people need more help to access SDS: “We’re disappointed that few people are taking advantage of the options available, particularly in the over-85 age group. While some older people find it works very well, too many are not informed enough about their choices. There is a perception that it is more for younger people or too much hassle to put in place.

“In many cases, the bureaucracy can be overly complicated and time-consuming, and councils can be reluctant to give appropriate advice, especially proactively.  This can be a major issue for older people who need care immediately, for example if they are just coming out of hospital.”

The voice of service users

“My disabled daughter’s life has changed completely due to SDS. She now has a healthy lifestyle which includes a timetable of fitness classes, gym and swim activities that she attends along with her carers. She attends clubs to socialise with friends, goes to the cinema and bowling etc. She now leads the life of other 30-year-old girls. Prior to SDS she stayed home and watched videos. The transformation in her life has improved her health and wellbeing massively.” Parent

“The council were horrendous to deal with and at every point tried to talk us out of SDS”. Daughter of an older person

“I manage an SDS budget for my son who has severe physical and learning disabilities. I found the process of getting a social worker and an assessment for my son to be laborious and the procedures involved to be opaque. The whole process between initial calls to social work and payment of a small budget of £1,500 took almost two years”. Parent

“You have to be knowledgeable about it and stand your ground about what you and your young person want from it as councils will be budget led rather than needs led. It was not easy getting the support for our daughter as we were aware it is a significant package, however it has changed her life.” Parent

“The process by the council is long, unwieldy and bound in secrecy, for example, we are not told how the budget was calculated and how the budget decision was reached.” Parent

Author: Scottish Government

The National Council of Rural Advisers was announced at the Royal Highland Show on 22nd June 2017.

The National Council will provide advice on the potential implications of Scotland leaving the EU as part of the UK, and make recommendations on future policy and support, with the aim of ensuring a vibrant, sustainable and productive rural economy.

The Co-chairs are Lorne Crerar and Alison Milne.

Lorne Crerar joined the Board of HIE in April 2008 and was appointed as Chair in March 2012. Lorne is a founding partner and Chairman of leading Scottish commercial law firm Harper Macleod LLP.

Alison Milne is a self-employed consultant, currently representing the Scottish Tenant Farmers Association on matters relating to agricultural policy.  Alison also farms a mixed arable and livestock business, in partnership with her husband, mother and father-in-law.  In this role Alison was a driving force in hosting the Fife HGCA arable Monitor Farm from 2013 to 2016.

Council Members:

Archie Gibson – Archie Gibson is Food & Drink Federation Scotland’s Chair.  He is also the Managing Director of Agrico UK Ltd, a subsidiary of a Dutch farmers’ cooperative with 800 members. The company is a leading breeder and merchant of seed potatoes supplying more than 80 countries worldwide. Archie gained experience in a variety of land management roles producing store lambs and cattle before joining the food industry in 1999. He represented Scottish supply chain interests in a far reaching review on food defence and resilience led by the Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure (CPNI) and British Standards Institute (BSI), resulting in the publication of PAS 96 Defending Food & Drink

David Sulman – David Sulman is Executive Director of the United Kingdom Forest Products Association (UKFPA) which represents the technical  and commercial  interests of  processors  of British – grown timber and Secretary to the Scottish Timber Trade Association, the trade association which represents the interests of timber importers and merchants in Scotland.  He is a member of various Forestry Commission expert groups/committees, is involved in skills development matters, is a member of the Timber Transport Forum and Chairman of its Technical Working Group and also Chairman of the Scottish Strategic Timber Transport Scheme’s Assessment Panel. David is involved in the work of the Forest Industry Safety Accord.

James Graham – James Graham has been Chief Executive of the Scottish Agricultural Organisation Society since 1998. SAOS is the membership body of 65 agricultural co-operatives trading in Scotland whose collective throughput in 2016 exceeded £2.2 billion. He has worked in various capacities as company secretary, advisor, consultant, Chief Executive and non-executive Director in the coop ‘agri-food’ sector for 33 years and is an acknowledged specialist in agricultural co-operatives and supply chain collaboration in the food and drink industry.

