Author: Fionn Travers-Smith

Think local banks are unprofitable? Think again.

There is a growing orthodoxy that bank branches are a thing of the past, and that mainstream banks are justified in closing them en masse. After all, when was the last time you visited a bank branch?

It’s not surprising that the demise of bank branches seems inevitable in a society that has lost more than half of them in the last 30 years.

What is perhaps more surprising is how willing we have been to believe the banks’ justifications for closing them, without taking a more critical view. It’s almost as if, as a society, we have internalised the banks’ narrative to such an extent that the mainstream has begun to parrot it back to them, and to us.

In fact, the arguments that support the massive closure programmes barely stand up to scrutiny. Conversely, arguments in favour of continued and broad-based branch provision carry great weight both economically and socially.

Firstly, bank branches are profitable. The retail operations of the ‘big five’ banks are turning multi-billion pound profits, at their current level of branch provision. Where banks are losing money, it is from their investment arms – which explains why the big five have been so keen to undermine the ringfence that would have kept them separate from the day-to-day retail activities (efforts that have been largely successful).

Another myth is that branches are only for the old, or that savvy consumers shun bricks in favour of clicks. Again, while it is undeniable that online and mobile banking have revolutionised the ways in which we interact with our financial service providers, people still prefer branches for big financial decisions.

Whether it’s taking out our first mortgage, opening a new current account, or dipping our toes into the investment market, research suggests that millennials are actually more likely than older people to use branches for such decisions, not less.

Of course, banks know this already and are continuing to open branches in urban, densely populated, and affluent areas. In such locations branches are manifestly profitable, which is why you’ll still see five or six of them tightly packed and highly concentrated in large urban centres.

The problem is in those areas that aren’t so obvious to the mainstream – rural areas, the shires, the post-industrial blue-collar belts. Branch closures have been happening disproportionately in these areas for years, and it’s not just those too infirm or vulnerable to travel to the next big urban centre who suffer.

In such communities bank branches provide access to the financial system for those that struggle to achieve it in their absence. Yes, this includes the elderly, the sick and the disabled, but it also includes small businesses who are predominantly reliant on cash, and who are the lifeblood of our economy.

Bank branch closures are a serious problem for businesses across the country that already have small margins, tight cashflows, and which provide the majority of employment in this country. Despite what the London financial bubble will tell you, cash is not a payment method in decline – if anything it is growing. Outside metropolitan urban areas, bank branches are needed to process and facilitate the cash economy, and their removal is seriously undermining businesses and employment in areas that already suffer from imbalances in employment, prosperity and wealth.

Moreover, bank branches provide and distribute lending, which is fundamental to thriving and healthy communities.Recent research from Move Your Money shows that postcodes that lose a bank branch suffer a 63% drop in lending growth, whilst postcodes that lose their last-bank-in-town suffer even more, seeing lending actually turn negative in those postcodes (meaning that banks are actually withdrawing money from those areas).

On average, postcodes that suffer last-bank-in-town closures lose around £1.6m in lending – which is a significant and often devastating drop in lending, particularly given that these are more often than not some of the poorest areas in the UK already. Similar observations have been found in the American context.

Consequently, we are seeing the development of a two-tier financial system in this country. Overprovision and ease of access to finance for the wealthy, urban and privileged – particularly in London and the south-east – and increasing destitution, isolation, and local economic decay for everyone else. In a society that is already bitterly divided in terms of affluence, opportunity and development, we need a financial and banking system that can help address and alleviate these imbalances, not entrench and exacerbate them.

Reversing the tidal wave of bank branch closures isn’t about nostalgia or rose-tinted glasses; it’s an urgent imperative to save our abandoned communities, and to prevent the social fabric of this country from splitting apart at the seams.

Author: ESIN

Islands as beacons of low carbon and sustainable living

“The Small Islands of Europe are extremely precious as potential beacons of sustainability and low carbon living” was the message delivered at the conference organised at the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) in Brussels as part of the 16th AGM of the European Small Islands Federation (ESIN), the organisation that federates 11 small islands federations throughout Europe.

“The ESIN conference and AGM in Brussels on Tuesday 27th and Wednesday 28th September were a resounding success” said Máirtin Ó’ Méallóid from Cape Clear island, vice-chairman of Cómdhail Óileán na hÉireann, the Irish Islands Federation, “we are delighted that the European Small Islands were welcomed so warmly at the heart of Europe.”

