Author: SCA

To : Members of Scottish Parliament Committees scrutinising the Draft Climate Change Plan

In November 2016, twenty community sector leaders met to consider the Scottish Government’s proposed Climate Change Plan and more specifically, to explore how community action on climate change could be incorporated into the Plan.  As a result of this meeting, a paper (attached as appendix) was submitted to the Scottish Government describing the significant contribution that communities can make in this respect, and how this can be nurtured and built upon into the future.

While we can see much in the draft Plan that is ambitious – it describes the sort of low carbon future that we all want to see for Scotland – we are disappointed that the Plan shows little regard for, or knowledge of, the role that communities will be required to play if any of this ambition is to be realised.

The community empowerment agenda is currently front and centre of many areas of Scottish Government policy but little of this appears to be joined up with the specific challenge of tackling climate change.  For instance, the Climate Challenge Fund (CCF) is just one relatively minor stream of community investment currently being committed by the Scottish Government.  By only referencing CCF funding in relation to community action, the Plan gives the impression of sitting entirely within a distinct policy silo and as such restricting any potential impact in other areas.

We find it difficult to comment directly on the Plan because there are so few points within it that are directly inviting of community engagement.  Partly because of this we nonetheless have three key proposals:

1.            We ask Scottish Government to commit to working closely with community sector organisations towards a better collective understanding of how climate action can be integrated across all aspects of the evolving community empowerment agenda, beginning with a cross-departmental roundtable discussion within the first half of 2017.

2.            Recognise the wider contribution that Local Place Plans (see Places, People and Planning – a consultation on the future of the Scottish planning system) have to play beyond the planning system so that they embrace all aspects of civic life and become a foundation stone of a revitalised system of local democracy.

3.            We call on the Scottish Parliament to approve the creation of a Cross Party Group on Climate Change.

Scotland’s community sector operates primarily in the ‘social’ sphere of the ISM model of behaviour change.  We have a unique reach in terms of connecting with individuals and whole communities in ways that are far beyond that of the public or private sector.  We believe Government needs our sector every bit as much as we need Government to act in ways that enable communities to fulfil their potential.

We offer to attend any meeting of your Committee in the course of its consideration of the Plan.

Angus Hardie, Director

Author: Locality

How to Keep it Local  – A five step guide for councillors and commissioners.

Author: Cormac Russell

The welfare state is an extension of us, not a replacement for us.

1. The welfare state is an important extension of our human community’s capacity to care; not a replacement for it. Communities produce care (full-stop) and the systems or service world should simply be the support to that care where required, a resource to carers and not the source of care.

2. These ideals have become confused in the last 150 years by different social service models, to the point where community care has become systematically outsourced, commodified, monetised and accordingly displaced from its rightful place of origin: the commons, and dislocated into institutional space. This has undermined citizenship, democracy and our commonwealth, and created the construct that john mcknight aptly calls the ‘careless society’.

3. The view that our welfare is determined by our community assets, not institutional programmes, underpins the ethic of deep democracy and is the only viable antidote to neoliberalism. It’s a view that is confirmed by the great preponderance of epidemiological evidence (not ideology) regarding our primary drivers towards wellbeing, which include our individual agency, our associational life and our economic and environmental circumstances. It is a view that brazenly defies the attempts of the marketplace to keep us dissatisfied, so that we consume more.

4. While it is critical that we urgently find a new expression of the welfare state, one that is an extension of us, not a replacement for us. We must grow that expression from inside communities, out. Welfare reform in isolation of the enlargement of the commons is naive and counterproductive. The enlargement of the commons is a necessary prelude to a new expression of the welfare state, not a by-product of it.

5. Our institutional systems have reached the limits of what they can do to secure our welfare. Actively getting behind personalised budgets and basic income, we (as citizens not employees of organisations) can reclaim the ground from where ‘welfare’ is produced: our commonwealth. This must be our primary focus, the ‘builder’s stone’ on which the supportive functions of the state can be redefined and refunctioned.

6. The above five points do not preclude a functioning welfare state where healthcare services, social care and social protections are properly funded. Instead it defends them by standing shoulder to shoulder with them, recognising that there are three domains from whence welfare is produced:

A. Civic – the space outside institutions where we use personal, family and community assets to be healthful, caring, safe and participants in a commonwealth.

