http://www.nationalnetworkcc.com

The Nationwide Network of Community Councillors in Scotland seeks to support members working together for a better future for community councils.

Does the Community Council (CC) concept in Scotland need review? While CCs have statutory rights to comment on licensing and planning matters, just how much power does that actually mean for the community councillors who engage. Is anyone listening? What sort of impact are Ccs actually making on policy decisions in these areas?

Should Ccs stop there? What about local democracy? Could or should community councillors have a place in helping to govern their local communities? If so, how can the election process be made more active, dynamic and meaningful?

There’s a debate to be had and it needs to grow. Community councillors from across Scotland are already giving their views. This network wants to stoke up that debate, and to make sure that it’s heard where it matters. We invite you to take part. We welcome articles, reviews and reports of best practice. 

Do you have something to say? How accountable can CCs be? In turn then, how much responsibility can they expect? Let’s hear it. Where do we go from here?

http://www.nationalnetworkcc.com

Have you thought of moving to a small island community, one where your contribution could make a difference? Eday Partnership, based on one of the North Isles of Orkney, could offer you that opportunity, as we are looking for a new tenant for our Gateway House.

The property is available for rent for a period of up to 18 months, to give prospective island residents the chance to ‘try before you buy’.  Our first family have recently vacated the house, having just purchased a five acre plot where they intend to build an eco-friendly house of their own.

The Grind (pronounced as Gr inn is Old Norse for gateway) is a new build three bedroomed, single storey house heated by a ground source heat pump and a heat reclamation system. It is located in the centre of the island next to our Community owned shop and Post Office, with spectacular views over Mill Loch.

We are seeking a family who have skills or talents that would benefit our community or compliment those that already exist here on Eday, from mechanic to silver smith, musician to baker, the only common denominator being people who want to join and help develop a self reliant and sustainable community.

The island boasts a community owned shop, Heritage and Visitor Centre with licenced cafe and a community owned hostel and we are in the process of installing a 900 Kw wind turbine the profits from which will be invested into our community. We also have a Primary School and Pub.

For more about our island visit our website www.visiteday.com or contact our Community Development Officer, Carla, carla@edaypartnership.org.

Blog by Andy Wightman

It is long past time that I revisited the topic of the Crown Estate. (see previous posts for further background) since much has been happening over the past few months.

First of all, a bit of background.

The Crown Estate in Scotland is a collection of property, rights and interests administered and managed by the Crown Estate Commissioners (CEC) who (confusingly and erroneously) continue to call themselves “The Crown Estate”. Be that as it may – the debate today in Scotland is about whether the CEC should continue to manage this diverse and distinct Scottish public estate or whether its role and responsibilities should be devolved to Scotland.

Serious debate in recent years about the future administration and management of the Crown Estate began with the work of the Crown Estate Review Working Group comprising local authorities in the Highlands and Islands together with COSLA and Highlands and Islands Enterprise. Their detailed and authoritative report was published in 2007 and is required reading for anyone who wishes to obtain more information on the history of the Crown Estate and the operation of the CEC. Despite some attention from the Scottish Parliament, neither the Scottish Government nor the UK Government paid much heed to its recommendations. The Treasury Select Committee at Westminster then took up the question in an inquiry conducted before the last Westminster election in 2010. (1) There then followed the publication of the Scotland Bill on 30 November 2010 with two minor proposals for reform (so minor as to be inconsequential) accompanied by a rather incoherent and error-strewn Command Paper.

The Scotland Bill was then the subject of scrutiny both by the Scotland Bill Committee of the Scottish Parliament chaired by Wendy Alexander MSP and by the Scottish Affairs Committee (SAC) of the House of Commons. A large number of submissions of evidence were made to both committees in support of reform of how the Crown Estate is administered and at this stage the topic began to assume a higher political profile. Indeed, so impressed were the Scottish Affairs Committee with the level of interest shown in the matter that they announced in February 2011 that they would hold a separate inquiry into the Crown Estate in Scotland. Following the SNP victory at the May 2011 election, Alex Salmond announced that devolving control over the Crown Estate was one of his priorities. Finally, a new Scotland Bill Committee of the Scottish Parliament was established with an SNP majority of MSPs. It has just published its final report. Meanwhile the Scottish Affairs Committee has just held its final evidence session and will report shortly.