The valuable work done by ESIN, notably regarding renewable energy issues, and promoting the use of sustainability indicators to describe the small island situation was noted by the European Commission.  It also garnered the strong support of Mr George Dassis, President of the EESC, who sponsored the conference, and Pierre-Jean Coulon, President of the EESC’s TEN section who championed the EESC Smart Islands study.

Smart strategies to counter-act brutal love

It is in the islands’ nature to be smart as they have to constantly re-invent new solutions for their issues, notably those resulting from their popularity as tourist destinations. The home of 359,000 all-year islanders, the European Small Islands also have 3 million summer residents and 30 million yearly visitors:  they are the objects of a somewhat brutal love which may bring them money but also uses vast amounts of energy and water and leaves huge amount of waste to be dealt with, not to mention the marine waste which ends up on their shores.

Initiatives at opposite ends of Europe such as storage of energy from wind and sun in the small Dodecanese island of Tilos (800 inhabitants), which already boasts unique protection for wild birds (it has 10% of the world population of Eleanora falcons), the well-established Green Grid on the isle of Eigg, an island in the Scottish Inner Hebrides (100 inhabitants) and the brand new tidal turbine providing electricity to the 3 unconnected islands of Ouessant, Sein and Molene in Brittany’s Iles du Ponant, (900, 170  and 216 inhabitants respectively), show what can be done through European programmes such as Horizon 2020 and the European Structural Fund as well as with collaboration with a forward thinking electricity company.

 United Small islands of Europe

The total number of inhabited islands in Europe, big or small, bridged or un-bridged, in seas, rivers and lakes, which are states, regions, municipalities or local communities is 2,418 with a resident population of almost 14 million people.

Among these, 1,640 are small islands in the 11 nations that are members of ESIN: the Aland Islands, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Scotland and Sweden.  Founded 16 years ago, the aim of ESIN is to present issues of common interest for its members to the European institutions, and to exchange knowledge and experiences between its members.

“Islands are ‘buttons of the European Coat’ and as such, they are one of the EU’s  great assets. It is important that their reality is adequately captured, because it is not the case at present” said Christian Pleijel from Kökar island, Åland, who has presented his pioneering work on the concept of ‘Atlas of the Small Islands of Europe’ at the conference.  Mr Pleijel is ESIN’s newly appointed general secretary, working closely with the ESIN board to implement a library of island good practices, zero waste strategies and island product labelling among other projects as part of the federation’s smart objectives. He is also the editor of ESIN’s website.

New Chair from the Scottish Islands

French born Scottish resident of 35 years on the isle of Eigg, historian and social entrepreneur Camille Dressler is new chair of ESIN. Being also the chair of the Scottish Islands Federation, she says: “The Scottish Islands Federation has been involved with ESIN from its very beginning and took an active part in the very valuable 3 years exchange of experiences financed by the INTERREG 3 C programme. Along with all the ESIN members, we are extremely encouraged by the support we have now received from European institutions such as the EESC and the interest shown by the European Commission. It sends a very strong signal to everyone that that the EU has a strong interest in supporting grass-root organisations and help European citizens exchange examples of best practice. I am delighted that the work which the Scottish Islands Federation has put into ESIN has been recognised by my appointment and I will ensure that the Scottish Islands can continue to share their valuable experiences with our friends and colleagues throughout Europe. ESIN will also work closely with the CPMR’s Island Commission to help tackle the effect of climate change on our islands and we are also very excited by some of the ideas mooted at the conference such as a possible Erasmus plus for our small islands’ youth and the setting up of a ZeroWaste Island strand within ZeroWaste Europe.”

Mrs Dressler takes over from Bengt Almqvist, resident of the small island of Sankt Anna in Sweden, founder of ESIN, who has been championing ESIN issues from its inception in 2001. The board as a whole and its national members all expressed their gratitude to Mr Almkvist for his devoted contributions to the small islands of Europe.

Making the most of our opportunities in the EU

As to Scotland’s position in the EU, Mr Gary Robinson, member of the EU Committee of the Regions and political leader of the Shetland Islands Council, who also attended the conference as panel member on the discussion about the need for new island indicators, was unequivocal: “Scotland is in Europe until such time as someone tells us we are not. For that reason, we’ve got to make the most of our opportunities.”