Sarah Simpson – Sarah Simpson is a director of a dairy farm at Garlieston, near Newton Stewart in Galloway, together with her husband Peter.  She also works as a consultant to a group of dairy farms within Dumfries and Galloway providing benchmarking advice and information.    Prior to farming, Sarah was Director of Policy with NFU Scotland.

Alan Laidlaw – Alan Laidlaw is Chief Executive of the Royal Highland and Agricultural Society of Scotland (RHASS) – a registered charity with a remit to promote and protect the interests of rural Scotland.  Based at the Society’s headquarters at the Royal Highland Centre, Ingliston, Alan was appointed to the role in August 2016 after spending 11 years with the Crown Estate Scotland, latterly as Head of Property.   He is a trained chartered surveyor, a director of the Oxford Farming Conference and an Associate of the Royal Agricultural Societies (ARAgS).

Marion McCormick – Marion MacCormick has worked for ALDI (Scotland) since 1998.  Marion is currently responsible for growing and developing a comprehensive Scottish fresh meat range, capitalising on a comprehensive local network to develop a fresh meat and with quality, freshness and and the local customer at its heart.  Marion has also developed the strategy for marketing the Aldi brand in Scotland and building confidence in the brand.

John Kinnaird – John Kinnaird is a partner in 240 hect. family arable and beef farm. Former NFUS President from 2003-2007, representing Scotland’s farmers at a time of significant change.  Since then John has taken on other challenges, including committee member of AgriScot, local Director of NFU Mutual, Director of the Moredun Research Institute, Chair of the Scottish Government’s Scottish Appeals Procedure Panel, Chair of RSABI, Chaired a review of veterinary surveillance and Guardian member at Scotland Food and Drink. John is also the Vice president RHASS, Deputy Lieutenant – East Lothian and a Fellow of Royal Agricultural Societies.

Henry Graham – Henry Graham runs a 450-acre mixed farm in Midlothian in partnership with his wife, and is an experienced figure from the world of rural banking and agriculture.  He has held senior roles in the Royal Highland Agricultural Society, Quality Meat Scotland, Scottish Agricultural College and banking, specialising in agricultural business.  Henry is also a member of Forestry Commission Scotland’s National Committee and is a Trustee of Lantra (U.K.) acting as National Chair for Scotland.

Jim McLaren – Jim McLaren was appointed Chairman of QMS in April 2011. He runs a mixed arable and livestock business in Perthshire. The main arable enterprise is the production of spring malting barley, with the livestock side of the business including a pedigree Simmental herd. Jim was NFU Scotland President from 2007 to 2011

Lynn Mann – Lynn Mann is the co-owner of Supernature Oils. The company is based in Midlothian and is a farming enterprise (cereals) which has diversified into a food product. Supernature Oils specialise in cold pressed rapeseed oil, which is the fastest growing sector of the oils category in the UK.  Lynn is the driver behind the company and has recently been successful in getting listings in the UK and opening several export opportunities.  Lynn  is also an Ambassador for Women’s Enterprise Scotland and on the Board of Interface.

Sarah Allison – Sarah Allison comes from an agricultural background having grown up and worked on her family’s organic farm and food business.  She worked with farmers in England and Scotland before joining the Soil Association Scotland in 2017.  Sarah is a keen member of The Scottish Association of Young Farmers Clubs, recently retiring as Chair of SAYFC Agri and Rural Affairs Committee.

Jackie Brierton – Jackie Brierton is Enterprise Manager for GrowBiz – a community-based enterprise support organisation in rural Perthshire. She is also Chair of the Rural Perth and Kinross LEADER Local Action Group, and Founder and Vice-Chair of Women’s Enterprise Scotland CIC. She has more than 30 years’ experience in business, enterprise and policy development, including a period as adviser in the DTi’s Small Business Service between 2002 and 2006. She developed the UK Government’s first ‘Strategic Framework for Women’s Enterprise’ in 2003 and managed two centres of enterprise expertise for young people and women in the West Midlands between 2007 and 2010. Until recently, Jackie was Chair of Community Enterprise Ltd, and is passionate about the role of local enterprise development in the strengthening of the rural economy in Scotland.