So, where stand things now?

Well, the short answer is that a wide range of individuals and organisations including harbour trusts, local authorities, enterprise agencies, voluntary bodies and community groups would like to see the end of the CEC in Scotland. The Scottish Government has made it clear that it wishes all the current powers of the CEC to be devolved. Meanwhile, Michael Moore, the Secretary of State for Scotland, has indicated he is willing to consider the case for change but, for now at least, is of the view that the CEC should remain a UK body.

But what is really going on?

It is perhaps obvious but is nevertheless worth stressing that the future of the Crown Estate in Scotland is now the subject of an undeclared political fight between the UK Government and the recently-elected SNP administration whose policy of independence they oppose and this thus colours relations between the two governments.

However, the volume of evidence and debate that has taken place so far reveals a very clear picture set apart from any party political struggles. This is most evident in the recently published report of the Scottish Parliament’s Scotland Bill Committee. In their 45 recommendations, only 15 were unanimously endorsed by all Committee members, the remaining 30 being agreed by all SNP members but dissented from (or were the subject of a split vote to remove) by the LIberal Democrat, Conservative and Labour members.

Significantly, one of those 15 related to the Crown Estate.

“The Committee has been struck by the degree to which the more we have learnt and understood about the Crown Estate in Scotland and the operations of the CEC here, the clearer and more compelling the case has become for change” (2)

Recommendation 35 is that “The Committee recommends that there should be further devolution with different outcomes to match the nature and circumstances of the various Crown property, rights and interests involved”

This outbreak of harmony is most welcome and reflects the volume of evidence that has accumulated on the topic and the serious intent of all members of the Scotland Bill Committee.

In the minority report the Lib Dem/Lab and Con MSPs do nuance their position on the topic by stating that further consideration should be given to how any devolution might work and that they do not think that any reform should be taken forward in the context of the Scotland Bill beyond what is already proposed. However, they are not averse to more of the functions discharged by the Commissioners being devolved (3)

In an important passage, the Committee notes Michael Moore’s three tests for any further proposals for devolution, namely that

“Any further proposals for consideration must be based on three key tests, if I may put it that way. They must be based on detailed proposals and be capable of establishing a broad consensus, and they should, while clearly benefiting Scotland, not be detrimental to the rest of the United Kingdom.” (4)

It is clear from the evidence to the Committee and their own report that these three tests are already met. Detailed proposals were put forward in the written evidence around which there is a broad consensus including in the Committee itself. The benefits to Scotland are clear in terms of accountability, improved governance and a greater role for local interests. And the impact of devolution would have minimal consequences for the rest of the UK.

Neverthless, the UK Government appears to be unmoved by these arguments and the focus thus moves now to the Scottish Affairs Committee which, through its dedicated inquiry has assembled a great deal of evidence in writing, in oral sessions and from field visits around Scotland. The Committee has now held the last of its evidence sessions and its final report is anticipated in late January or February of 2012. The mood of the Committee is for change – in the words of the Chairman, Ian Davidson MP, “the status quo is not defensible” (5)

SAC seem inclined to recommend greater local control of the Crown Estate and their approach to this is borne out of not only the evidence they have heard but also of the partisan nature of the relationship between Labour and the SNP at Westminster and Holyrood. (6) Put bluntly, key members of the Committee appear to be wary of a power grab by Holyrood. this is not entirely fair since, in their paper (page 5), the Scottish Government make clear that they favour further devolution to local authorities and communities. However, their failure to develop any detailed proposals for how this might work in practice does not help their case since it allows the SAC to portray their approach as “entirely vacuous” in Ian Davidson’s words. (7)

The fundamental question is where should legislative competence lie over the administration of the property, rights and interests that comprise the Crown Estate in Scotland. If it is to remain in Westminster and the UK Government is persuaded that local communities should benefit more then the onus is on them to pass legislation to that effect. This is highly unlikely. The only realistic option is to devolve legislative competence over the the administration of these rights to the Scottish Parliament which can then consult and legislate for further devolution to local authorities and communities.