Just such an opportunity for close collaboration between all ESIN members is the ESIN INTERREG Europe proposal – Developing Island Entrepreneurship – which one of the two ESIN vice-chairs, Eleftherios Kechagioglou from Hydra in Greece, will be taking forward with the Hellenic Small islands Federation (HSIN) as lead partner. “We want to help those who want to help themselves,” said Mr Kechagioglou, “and especially our young islanders. We need to help them find ways to stay on the islands and contribute meaningfully to island life. All our islands in Europe have a huge natural, cultural and renewable energy potential that we must learn to utilize to the best advantage in the digital age.”

Author: Scottish Government

The new revised National Standards for Community Engagement were launched on Thursday 29th September 2016 by the Minister for Housing and Local Government, Kevin Stewart MSP, in Kelty Community Centre in Fife.

The Minister said that the days of communities being told what to do are in the past, and that we are now seeing, right across the country, communities becoming involved in every aspect of decision making. Engaging with communities leads to better decisions, he added. The Minister welcomed the revised National Standards for Community Engagement as a framework for supporting the participation and empowerment of communities.

Download the revised National Standards for Community Engagement

First developed in 2005, the Standards are key principles for effective practice which support community engagement and user involvement in Scotland, in areas such as community planning and health and social care. In so doing they are intended to complement and support Scotland’s developing community empowerment landscape and in particular the implementation of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015.

In 2015 and 2016, SCDC and What Works Scotland were commissioned by the Scottish Government to undertake a participatory process to review and update the Standards in light of the current context. Click on the infographic on the left for a summary of the engagement.

What’s in the revised Standards?

The National Standards for Community Engagement have been simplified to seven Standards, reflecting the main elements of good community engagement – Inclusion, Support, Planning, Working Together, Methods, Communication and Impact. The diagram on the right gives some more information on each of these (click on the image to view in full).

Over the coming months a range of accompanying resources will be developed – including an Easy Read version, case studies, and a handy hints guide – to support the use of the Standards across Scotland. These will also be available to download from www.voicescotland.org.uk

In addition, there will be a series of dissemination events across the country to highlight the Standards and their possible uses to support effective community engagement. Further details will be available soon.

Author: Planning Democracy

PEOPLE’S VOICE IN PLANNING

Planning Democracy is a growing organisation with an ambitious mission to make planning more progressive and enabling for communities.

Planning is currently viewed negatively and is seen as a barrier to development rather than a tool to get better places built.

The system contains deep inequalities that need to be overcome before communities can meaningfully engage in planning.

Many people end up feeling traumatised and disempowered following their involvement in planning. This cost to communities is unrecognised, too frequently it is the cost to developers that gets attention.

Proposed reforms will do little to address these problems. People need assurance that the system is fair and their input will be listened to and that future planning results in better places to live in.

WE BELIEVE A TRULY TRANSFORMATIVE PLANNING SYSTEM CAN BE REALISED IF THE FOLLOWING ISSUES ARE ADDRESSED

·         Capture land value – By introducing better mechanisms we could transform how we develop our cities, reducing existing incentives for speculative development on unallocated sites and funding infrastructure.

·         Include powers of public land assembly – to direct development to desirable locations with adequate infrastructure

PUBLIC TRUST IN PLANNING CAN BE REBUILT IF WE:

·         Incorporate properly developed, inclusive, community-led plans into Local Development Plans

·         Strengthen the plan led system – Transform development plans into much more detailed documents that genuinely engage communities in their preparation. Ensure a presumption against development that is contrary to an agreed development plan.

·         Investigate real barriers to early engagement including structural and cultural issues – We ask for an evidence-based inquiry into the strengths and limitations of current approaches and how they can be addressed.

·         Stop calling people NIMBYs – People oppose developments for valid reasons; they want community NEEDS put before PROFITS

·         Equalise the appeal process – Currently if a Developer makes a planning application and the Planning Authority rejects it the Developer CAN appeal the decision. But if a Planning Authority approve a development the affected Community CAN NOT appeal the decision – NOT FAIR!

·         Tackle repeat applications and poor enforcement performance by planning authorities

·         Regulate aggressive and unacceptable developer behaviour

Author: Scottish Community Alliance

A Review of Current Practice in Community Led Plans and their Connection with Spatial Planning 

Executive summary

Purpose

The purpose of this research is to develop a better understanding of why communities choose to produce local plans, how they go about it and what impact these plans have had in terms of bringing about change and improvements within their communities. The research also focussed on the extent to which the wider community became engaged in the process and the extent to which the plans were able to influence the formal planning system and community planning partners more widely.