Author: SCCS

Scotland’s largest civil society coalition, Stop Climate Chaos Scotland (SCCS), has this week written to the First Minister calling for the new Climate Change Bill goes even further to help stop the growing threat to the world’s poorest communities.

With just over a month to go until the public consultation on the Bill ends, SCCS is pushing the Scottish Government to produce a world-leading plan for Scotland, insisting the current proposals fall short of the mark.

Last month, the coalition, made up of 50 members including SCIAF, WWF Scotland, Oxfam, RSPB Scotland, Friends of the Earth Scotland, Christian Aid, and Unison, launched its Act for Our Future campaign calling for a Climate Change Bill that creates both “world leading ambition and the policies required for delivery.”

 SCCS chair Tom Ballantine has written to Nicola Sturgeon praising the Scottish Government’s “commitment to implementing the Paris Agreement” through the upcoming Climate Change Bill, said current Government plans fell well short of the level needed if Scotland is to be at the forefront of delivering the international agreement signed by 197 countries 18 months ago.

Tom insisted a bolder Bill would create jobs, improve health and reduce poverty at home, whilst also ensuring Scotland plays its part in helping the poorest people in the world cope with the impact of climate change.

The letter outlines the coalition’s three key demands for the new Climate Bill including setting a target of zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 at the latest, and a reduction of 77% by 2030, ensuring that future finance budgets are consistent with our climate targets, and committing to actions that cut emissions and deliver and cleaner, healthier, more prosperous Scotland.

He wrote: “The new Climate Change Bill is a huge opportunity to renew Scotland’s climate leadership and demonstrate the creative, imaginative and bold policies you are aiming for in the next Programme for Government. A net zero target by 2050, and the transformative policies to deliver it, would maintain Scotland’s place as a true world leader. It would deliver an increase in jobs, cleaner air, reduced burdens on the NHS and economic prosperity.

 “Thousands of SCCS supporters will be submitting their responses to the recently launched consultation on the Climate Change Bill. We look forward to working with your Cabinet to ensure that the new Act delivers on a just, prosperous, low-carbon future.”

Tom also highlighted great challenges on climate change in the past year, in particular President Donald Trump’s decision to signal US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement being a “cause for deep concern”.

 “Against that backdrop, we have been heartened by the renewed, and growing, commitment to tackle climate change and build a resilient, thriving low carbon future from the EU, China and other nations as well as from states, cities, businesses and communities in the US and around the world,” he added.

“We welcome your own and your Government’s heightened resolve to continue to lead, demonstrated in the recent MoU with California and your speech to the Arctic Summit.

 “The task at hand is as urgent as ever – not a question of ‘will we act?’ but ‘will we act fast enough?’. Scientists have warned us that without immediate action our chances of keeping global warming to 1.5°C, a key Paris goal, will be gone. We know that the world’s poorest people are already feeling the effects of climate change, from Malawi to Bangladesh – delivering climate justice is a challenge for today, not tomorrow.”

 The Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 set a greenhouse gas emissions target to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050. The new Climate Bill proposal increases that target to 90%, making provisions for a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions target to be set when the evidence becomes available.

Stop Climate Chaos Scotland is a diverse coalition of organisations campaigning on climate change, including environment, active travel, faith and development organisations, trade and student unions and community groups.

The deadline for the Climate Bill consultation is 22nd September 2017. Don’t miss your chance to have you say. 

Author: Nithin Coca, New Start Magazine

There are now 900 Food Assemblies across Europe, helping urban communities connect with farmers and cut out supermarkets. 

The first ‘Ruche’ or Food Assembly, took place in La Fauga in France, near the city of Toulouse, in September 2011.

It was a space where consumers could meet food producers and pick up produce that they had previously ordered online. Since then, it has grown into a robust network of independently operated farmers’ markets organised via an online platform.

The timing for the launch of Food Assembly was ideal. In France, campaigns against genetically modified food had been simmering for years, and along with a drought and other challenges affecting French farmers, there was a strong desire for new, sustainable alternatives.

What made Food Assembly stand out from other similar projects was that it incorporated the concerns of not just consumers in its platform but also of farmers from the very start.