B. Institutional – where through goods, services and technology, that which can’t be done through civic effort is augmented and complimented through democracies processes.

C. Civic collaborative – the democratic interface between civic efforts and institutional resources.

A final thought

According to Barry Kushner and Saville Kushner(1) when the welfare state as we understand it today was introduced in the uk at the end of the second world war, the national debt peaked at 238% of gdp. Still, as well as introducing the welfare state, the national health service and council housing were also introduced.

In stark contrast, recent austerity measures were introduced at a time when national debt was running at 57% of gdp (2010), lower than italy, france, germany, japan, and the u.s.(2) the debt was not the actual or actuarial reason for austerity; neoliberal hegemony was, and continues to be. Hence nothing that has been stated above should be misconstrued as an apology for cuts, rather it argues for a renaissance of the welfare state which can mount a credible corroding argument to neoliberalism, true to the original spirit and ideals of its founding architects.

David Boyle’s engaging piece in the guardian professional (2014) aptly captures those ideals:

“ when william beveridge released his famous blueprint for the welfare state at the end of 1942, his assumptions suggested that the cost burden would reduce over time because welfare spending would progressively reduce need.

As we now know, he was wrong. It wasn’t just him; the same mistake was made in most welfare states. The problem wasn’t that beveridge failed to slay his ‘five giants’ – ignorance, want, squalor, disease and idleness – but that they came back to life in every generation, and had to be slain all over again. Every time at increasing expense.”

In an attempt to offer an explanation for the current malaise boyle goes on to say, rightly in my view:

“ the difficulty was that beveridge’s welfare services developed in a direction he never intended: over-professionalised; dismissive and suspicious of the neighbourhood networks which had underpinned people’s lives for generations; undermining informal advice and support; allowing the ties of mutual support to atrophy.

Services developed the attitude that high-tech equipment, sophisticated processes and professional knowledge is somehow all that is required to provide help to the grateful, passive multitude. Two generations later, those informal networks of support have been corroded.”

Today, it the corrosion of those informal networks, alongside hyper individualisation, consumerism and austerity that have combined to form a perfect storm. A storm that will further devastate low income communities and those who are most marginalised from society and the economy.

I have previously argued that here that we have alternatives to the demeaning welfare arrangement we currently provide. Ironically to find exemplars for such alternatives, we must again return to the end of the second world war and this time closely examine the structure and ethos of the the servicemen’s readjustment act of 1944, known informally as the g.i. bill. Here we see what happens when governments treat people like heroes, not spongers. The former enables people to be of value in their economies and communities and the latter misrepresents people as untrustworthy drains on the systems and the tax payer’s money. There was a time when ex service men and women were walking down payments on houses, had resources to start up their own businesses and return to education on their own terms. Those times are long gone. They were replaced with services, and more recently even those services are being cut.

A significant amount of the money spent attempting to help people with professionally diagnosed ‘needs’ and ‘problems’ has prevented those people from sharing their gifts and living a life of their choosing. Hence denying them of their most basic needs/rights for belonging, autonomy, competence and security, and therefor creating far greater and more impenetrable problems than they originally presented with. Is this not neoliberalism wearing the mask of love?

Ethical helping professions, instead of asking people ‘what is the matter with them?’ ask, ‘what matters to them?’ the former reveals the need for programmes, the latter reveals a yearning for life, and a huge reservoir of sleeping gifts.

Powerful citizens accept no less from those who serve them, and their neighbours. They also understand that if they do not do what is best done in civic space then it will not get done. Hence the functioning welfare state at best is an extension of us; not a replacement for us.

Cormac Russell 

Author: Common Weal

A DETAILED plan for a new Citizens’ Assembly, acting as a second revising chamber in the Scottish Parliament, has been published by Common Weal, the Sortition Foundation and newDemocracy in a new report.

‘A Citizens’ Assembly for the Scottish Parliament’ can be read in full here.

Authored by Dr Brett Hennig, co-founder of the Sortition Foundation – a non-profit organisationa advocating citizen led deliberative democracy – in collaboration with Lyn Carson and Iain Walker from newDemocracy – an independent research organisation that trials new models of democratic decision – the report argues that a Citizens’ Assembly would be a “profound increase in the legitimacy of Scottish laws by providing solid evidence of the considered endorsement by a representative sample of deliberating Scottish citizens”.