Which leads me to conclude by observing that reform is now the public view of the Scottish Government, the Scotland Bill Committee and the Scottish Affairs Committee. The one party that now stands exposed is Michael Moore and the UK Government. For a flavour of their position, watch the evidence of Moore, David Mundell and the Treasury at the Scottish Affairs Committee on 14 December 2011 as they seek the defend a position that is increasingly untenable. There is also a rather embarrassing moment (not picked up on by MPs) when Paula Diggle, the Treasury Officer of Accounts states (in an attempt to be helpful) that,

“The Queen owns the property of the Crown Estate and she owns it by right of her place as the monarch. However, the Government, under the statute of 1961 and indeed under the Civil List Act 1952, get the revenue of the Crown Estate. That is how it works.” (8)

This is, of course, complete and utter nonsense. As this historical essay by George P Best, Assistant Commissioner of the Office of Woods, Forests and Land Revenues (a predecessor of the CEC) demonstrates, the Crown Estate is owned by the Crown and not the Queen who has no entitlement to the Crown Estate revenues. Crown revenues were historically the source of funds to run the country and pay for HM Ambassadors, HM Royal Navy etc. Since 1688, these obligations have gradually been taken over by Parliament as Britain became a constitutional Monarchy. In Scotland, as in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the Crown Estate is public land.

The investigations to date have provided valuable information and insights leading to a greater understanding of the nature of the Crown Estate and its administration. The fact that a senior Treasury official remains so spectacularly ill-informed suggests that the UK Government is yet to take the issue seriously. It is to be hoped that the forthcoming report of the Scottish Affairs Committee will help focus minds in Whitehall and that the days of the CEC in Scotland are numbered.

(1) See Treasury Committee Eighth Report 30 March 2010

(2) para 113, Report on the Scotland Bill, Volume I, December 2011

(3) Volume 2 Annex A pp. 153 & 163

(4) Evidence from Michael Moore to Scotland Bill Committee 8 September 2011, Col. 54

(5) Uncorrected Evidence, 7 December 2011 Q437

(6) See, for example the tetchy exchange between Jim McGovern MP at Q673, Uncorrected Evidence, 12 December 2011.

(7) Uncorrected Evidence, 12 December 2011 Q665.

(8) Uncorrected Evidence, 14 December 2011 in response to Q817.

To assist those interested in following this debate, I have published links to some of the key documents and evidence on my website here.

The global financial crisis is making its impact felt across all parts of society (or at least 99% of it) but inevitably it will be our poorest communities who will feel the worst of it.  But even when the economy was strong, and when public expenditure enjoyed year on year growth, many of the most deep rooted inequalities faced by those living in our poorest communities were showing little sign of improvement.  Despite the best efforts of successive regeneration strategies over the past thirty years, evaluation of their long term impact has consistently flagged up that any success has been, at best, limited while many of the disadvantages these initiatives were specifically designed to tackle have actually became more pronounced.  But despite the mounting evidence that these regeneration strategies have been pointing in the wrong direction and achieving little in the way of positive and lasting change, a form of sustained and collective amnesia seems to have prevailed amongst policy makers in respect of learning from the lessons of the past. As a result, official regeneration policy over many years has persevered with variants of the same top-down approach, focusing largely on physical regeneration and driven by the public sector in the hope that the private sector will eventually find sufficient traction and the incentive to finish the job.