Food Assembly obtained a Collaborative and Social Certification from the French government, the same designation used by most cooperatives. Since then, it has also achieved B-Corp certification. The organisation’s growth has been substantial, and today, there are over 900 Assemblies, connecting farmers, producers, and consumers, taking place every week, across Europe.

Plugging the gap between cities and farms

In a modern, urban consumer economy, the gaps between farmers, food producers, and consumers is wide. In Europe, where about 74% of the population lives in cities and rarely gets a chance to visit farms, bridging that gap can be challenging. The places where most people get food — grocery stores, restaurants, cafes — are often several degrees removed from farmers and other food producers.

There’s a negative financial impact as well. Because farmers are so far away from consumers, they have to rely on middlemen, such as chain supermarkets, to reach consumers. Every link on the chain between farmers, food producers, and consumers is a loss in profit for farmers who only get 15-25 per cent of what any product is sold for in most supermarkets, according to Food Assembly.

Addressing this problem and creating a more equitable, community-driven food sharing economy was the initial goal of Food Assembly, which was founded as ‘La Ruche qui dit Oui!’ (The hive that says yes!) in 2010.

The goal was to reduce the number of intermediaries between consumers and food producers. From the start, the organisation had a technical component, using a web platform as the key tool to connect members and farmer-producers.

How it works

Each ‘Assembly’ is independently operated, but with plenty of support from both Food Assembly staff, and other Assemblies. You have to be a member of an Assembly to participate, though there is no membership fee. Once you join, you get access to an updated, online catalogue of local food products, which you order and pay for through the website. Members then pick up their food at an in-person Assembly, held at a set time in a local venue. This allows members to not only meet their neighbours, but also the people behind the food they are eating. Key to each Assembly is the host, who works with the Food Assembly network to create the weekly catalogue of all the local food products available from producers, and arrange logistics with the venue. It is an important role, and one that is not run by volunteers – hosts are paid a portion of sales, to value the time and effort they put into making the network work.

In fact, everyone gains in the process. For consumers, it’s access to fresh, seasonal foods all grown or produced within 150 miles or 250 kilometres, depending on the country. For farmers and food producers, it’s a bigger cut for their labour, as over 80% of the price paid by members goes straight to them — a far higher percentage than they receive from supermarkets. The remainder goes to the host and to Food Assembly itself, to maintain the web platform, provide support, and expand the network.

Growing from a single Assembly in 2011, to over 900 in 2017, makes Food Assembly one of the most successful examples of a sharing economy platform scaling rapidly while maintaining its core values. It was not easy, however, as it encountered several challenges on the way.

For each Assembly to work, you need a mix of the right people: a dedicated host, and certain number of farmers-producers and members. Getting that balance can be a challenge, especially in a certain regions.

‘In some regions, there is synergy — it works well, it inspires people, and it spreads,’ Melissa Martinay, a spokesperson for Food Assembly in Paris, France says. In other places, not so much. For example, Food Assembly found it especially difficult to expand in London due to a scarcity of producers willing to enter the city to distribute their produce.

‘The logistics for producers [in London] is hard,’ Martinay says. ‘They are not [willing to] spend so many hours and effort to transport goods. The distance between their farms and the consumers is a lot.’ They are now testing a new model where they allow farmers and producers to drop off goods at an easier location for a slightly higher fee — an optional service, but one that might help bring more producers to Assemblies in cities like London.

Sharing can be scaled

Going global was also difficult. Food Assembly grew fast in France, due to timing, complementary logistics, and a dedicated community. In other countries, however, growth has been slower from the get-go. Martinay believes this was due to not fully understanding cross-border and regional differences.

‘We underestimated the cost of localising a project,’ Martinay says. ‘But now we’ve put the right resources in the new countries.’ And it’s paying off, as there are now more than 100 Assemblies in the UK, Belgium, and Germany.

In the end, what matters most to success and growth is not analysis or ample resources, but the people who form the core of each community. They are the ones who set up, organise, and maintain each Assembly. ‘Put people first,’ Martinay says. ‘We can do a lot of market studies to grow the network, but in the end a platform like ours really relies on people.’