Policy and legislative context

This study has been conducted at a time of great political and economic churn, and when the spotlight of public policy is focused as never before on the role and contribution that Scotland’s communities can play in helping to meet the challenges facing the country. As communities have become more aware of this changing environment and of the opportunities that are beginning to present themselves, many have taken steps to take stock of their situation and have carried out some sort of appraisal of their strengths and weaknesses. As a consequence, this has resulted in many of them drawing up plans to help shape their future development. Across the country, different approaches to ‘community led planning’ have been pursued andwith an equally varied set of outcomes. This study was commissioned with a view to developingbetter understanding of existing practice in this area of community led planning so as to inform future practice in this area of community development.

Categories of community led plan.

As these plans are determined by local context, each is, to a large extent, unique in terms of process followed, format and content. However, over the course of this research, it has been possible to discern three broad categories of community led plan.

1.            Locally initiated and locally developed. This category of plan covers those where the idea to draft a plan was initially conceived by local people, the research and the production process for the plan was carried out by local people and the end result – the plan – has been wholly ‘owned’ by local people.

For this category of plan, each community would cite a different set of factors that prompted their decision to produce a plan. Some were reactive in the sense that it may have been in response to a perceived external threat or because of a lack of investment from their local authority. Others were more proactive in that the production of a plan was seen to be a key element in galvanizing and sustaining local support for a programme of future action. In general terms, the key driver for this category of plan might be described as the community actively choosing to become more empowered. 

2.            Externally initiated and locally developed. This category of plan covers those where the impetus and initial idea to produce a plan came from an external agency (e.g. a local authority, a National Park planning authority, or a third sector intermediary). The resource, or at least part of the resource needed to fund the process of developing the plan, would be provided from that same external agency. However, the process would only proceed if there was sufficient early evidence of community support and that by the end of the exercise, the community had, to some extent, taken ownership of the plan. For this category of plan, the initial driver was generally the agenda of the external agency, e.g.budget pressures within a local authority, a community engagement strategy of a national park authority. The extent to which a genuine sense of ‘ownership’ of the plan transfers to the local community is generally determined by the particular approach and the level of community engagement skills of the external agency.

3.            Externally initiated and externally developed. This category of plan covers those processes whereby the local authority, or some other external agency such as an urban regeneration company, initiates an intensive design workshop within a particular area. Scottish Government have promoted a programme of such events through its Charrette Mainstreaming Programme over a number of years. These events are generally widely promoted to the local community who are invited to input their views in the way of a normal community consultation. In this type of plan, there appears to be little expectation that the community will take ‘ownership’ of the end product other than to be aware of the design/redesign possibilities for the future. These plans are commissioned by external agencies with the plan production process being led by an externally commissioned design team. The key driver for this type of plan appears to be either a desire to apply a spatial/design element to an existing plan and/or as a community engagement tool for a local authority-led regeneration project.

 Key findings from the research:

•             Community led plans are central to the community empowerment agenda.

The Scottish Government’s vision for communities to play a key role in the design and delivery of public services and to own and take control of a range of local public assets, needs to be framed within a coherent and planned approach that has the full involvement and support of local people. The production of effective community led plans can be a crucial element in achieving this end.

•             Community led plans need to be better connected to the statutory planning system.

Given the evidence, there has been some progress and limited good practice in connecting community led plans with statutory planning and its operations. However, many communities that were interviewed are of the view that their community-led plans are yet to be attached in any meaningful way to public policy and lack genuine public sector support.

•             The confusion around planning terminology needs to be resolved

Community led plans have been labelled variously as ‘Community Action Plans’, ‘Community Development Plans’, ‘Neighbourhood Plans’ or ‘Community Plans’. In addition, there are ‘Design Charrettes’ and plans associated with the Community Planning Partnerships. All this terminology and variation has created significant confusion amongst communities, public organisations, consultants and other stakeholders.

•             Community led plans contribute to the process of renewing local democracy

Community led plans can bring local people together and encourage widespread participation in a range of decisions which will have an effect on their lives both as individuals and as a community. In this sense community led plans can be a key element of any national strategy to renew local democracy.