But now, at last, it looks as if the Government’s obsession with top down regeneration is coming to an end. In its recent policy paper – Towards a Sustainable Future – the Scottish Government appears to acknowledge that previous approaches to regeneration have either simply failed to deliver the desired outcomes or, because of the fundamentally changed economic circumstances within which regeneration now has to take place, these approaches are effectively no longer fit for purpose.  The financial climate and in particular the long term constraints now biting into public spending budgets mean that the traditional top down public sector led approach is simply no longer an affordable option.  And the absence of public sector funding to pump prime investment opportunities, combined with the slump in land values, means that regeneration is no longer attractive to the private sector.

Whether this change of tack has come about because the Government has finally recognised the futility of pursuing approaches that have consistently failed in the past or whether it is because circumstances have conspired against them, is not entirely a moot point.  Although the Government now seems prepared to countenance a different approach to regeneration, one which is bottom up and community led, the implications for government, both local and national,are highly significant if this change in direction of government policy is to be successful.  It is important therefore that the Government is wholly committed to this new approach and recognises the full implications of what it means. Although the resource implications of community led regeneration are not insignificant, as much as anything else this approach implies a fundamental change in the culture of government, both at a local and national level, and new ways of thinking about communities and what they are capable of achieving. If Government is a reluctant conscript to the idea of community led regeneration, it is unlikely to succeed.

The fundamental assumption underpinning most regeneration effort in the recent years seems to be that it is the principle responsibility of the state, both national and local government working together, to deliver solutions to the complex challenges facing our most disadvantaged communities. It is this particular assumption that now needs to be laid to rest if the challenge of how to deliver successful community-led regeneration is to be met.

A community-led approach to regeneration is one where the emphasis in terms of the shape and direction of the regeneration process shifts from being determined principally by external stakeholders (local government, public agencies) to being determined principally by internal stakeholders (local people).  Regeneration strategies in the past have typically incorporated some degree of community involvement with the aim of providing local people with an opportunity to feed into the process and to have their voices heard. Essentially, the role of the community in previous regeneration strategies has been primarily consultative and passive in nature.  Community-led regeneration demands a much more proactive contribution from local people and as such it is not necessarily an approach that will suit all communities from the outset.

Community-led regeneration can take many different forms and these will largely be determined by the local context.  However, where a community led approach has been successful there are likely to be a number of features that can be observed in each instance:

• one or more local organisations playing a leadership role within the community and has the capacity to provide support to a wide range of less formal community activities

• significant assets under community ownership or control

• community owned enterprises generating an independent income stream

• a locally conceived community plan or ‘charter’ which identifies the short, medium and long term priorities for action as determined by local people 

• a level of engagement with external stakeholders which reflects a sense of genuine partnership and mutual respect

• an absence of top down initiatives driven unilaterally by public agencies

Above all, community led regeneration requires significant culture change on all sides. Communities need to realise that it is no longer an option to assume that it is the responsibility of the public sector to meet all of their needs or to ‘resolve’ many of the problems that they face. Public sector agencies need to realise that it is neither appropriate nor realistic for them to imagine they should seek to be doing this.  In essence, community-led regeneration requires the relationship between the state and communities to be recalibrated so that there is a much greater sense of mutual respect and equity of status. This aspect was recently reinforced by the Christie Commission who looked at the future delivery of public services. The report argues that the public services of the future must be built around people and communities and highlights the importance of co-producing services with local people rather than delivering to them. The report concludes that , “people’s needs are better met when they are involved in an equal and reciprocal relationship with professionals and others, working together to get things done.”

Examples of community led regeneration can be found in many different parts of the country –  from the island based community buy outs where local people have assumed control over virtually every aspect of community life (Isle of Eigg, Isle of Gigha, South Uist) to more urban communities where various combinations of development trusts and community based housing associations have acquired control and ownership over a wide range of assets and enterprises and where local people are now instrumental in shaping their own futures (Renton, Neilston, Easterhouse).   Historically, issues of urban and rural poverty have been treated by Government within distinct policy silos. While this might have been appropriate in the context of the top down models of old, community led regeneration offers real opportunities for much closer integration of effort to be developed  – indeed there are many principles and practices that have underpinned successful regeneration in rural Scotland that could and should be transferred into the urban context.  