It can be a tough balance, especially when it comes to the host of each community. ‘It is a challenge to identify the right person, and empower them properly, without being forced to control them too much.’ This means that not every Assembly is run to the standards that they would like — but it’s a necessary trade-off to maintain a truly diverse, open, and welcoming network.

There are now 900 assemblies across Europe, but this is just the start. The main goal going forward for Food Assembly is to grow that number so more consumers, farmers, and food producers have access to each other and gradually build communities in more and more regions. The key to doing this will require a better understanding of how the platform is creates value. It’s a challenge as Food Assembly focuses on community and connections, not purely finances. Food Assembly knows about how much value is gained through the exchange of food — but that’s only part of the story.

‘We have a lot of anecdotes and stories to tell about producers, but not aggregated data,’ Martinay says. ‘We can monitor how much [producers] sell through the network, whether this this allowed them to hire an extra worker on the farm, but to what extent has participating opened up perspectives on what to grow or transport? I’m not sure we will ever be able to collect this kind of information, but it is a big part of the impact.’

One of the goals for this year is to incorporate survey tools and other means for members, hosts, and producers to provide feedback. This would help Food Assembly understand how they can assist them in  gaining more value from participating.

The rapid growth of Food Assemblies across Europe shows the desire for a more cooperative food system, in which consumers and farmers are more closely connected, and can work together to create a more equitable, sustainable economy. It also shows that sharing can be scaled, if people are central to the network, and the incentives are set up to create positive outcomes for all participants.

Author: COAST

Scotland’s inshore fisheries management not fit for purpose

The Scottish Salmon Company (SSC) has withdrawn its application to expand the St Molios salmon fish farm in Lamlash Bay. This follows SEPA admitting to errors in their ecological appraisal which wrongly predicted the expansion would lead to a decrease instead of an increase of toxic Emamectin Benzoate going into the South Arran Marine Protected Area.

With escalating salmon exports – up 70% in the first half of 2017 – the SSC can afford to pay law firms like MacRoberts to manage the case, while the people of Arran have invested thousands of hours to get this SEPA-approved application “called in” by the government. Without the commitment of our community, this expansion would have gone ahead, risking our environment, well-being and livelihoods (salmon aquaculture in Scotland accounts for under 0.1% of employment). 

But the story, unfortunately, does not end here.

The problem of sea lice in intensive salmon farming has led the industry to start to replace chemical treatments with wrasse cleaner fish. To treat 60 million Scottish-farmed salmon, 3 million wrasse are required of which 80% are caught in the wild. Here in the South Arran MPA, local fishermen are being paid by the SSC to fish wrasse but there is no publicly available information on wrasse stocks or landings, no restrictions on catches and no impact assessments required. Is our government giving the salmon farming industry a free ride?

According to Mark Lloyd, Chief Executive of the Angling Trust & Fish Legal: “The salmon farming industry has already destroyed numerous wild salmon and sea trout fisheries on the West Coast of Scotland and now seems intent on doing the same to wild wrasse stocks in the South West of England”. Devon’s Inshore Fishery Conservation Authority has quickly limited this new fishery. However there has been no response to this matter in Scotland, despite concern for wrasse stocks being on the agenda of Scottish Inshore Fishery Groups for years and recent proposals of protecting wrasse from groups like the Wester Ross Fisheries Trust.

This all points to the malfunction of Scotland’s Inshore Fisheries Management. Once again, COAST calls for an urgent reform based on local empowerment, good governance, and social and environmental justice.

Author: Jackie O'Brien, BBC Scotland

The land was cleared to make way for sheep and dwellings were destroyed

A new phase of Highland history is unfolding in Sutherland as land still owned by the family of the man blamed for the Highland Clearances is to be sold to descendants of those he evicted.

A community group has secured all of the funding it needs to buy 3,000 acres of crofting townships near Helmsdale on the far north-east of Scotland.

It is seen as a significant development for an area which still lives with the legacy of the decision by the infamous Duke of Sutherland two centuries ago to remove his tenants to make more money from sheep farming.

The English nobleman inherited the vast tracts of northern Scotland when he married and quickly set about making what he called “improvements”.