•             Many communities require external facilitation and additional capacity in order to produce effective plans

The skills that are required to develop effective community led plans are not present within every community. However, there is a growing body of knowledge and experience both within the community sector and across Scotland’s public sector bodies. This needs to be recognized and harnessed so that it is more readily accessible to communities who need to avail themselves of it.

•             The production of effective community led plans has resource implications for the public sector.

Local communities will require access to funding to support their aspirations to develop effective community led plans. If community led plans are ever to become an intrinsic part of formal spatial and community planning systems, the development process needs to be supported appropriately.

•             Community led plans work are effective when they have active support from external stakeholders.

As community led plans currently carry no statutory weight, these plans need to be actively championed within the wider community planning partnerships and, in particular, they need to articulate closely with the spatial local development planning system

•             Community led plans must lead to action.

Local people have invested considerable time and energy in producing these plans. Implementation, however is crucial, in maintaining momentum.

•             Leading the process.

There was some support for the idea that that the development of these community led plans could be the responsibility of community councils. However, this was not a universal view and reflects the fact that in some parts of the country, community councils are in good health whereas in other parts this is not the case. However, what does seem crucial is the presence of some kind of local organisation – for instance, a community anchor organisation – that is able to assume a leadership role within a community.

•             More than a plan

The process of developing a community action plan can have an impact beyond the production of the plan itself. The process of drawing the community together around a common task can in itself build local capacity and a better understanding between different (sometimes vested) interests within the community.

•             Success breeds success.

There was evidence that where a community has successfully developed a plan, neighbouring communities have been inspired to do likewise.

•             ‘Local by default’ can challenge prevailing obsession with scale

Some communities felt that the priorities contained in their plans had been effective in challenging the prevailing economic dogmas of large scale and macro-economics. By focusing on small scale, economic development, the importance of local heritage and tourism, community led plans can be seen to impact on regional priorities.

•             Funding for implementation has to look beyond grants

Consideration needs to be given to more creative/radical ways to underwrite the implementation of community led plans. Suggestions such as direct access to planning gain funding and  a ring-fenced proportion of Council Tax receipts are proposed.

•             External support, partnerships and capacity building are essential

Rarely will a community develop a plan in complete isolation. Even when levels of local capacity are high, community led plans will only be effective in the long run if they are supported by external stakeholders.

Author: Professor David Adams

In May 2014, the Land Reform Review Group submitted its final report to the Scottish Government. The First Minister announced in November 2014 that the Government would consequently bring forward a Land Reform Bill, which was published in June 2015 and subsequently passed by the Scottish Parliament.

The Land Reform Act concentrates mainly, but not exclusively, on rural aspects of land reform. Alongside this, the Scottish Government is currently undertaking a consultation programme on the recommendations made by the LRRG for urban land reform. These have potential fundamentally to change the operation of urban land markets in Scotland. If adopted, they could have significant impact on planning, housebuilding and real estate development across Scotland.

To help people better understand the LRRG’s proposals for urban land reform, Policy Scotland is publishing seven briefing papers summarising their key elements. These papers have been prepared by Professor David Adams who acted as an independent adviser to the LRRG. For more information, please contact Professor Adams at david.adams@glasgow.ac.uk

Briefing Paper No. 1: Compulsory Sale Orders

Briefing Paper No. 2: Housing Land Corporation

Briefing Paper No. 3: Majority Land Assembly

Briefing Paper No. 4: Public Interest Led Development

Briefing Paper No. 5: Statutory Rights of Pre-Emption

Briefing Paper No. 6: Urban Partnership Zones

Briefing Paper No.7: Scottish Government Response to Sounding Board Report

Author: Children's Parliament

See a short film of the trip to Geneva

Last month 15 children from Tranent, East Lothian, participated in the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child’s Day of General Discussion in the Palais des Nations, Geneva. The theme of the day was Children’s Rights and the Environment. These are the youngest children ever to participate in such an event and the first children from East Lothian to go to the UN.  They proudly wore Tranent Tartan kilts for their visit.

The invitation to participate in this prestigious event follows the children’s participation in their local town centre regeneration project StreetsAhead Tranent which is part of Scotland’s Festival of Innovation, Architecture and Design.  Incorporating the views of 250 children in Tranent schools, the children created a large scale mural reflecting their own, and their classmates’ views about the town’s past, present and future.