The assembly have powers to hold inquires into “significant matters of public concern” and to “review the quality and practises of specific instances of parliamentary democracy”.

A number of implementation questions are addressed in detail including the size of the Citizens’ Assembly, the length of time a citizen would serve on the assembly and how they would be selected. 

“The instigation of the world’s first CA in a parliamentary setting would be a momentous decision and put Scotland at the forefront of democratic innovation and citizen empowerment and engagement. It will, by necessity, be an immense learning experience and governments around the world would all turn to Scotland to observe the outcome,” the report concludes.

“Scotland could pioneer a new kind of democracy for the 21st century in which power is broadly shared and people feel like they are at the heart of decision-making.” Robin McAlpine

Commenting on the report, Robin McAlpine, Common Weal Director, stated:

“The loss of faith that many people feel towards politics is not entirely fair, but it’s not entirely wrong either. The political system has become more of a closed shop and over recent decades the voice of citizens has taken second place to the voices of a political insider class. A Citizens’ Assembly would be a powerful voice for citizens at the heart of our political system and it would be an effective watchdog on professional politics. Scotland could pioneer a new kind of democracy for the 21st century in which power is broadly shared and people feel like they are at the heart of decision-making.”

Hennig, author of ‘The End of Politicians: Time for Real Democracy’, said: “Our democracy should be responsive to the informed wishes of the people – but many people have lost faith in politics and political parties to deliver this. Putting ordinary people back into politics is one solution to this crisis of legitimacy. But it is not knee-jerk, raw citizens’ opinions that should guide us, but citizens’ considered and informed judgement. This is what a citizens’ assembly would do. A Citizens’ Assembly in the Scottish Parliament would increase the legitimacy of Scottish laws by providing solid evidence of support from a representative sample of deliberating Scottish citizens.”

Author: Rebecca Cooney, Third Sector magazine

Paul Streets, the chief executive of the Lloyds Bank Foundation, has accused large charities of aping the practices of the private and public sectors to squeeze smaller local charities out of service provision.

Speaking at the Social Change Awards organised by the Directory of Social Change in central London last night, Streets warned that if the voluntary sector as a whole did not emulate smaller charities and reconnect with local communities, it would have only itself to blame if commissioners viewed charities in the same way as private providers.

Streets, whose organisation offers grant funding to charities with incomes of less than £1m, praised small charities for their approach to building services by starting with the needs of local people and then designing a service, rather than taking a top-down approach.

He said smaller charities were more sustainable, even in tough financial climates, because they were responding to a need they saw, not a contract they had pitched for and, unlike commercial providers or national charities, would not pull out if a contract was lost.

He accused larger charities of pursuing a “headlong rush for growth” that led them to fall into state-vision social change as seen in large-scale top-down contracts.

“They swap the voices of those we reach for the voices of those who commission us to reach them, and determine need on the basis of what those commissioners are prepared to pay for,” Streets said.

“In doing so, I think they have effectively become co-opted as delivery agents of the state rather than agents of social change. It feels like really dangerous territory, frankly.”

He called for charities to return to the values and ethos that differentiated them from the private and public sectors.

“And that means not aping their top-down market-driven approaches, either in respect of those we serve or in respect of our fellow charities,” Streets said.

He said the greatest anguish for the small charities supported by the Lloyds Foundation came when they were “at the sharp end of competitive and pricing practices” from large charities that “use their economic muscle and bid-writing prowess to pitch against the long-established local charity or squeeze them in a subcontract if they win”.

But he pointed out that the same organisations would send out direct mail and public relations materials about their values and ethos.

“I get that times are tough,” Streets said. “But if we in the public sector don’t mirror in our own relationships the value we place in building relationships with those we serve, we’ve only got ourselves to blame if the commissioner decides they’d rather go to a private provider than with us, or if the public grow ever more sceptical about our requests for their money.”

He called on the sector to redress the balance and reconnect with its campaigning roots by connecting local action with national advocacy.

Author: COLtd

Community Organisers Ltd (COLtd) is pleased to announce that it has secured a major £4.2m contract from the Office of Civil Society, part of the Department of Culture Media and Sport, to expand the movement of Community Organisers from 6,500 to 10,000 by 2020.

COLtd is the independent body that grew out of the original 2011 – 2015 Community Organisers Programme, which mobilised communities to take action on issues they care about.