He carried out extensive clearances between 1811 and 1820, with his factor Patrick Sellar personally supervising the eviction of any tenants who showed reluctance to leave.

About 15,000 people are thought to have been removed from the wider estates of the Sutherlands and the cleared dwellings were burned to prevent them being re-occupied.

The Strath of Kildonan bore the initial brunt of his brutal decision and the townships to which many residents were cleared now form part of the buyout deal.

Many of those who were evicted left to seek a new life in Scottish cities or overseas.

However, others were cleared to the less fertile, exposed ground closer to the coast such as at Portgower and West Helmsdale.

A statue in nearby Helmsdale, called The Emigrants, is dedicated to those driven out of the hills by Sutherland.

It shows a bronze couple and their children. The father is looking out to sea and the mother is looking back to the hills they are leaving behind.

While many of the cleared left Scotland, others tried to make a living in the crofting townships, which are included in the buyout deal.

Two centuries on, descendants of those cleared are on the verge of an historic purchase of land at the centre of the struggle.

Anne Fraser, one of those driving the purchase of the croft land, said: “For me personally because I can trace my ancestors back to people who were cleared off the strath back into this area, it’s really significant, and it’s quite emotive as well.

“There are still lots of people living in the community who have that connection so I think they see it as finally getting something back.”

The townships of Marrel and Gartymore are also included in the buyback deal, which has been made possible with private funds as well as the £273,000 of public money awarded from the Scottish Land Fund. .

Ms Fraser hopes that more development and prosperity will flow from taking the land into public hands.

She says: “We are designated as a fragile area. We are part of the social deprivation stats because we are seen as being a poor place so the opportunity to have the land and develop it into something that is useful for the community so we can attract people back into the area, I think that is massive for the whole place, including the village.

“So it is not just about the crofting areas, it is much wider than that.”

This latest land purchase is all the more symbolic because it was offered for sale by the Sutherland family, descendants of the landlords who sparked the Highland clearances.

Esther Macdonald, whose family were also cleared, says she hopes the first east coast purchase of its kind will create a new sense of belonging and ownership for those living on and working the land.

She says: “I’m looking at the hill and thinking how great it would be for our forefathers to come back now and see that we are being able to purchase the land.

Esther Macdonald says the area is in her blood

“I feel so strongly about this area because it is in my blood. I love this area. It is just part of me and it feels right.”

The physical scars of the Highland Clearances still remain today in the abandoned hillside settlements of the Strath of Kildonan.

For Anne Fraser it is a chance to right some of the wrongs of the past.

She says: “I think it’ll give people satisfaction to be back in ownership and to be able to develop it as we would like to develop it because I think it has been underdeveloped.

“There is a sense of something being put right.”

Author: Stranraer Development Trust

We devised the Stranraer Oyster Festival to celebrate not only the famous Loch Ryan oysters (Scotland’s only wild, native oyster bed) but also all other local produce.

The first Festival will take place in September 2017 and is particularly timely as 2017 is the celebration year of 400 years of Stranraer being a Royal Burgh and be the perfect inaugural year for the event.

Until now the town has not been in a position to explore the full potential of our wonderful native Loch Ryan oysters. At present oyster are sent around the world but the connection with Stranraer is not recognised. The festival provides the opportunity to make this connection, increase visitor numbers to the town and support the local economy. Although our oysters are at the very heart of the festival, we will also be featuring all sorts of other seafood as well as local produce of many kinds, including food, drink, arts and craft work, in a specially created Festival Market.

In common with established oyster festivals in other parts of the world, placing the unique native Loch Ryan oysters at the heart of our festival, enables us to create and original new community focused event in celebration of this wonderful natural resource.  The Stranraer Oyster Festival has huge potential in terms of promoting increased awareness of our unique coastal heritage and all that we have to offer the visitor as well as those who perhaps who are considering moving to live and work in the area.

The Festival has evolved following years of discussion by various groups and organisations in and around Stranraer.  We are delighted that this significant event is finally coming to fruition.

For tickets and full details of all events, activities, festival market, skiff regatta, children’s activities etc. visit the Festival website