At the heart of community led regeneration is the notion that it is about redefining the nature of the relationships between a local community and the world about them.  In this respect it is worth considering the transformational impact that the acquisition of land, and in particular the land on which a community lives, can have.  When the community of Eigg finally took the step to free itself from being subjected to the whims of an absentee and disinterested feudal landowner, a wave of energy, creativity and passion was unleashed from within the local population that today seems to be unstoppable. Prior to taking the final step towards owning their island (and a sense of control over their future) the community had showed none of this passion or interest in their collective future.  There is now a sound body of evidence stretching back over twenty years that indicates that this shift in the relationship between people and the land they live on can generate local energy like nothing else – regeneration begins to take care of itself.   The fact that not every community is an island does not negate the fact that owning land or other forms of community asset and taking control over different aspects of community life can galvanise local people in unforeseeable ways and unlock a hitherto untapped human resource. 

Indeed there are many close parallels between the experience of a remote island community such as Eigg and any one of hundreds of disadvantaged urban communities. For the absentee feudal landlord, substitute the urban local authority delivering public services within a traditional municipalist framework. Both are equally disempowering for the people who live under these paternalistic regimes. For a community land buy-out substitute the formation of a community led housing association and the purchase of the land and housing stock from the city council. Both are equally empowering for the local people involved and there is now plenty of evidence to support the argument that with appropriate external support, both models of community led regeneration, albeit in very different physical environments can produce the most stunning results.  

Despite the prevailing wind of regeneration policy having blown in the opposite direction for so many years, nonetheless many fine examples of community led regeneration have emerged across the country.  They all share a story in common with each other which describes many years of struggle in order to get to the stage of development that they are now at. In particular, and without exception, the community leaders involved would, in part at least, ascribe that struggle to varying degrees of opposition encountered from across a range of external stakeholders. While there may be some merit in the argument that the process of engaging in a struggle of some sort can forge a deeper level of commitment in the long term, the fact remains that community led regeneration has evolved as it has, in spite of the attitude and behaviour encountered from external stakeholders rather than because of them. 

In many respects, given the history of regeneration in this country this oppositional behaviour that communities have encountered is entirely predictable. The state has hitherto assumed that its principal job was to ‘fix’ whatever the problem was and any suggestion from local people that perhaps the solution lay in a different direction ran counter to the received wisdom. This state sponsored resistance to the idea of communities taking responsibility for resolving their own issues, is further exacerbated in part by the overall size of the public sector in this country, and in part by the degree to which local government has become increasingly centralised through successive reorganisations and consequently more remote from the communities it is supposed to serve. 

It is worth noting however, that in the Highlands and Islands, a particular approach to strengthening communities has been pursued by economic development agency, Highlands and Islands Enterprise.  HIE work in the belief that the economic and social development of the region are inextricably linked and as such have developed a modus operandi of getting alongside communities to help them play their full part in the regeneration of the region.  Although the effectiveness of HIE’s approach to strengthening communities attracts widespread acclaim, for whatever reason it has not been pursued elsewhere in the country.

Consequently, although perhaps to a lesser extent in the highlands and islands, there remains a very significant barrier in the way of delivering widespread and successful community led regeneration. And that is the dominant culture and prevailing mind-set within the agencies of the public sector.

In those parts of the country where community led regeneration has been successful, there is a compelling  argument to be made that the process should not have been as difficult to achieve or as costly in human terms as it has turned out to be.  Nor should the whereabouts of the successful examples be as randomly haphazard and dependent on the fortuitous presence of key individuals or local circumstances.  If the Government’s new regeneration strategy is to place an emphasis on community led regeneration, it will be essential that a more systematic and strategic means of achieving this end is identified.  It won’t be cheap and it won’t be easy – particularly for those who will need to reappraise their beliefs and attitudes towards the community sector –  but it will build local resilience where it matters most and it may help to ameliorate some of the worst impacts of the financial crisis that is spreading across Europe and beyond.