The ambitious expansion programme announced today will increase the number of community organisers across England and enable residents to take greater control of their lives and create strong and resilient communities that work for everyone.

Community organising is the work of building relationships and networks in communities to activate people and create social and political change through collective action.

Community Organisers listen individually to residents, identify and inspire local leaders and bring people together to take action on the issues they all care about. In areas where community organisers work, people have a stronger sense of belonging to their neighbourhood, feel more valued and are motivated to work together to improve lives and transform where they live.

COLtd will launch a £1.3 million grant fund to embed community organising at a neighbourhood level, empowering Community Organisers and local leaders across England to work with local and national partners to strengthen networks and drive social action.

The programme will embed community organising as part of the fabric of our neighbourhoods and equip local people with the skills to transform their communities for good. It will expand the community organising movement to include young people from the National Citizen Service (NCS) and ambassadors for the #iwill social action campaign for 10 to 20-year-olds. The programme will also establish the National Academy for Community Organising to sustain the ongoing training of Community Organisers.

The programme enables people to be part of the Government’s commitment to create a shared society by supporting people to come together to improve their own lives and social action to become established as routine in our public services and communities.

COLtd will work with local authorities, such as Staffordshire County Council, helping them to train their staff to strengthen their ambition as an authority committed to enabling social action.

Rob Wilson, Minister for Civil Society, said:

“From improving cancer services in Sunderland to creating mother and toddler groups in Southampton, Community Organisers are facilitating local neighbourhoods to help people transform their communities, creating a sense of pride and belonging in where they live.

“It’s fantastic that Community Organisers Ltd. are expanding the programme even further, helping to build a shared society that works for everyone.”

Nick Gardham, CEO Community Organisers Ltd, said:

“This is a fantastic opportunity to build on the foundation from the previous programme. This expansion will strengthen the existing network of Community Organisers and increase the numbers of people taking action at a local level to transform their communities for good.”

Author: Brian Donnelly, The Herald

CAMPAIGNERS backed by stage and screen star Hayley Mills are to challenge an apparently terminal turn in the battle to save the Earthy eatery building that overlooks an urban beauty spot in Edinburgh.

The Save 1-6 Canonmills Bridge campaigners said they will continue to fight moves to replace the single storey building that has Earthy as its tenant with flats and a restaurant space after a planning document posted online showed a key tenet of the opponents’ case had fallen.

One aspect of the campaigners’ challenge was that the developer Glovart Investments had missed a three-year deadline to start work on-site that began when planning permission for the development was granted in 2013.

It is claimed that allowing vehicle access and dropped kerb has been cited as being enough work done to amount to redevelopment beginning.

The campaigners said they still believe the work is not enough to be considered as such and will raise a further challenge.

The document describing the “commencement of development” states: “While the council is entitled to seek to revoke extant planning permission and conservation area consent, it is unlikely that consent for this will be obtained from Scottish Ministers and even if it is compensation will be very expensive.

“In conclusion, the developer is entitled to continue with the implementation of the planning permission.”

It read: “Agents acting on behalf of the applicant have submitted information as part of their notification of commencement of material operations that the vehicular access was formed on June, 10 2013 and that the kerb was dropped on May, 7 2016.

“Council officers initial view was that on the balance of probabilities that a material operation had been carried out, prior to consent expiring, meaning that the express grant of planning permission is capable of implementation.”

The campaigners said in a statement they are disappointed but added: “We question the interpretation of the legislation and won’t let this drop.

“In this, and in other ways, we are continuing to push for a better outcome for the site.

“We remain hopeful.”

Ms Mills,70, a friend of one of the campaigners, said that “the loss would be a sad one for the local community and part of Edinburgh city”.

Resident Colin Wright said: “Given it is now nearly four years since planning permission was controversially granted it seems odd that this development is still being considered as live.”

The campaign gained the support of 7,000 people and took their protest to the city council chambers.

Edinburgh City Council rejected a separate application to demolish the building but this was overturned on appeal at Holyrood.

The case went to the Scottish Government‘s planning reporter who said last year: “At present it is particularly well presented at street level by its current occupiers as an organic food grocers and restaurant and is clearly valued by the local community.

“However, I do not consider that its current occupation and use is relevant to the question of the intrinsic value of the building itself to the special interest of the conservation area.”