Because of the quality and impact of the children’s engagement in this project, Children’s Parliament, IPA (International Play Association) and the Children and Young People’s Commissioner in Scotland invited the children to join an international project looking at children’s rights, play and the environmental factors that impact on them. The international project is Under the Same Sky.  Funding was also provided by East Lothian’s Fa’side Area Partnership.

A film combining each country’s work was shown at the event on 23rd, the Scottish children spoke to Committee Members in the Palais des Nations and conducted tours of their mural.

On its return the mural will be permanently located outside Ross High School to be used by the local Community Planning Partnership to inform the town’s ongoing development.

To view a short film of the children’s trip to Geneva, click here

Author: Inverness Soup

What is the ‘Soup’?

Inverness Soup is not a soup kitchen, it’s a night out. Listen while a shortlist of people tell you about their project and how it can benefit our community. After all the pitches are finished, you discuss each one over a community dinner of delicious soup! After dinner, you vote for your favourite and the pitch with the most votes walks away with ALL the door takings in order to fund their project. Soup is an innovative, fun and democratic way to have a say in what happens in our community!

Our hopes for Inverness Soup

This live, micro-crowdfunding revolution is spreading all over the world, from Detroit toStirling, and each one is different from the last. The very idea of the Soup is to create a welcoming, safe and constructive space for people to share their ideas and improve our community. In Inverness, it is important to us that we make a bit of a night of it! We even aim to have exciting local musicians so you can squeeze in a bit of dancing before you leave. We welcome ALL AGES, ALL BACKGROUNDS AND ALL IDEAS (as long as they benefit our community in some way).

Other Soups

•             Detroit Soup is the original and biggest Soup there is. This has become the model for all others. We were so impressed by the simplicity, flexibility & ethos of the event that we were inspired to start one here.

•             Edinburgh Soup, the first in Scotland, has already run four packed nights!

•             Stirling Soup’s first night was completely sold out & they’re already looking forward to their second event on the 2nd of September.

•             Plans are even afoot in Aberdeen & Wick.

All soups are very different. While Inverness Soup welcomes a wide variety of projects, some are more specific.

Devenport Soup specifically helps fund artists & art projects. Birmingham Soup is a family event in the daytime, while Edinburgh Soup has puts on a real show of local bands and talent.

If you want to come along, discuss, learn, eat & have fun then follow us on Facebook to keep up to date with what is going on.

Thinking about pitching? Visit our ‘Why pitch?‘ page.

Author: Senscot, Community Enterprise, Social Firms Scotland and SCA

See event flier, programme and how to book here

Author: Scottish Housing News

A housing activist who founded the Castlemilk East Housing Co-operative in 1984 has been crowned Glasgow’s first recipient of theMary Barbour Award.

Campaigner Anna Stuart, 75, was given the award which honours women like legendary 1915 rents campaigner Mary Barbour who fought for a better deal for people in their communities.

The Mary Barbour Award was launched earlier this year by Parkhead Housing Association, in partnership with the Wheatley Group, to recognise the unique campaigning role of women working in the voluntary sector across Glasgow.

Anna, a mother of six, moved to Castlemilk more than 30 years ago. Shocked by the poor housing she encountered, she began campaigning for improvements and formed one of the city’s first housing co-operatives. The organisation later changed its status to become a charity and was renamed Cassiltoun Housing Association.

Anna is currently the Association’s board chairperson and continues to lobby, locally and nationally, for a better deal for local people on a range of issues from bus services to welfare.

Glasgow’s Lord Provost Sadie Docherty, chair of the judging panel, presented Anna with an engraved crystal rose bowl at the award ceremony held last week at the Pearce Institute.

Anna was also awarded £1000 to donate to a community group of her choice and a certificate.  Her name is also the first to grace the Mary Barbour Shield.

The Lord Provost said: “Huge congratulations to Anna, who is a deserving winner. I’ve known her for a long, long time and she’s a remarkable woman. She’s transformed the delivery of social housing locally and nationally. Her influence on how housing is managed has made a lasting and positive influence to countless people’s lives across the country.”

Jim Strang, chief executive of Parkhead Housing Association, said: “We all know and love the strong women in our communities. The women prepared to stand up for others and fight austerity and poverty. They are as necessary now as in Mary Barbour’s time.”

The judging panel also included Susan McKeown, chair ofParkhead Housing Association, former MP Maria Fyfe and Cllr John Kane, both from the Remember Mary Barbour Association; and Maureen Dowden from Wheatley Group.