Author: Alan Kay

Tribute by Alan Kay

John Pearce was a close friend, a colleague and a source of inspiration.   I shall miss his patience, his humour and his wisdom.   He strode through life…with original ideas that he put into practice…with a strong sense of values and social justice…and with an ability to include and support the most vulnerable in society. 

He had little patience with misguided authority and self-justifying power structures. He was always on the side of the common folk.   

I first met John in 1988 when I applied for a job with Community Business Scotland (CBS) and we went out for a coffee at the People’s Palace in Glasgow.  I think he wanted to check me out.  After the coffee we went on a visit to the hard-pressed Ferguslie Park housing estate in Paisley and he explained that what was lamentable was not that places like Ferguslie Park existed, but that they seemed to be allowed to continue to exist…

He converted me to a form of community development based on the need for local people to take charge of their own economic activity. By helping local communities to do this, we are empowering them.

John has inspired and influenced many people thoughout his life.  He was an activist in the Community Development Programme in the early 1970s in Cumbria.  He then worked tirelessly on promoting and developing community businesses in Glasgow and the West of Scotland.  He established and ran Strathclyde Community Business which was the first development unit supporting the growing community business movement in Scotland. That led to the founding of Community Business Scotland in the early 1980s and the Scottish Community Enterprise Investment Fund.

After leaving SCB in the early 1990s be became self-employed and worked on ways community enterprise could account for their social purpose.  This led to the development of social accounting and audit and work with the New Economics Foundation and others.

He had an agile mind coupled with a curiosity and sense of fairness which impressed nearly everyone he came into contact with.  He truly was a social entrepreneur but with an understanding that lasting community change would only be achieved if it involved collective action – people working with each other for the common good.

Over the years he and I worked closely together – in odd places from Shetland to Wales, from Newcastle to Liverpool; and with the occasional trip aboard on European research projects.

I learnt a lot from John as he always behaved with integrity and showed me ways in which we can help others, maintain a set of values and do interesting work – all at the same time!

For me John is irreplaceable and I look back on the work we did together over the last fourteen years with affection. They are filled with good memories – too many to go through but ones that will stay with me and be remembered with fondness.

And so, if any of us in the future stop long enough in the lay-bys of life and contemplate the origins of social enterprise and social impact we shall stumble across the work of John Pearce – much more than a footnote in the history of the social economy.

I shall miss him – my friend, John Pearce.

Author: Andy Milne, SURF

On 12th December, the Scottish Government launched a new ‘National Regeneration Strategy’ called ‘Achieving a Sustainable Future’. 

As Scotland’s independent cross-sector regeneration network, SURF welcomed the Scottish Government’s intention to produce a new national regeneration strategy – the first since the February 2006 ‘People and Place’ regeneration statement. It is therefore important both as the first since the economic collapse of 2008 and the first under an SNP-led administration.

SURF is working hard with local authorities, community organisations, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations and many others to find practical ways to support community regeneration at a time of huge changes and challenges for everyone. 

The Scottish Government is a vital partner in these efforts, particularly in setting out an inspiring vision within a deliverable strategy. It has to make difficult choices in that key leadership role but, for SURF, there are some big concerns with the strategy that it launched on Monday:

While the strategy sets out to make, ‘no assumptions about future economic circumstances’, the content confirms a sharp reduction in dedicated Scottish Government ‘preventative spend’ in support of community regeneration efforts. 

The strategy indicates that the Scottish Government will provide £7.9m per annum from 2012 to 2015 in the form of a new ‘People and Communities’ fund to support its vision for community led regeneration. 