The reporter said that “it is essentially a simple and functional mid 19th century small scale mainly brick built industrial building, which appears to have served the area as shops throughout most of its existence”.

“It has been the subject of various ad hoc adaptations throughout its life and is now built of mixed materials.”

Author: Andrew Crummy

Andrew Crummy, community artist and designer of The Great Tapestry of Scotland, reflects on his upbringing in Craigmillar.

I was born in Craigmillar and grew up experiencing The Craigmillar Festival Society, as my mother, Helen Crummy, was the organising secretary. In my mid-thirties I began to realise that this childhood experience was influencing my work as a muralist. Namely that often the production of your own creativity is not what is always required and that creating platforms for others to get involved is more important. That Art is often a catalyst in a community or public setting to deal with other issues in a positive manner. I began to realise that Community Arts has a valid role to play and the Craigmillar Festival Society was important because of how it used Art in its broadest sense.

In 1995, my father had recently passed away and to get my mother, Helen Crummy, to think about something else I suggested that she write an article about Communiversity. In her usual positive style she got it published a few months later. attracting interesting from all over the UK. And so was born the Craigmillar Communiversity. Up until her death in 2011, we hosted several conferences, had a major exhibition in Edinburgh City Art Gallery, published several books and CDs, help create a Art workshops in craigmillar (funded through Napier College), help create an award winning short documentary by Plum Films and started World Community Arts Day. It was very much a vehicle for her to express and develop her ideas. Although it has clearly influenced my own art.

Through World Community Arts Day, which we started in 2007, we began to show that many different versions are thriving around the world. Community Arts is very much alive and kicking. In March 2014 a sculpture to Helen Crummy and The Craigmillar Festival Society was unvielled in Craigmillar.

Author: Jeremy Kidwell

Why Map Community?

The impetus for project came out of a multi-year ethnographic engagement with transition towns and Eco-congregations with a team of researchers at the University of Edinburgh. We wanted to ensure that our work with these groups was sampled robustly and as we searched around for open data sets we struggled to find anything. We later found in conversation with members of community groups, that groups are as eager to be included in research and model digital cartography as they are under-resourced.

After consulting with colleagues in geography, politics, sociology and religious studies, between 2013-2016 project director Jeremy Kidwell began reaching out to groups in the UK, generating open data sets in collaboration with grassroots practitioners, and thinking towards a larger vision for mapping community in ways that could survive some of the challenges that have thus far prevented large-scale collaboration. Now we have a meta-data sub-group, a churches research sub-group, collaborators across the UK and Europe and a purpose built geospatial data platform hosted by the University of Birmingham which is built on the industry leading open-source package cartoDB

Have a look at where the project has reached so far

Author: Barbara Allan

Living Streets – the UK charity for everyday walking – has secured 12 months funding from the Scottish Government to work in 4 communities across Scotland to support the introduction of 20mph speed limit areas.

Lowering speed is about safety – at 30mph there is a 1 in 5 chance of being killed. At 20mph there is a 1 in 40 chance of being killed.

But lowering speed is also about helping to redress the balance between walkers, cyclists and cars. And it helps to get us all a bit more active!

Residential streets are areas where people drive – but also where people walk to the local shops, exercise dogs, where children learn to ride bikes or residents commute to school or work. However many communities now feel that cars – and the speed they drive at – are preventing people using the streets for walking and cycling. People feel wary about where to cross and there are increasing fears about safety when out walking.

Reducing speed limits to 20mph goes some way to balancing the needs of all users. As vehicle speeds are reduced, people are more confident to walk and cycle within their streets.

The Lower Speed Communities project aims to work with local authorities, community organisations, residents and other interest groups to support the role everyone can play in introducing lower speed limits. The project will offer hands on support to local authorities and community organisations. It will offer support in community engagement and information, support the involvement of hard to reach groups, offer examples of good practice from around the country, and support partnership working between local authorities, communities and other interest groups in improving the places people live and work.

Living Streets would like to hear from community, third sector organisations – and local authorities – who are interested in the project. It is hoped that the project will work in a range of communities – city centre, suburban areas or a village or small town. Actual involvement will be negotiated on a case by case basis at a local level.

So, if your community has a group working on 20 mph then please get in touch with  Barbara.Allan@livingstreets.org.uk