This compares with the pre-existing £118m/yr Community Regeneration Fund (subsequently rebranded and amalgamated with others to be the £148m/yr Fairer Scotland Fund) in addition to the earlier level of £12m/yr for the Wider Role Fund. All of this previous annual dedicated support (£160m) for targeted community based regeneration activity is now reduced to the new £7.9m People and Communities fund.

SURF Chief Executive, Andy Milne, said: 

“The rhetoric in the strategy for more ‘community led’ regeneration is not matched with adequate resources to help make that a practical reality. It appears that the increase in rhetoric on the importance of supporting community-based regeneration is in direct proportion to the reduction in resources allocated to that purpose. 

“The strategy represents a shift of the remaining greatly reduced resources to more market-based delivery mechanisms. SURF and many of its members are concerned that these loan based, speculative business models are not viable for local organisations in disadvantaged communities which are suffering the impacts of increasing poverty and unemployment. 

This is a particular problem in a strategy which is specifically dedicated to supporting hard pressed communities.” 

SURF and others have called for adequate, top-sliced investments to be directed to reliable, locally based ‘community anchor organisations’ such as housing associations, development trusts and other established social enterprises. These are widely recognised as being well-placed to support practical community led projects and services as the basis of genuine community led enterprise and regeneration. 

This, and a wide range of other practical measures in support of a more sustainable, community-focused form of regeneration, were proposed in SURF’s pre-election Regeneration Manifesto statement (‘Protect, Empower and Invest’) of March 2011. 

In following through on that collaborative programme, SURF is working creatively with its members and supporters across Scotland and beyond to promote effective ways to offset the worst impacts of the recession and to develop more sustainable approaches for the regeneration of Scotland’s disadvantaged communities.

Author: Carnegie UK

Housing expert offers blueprint to get the best out of Scotland’s unique Rural Housing Burden mechanism

The Scottish Government is being asked to consider a series of recommendations to help improve the supply of affordable land and homes in rural Scotland. Di Alexander, Chair of both Lochaber Housing Association and the Rural and Island Housing Association Forum, was commissioned by the Carnegie UK Trust to undertake a review of Rural Housing Burdens (RHBs) – an innovative approach that helps rural communities to access land at a discount, and secure affordable homes for local people.

Based on extensive research by Mr Alexander, the Trust are today publishing a series of recommendations which include ways in which the Scottish Government and local authorities could encourage and support an increase in the use of Rural Housing Burdens (RHBs) to facilitate the delivery of their housing policies .

In places where RHBs have been used, including communities across the Highlands and in Dumfries and Galloway, many local families have been given the opportunity to build or buy their own homes who could not otherwise have afforded to do so. The RHBs have helped improve the medium-term sustainability of some fragile communities by persuading landowners to make land available at a discounted rate for the development of affordable housing.

Mr Alexander says such an innovative mechanism to reduce the shortage of affordable homes in rural areas of Scotland could be used more effectively and widely: “Rural Housing Burdens have had a beneficial but so far limited impact in delivering both more affordable land and more affordable homeownership properties for rural communities. However, they are not yet living up to their full potential. The recommendations we are putting forward aim to improve the mechanism by making it easier for families in rural areas to build or buy their own home, and ensure that, when they move on, the property remains affordable for the next family buying it.”

The report recommends that Scottish Government should consider how RHBs could provide more effective support for their own policy initiatives, including their ‘LIFT’ shared equity scheme. It also recommends that both the Scottish Government and local authorities explore the idea of setting up revolving loan funds to help rural housing bodies to buy back RHB properties when they are put on the market. Such loans would be repaid as soon as the property had been sold on.

Mr Alexander will also take on the role of Carnegie Associate during 2012 to work on behalf of the Trust to improve the understanding of rural housing burdens and increase their uptake.

Jennifer Wallace, Carnegie UK Trust Policy Manager, says that the proposals being put forward are both sensible and realistic:

“This report is an important starting point for a thorough examination of the issue of how RHBs can to be deployed more frequently and effectively in the future. Many of these issues are related to the dramatic changes in the housing market that have taken place since RHBs were introduced, while others are more fundamental.

“Rural Housing Burdens were and are an important innovation. To allow them to achieve their potential we now need to work with the Scottish Government and rural housing bodies to examine how we get the balance right between the needs and interests of homeowners and communities and what sort of resources rural housing bodies have to deliver more RHB properties.”

For a summary of the main report, click here

Minister’s visit recognises success of a community determined to shape its own destiny

Alex Neil, Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure and Capital Investment will visit the East Renfrewshire town of Neilston on Tuesday 13th December at 10am to mark the completion of a six year project undertaken by the local community to buy, develop and run their own community asset. 

The Bank (formerly the Clydesdale Bank) was purchased by the local community through the Community Right to Buy provisions of the Land Reform Scotland Act in 2006.  The Bank was, and is still, the only commercial building in Scotland to be bought using the full powers of the Act.  The community (through Neilston Development Trust) then operated the building as a cafe and activities centre, including an annual festival, carbon reduction project and volunteering programme, until funds were raised in 2010 to undertake a large scale refurbishment of the premises. 

The reopening of The Bank on 13th, with improved café, office, meeting and activity space is a significant milestone for both Neilston Development Trust and the wider community as it marks the completion of the first element of an ambitious programme, to bring about the physical, economic and social regeneration of the town.

Alex Neil said “I am delighted to be able to open Neilston Development Trust’s fantastic new community facility.  However the work of the Trust goes far beyond the bricks and mortar of the building.  The Trust has the vision, the energy and the ambition to make Neilston a better place for all who live, work and invest there.  It was seeing examples like NDT that made me determined that community led regeneration should be at the heart of our new national Regeneration Strategy that I launched yesterday.  This Government believes in the creativity, determination and skill of the Scottish people, and our new Strategy will help to unlock more and more of that potential across the country.”

The Trust, which was formed in 2006, has played a significant role in delivering a number of other ground-breaking initiatives.   These include the delivery, with partners, of the Renaissance Town programme, which engaged Neilston residents in setting out a future vision for the physical regeneration of the town.    This resulted in Neilston being designated as Scotland’s first renaissance town.

The Trust is now moving to financial close in its Limited Liability Partnership with a commercial wind farm developer (another first), for a 4 turbine development which will see around £10m of revenues being distributed for use within the community over the life of the project (25 years).  The aim is to create a financial situation which enables Neilston to shape its own future without being wholly reliant on external funders.

Key to the ongoing success of the Trust will be the continued ongoing support of the wider local community.    Until April this year, almost all of the work of the Trust was undertaken by volunteers and over 50,000 hours of volunteer time has been accrued so far.

NDT chair, Andrew Jones said “we have always been aware that, for the town’s longer term plans and ambitions to be achievable, we needed to take control of our own destiny.  The purchase and redevelopment of the Bank, which we hope will develop into a real hub for the town, and the community’s stake in the wind farm take us some way to being able to achieve our goals.  However, the whole focus and purpose of the work we are doing is the people who live here.  We want to ensure that we continue to reflect their vision and that they are able to actively contribute to seeing it realised.”

With the re-opening of the Bank, the Trust has taken another step towards delivering on its vision of an engaged, sustainable and thriving community with local people leading the charge.

Angus Hardie, Director of the Scottish Community Alliance said:  Neilston exemplifies at a local level so much of what is being espoused at national policy level in relation to community regeneration.    The Trust has managed to adopt a community led approach to regeneration which focusses on harnessing local people’s energies to bring about an enterprising and sustainable future for the town.

A contribution from Jenny Mackenzie, Leith Community Councillor

Following uncharitable rumours about their severe illness and imminent demise, a nationwide network of community councillors (Ccllrs)  across Scotland is ignited in debate.

Not just a hot-air talking shop, this conversation is a heated exchange that is fast-forwarding into action.  A website will be up before the end of the month that will bring that debate into the public domain. More than a few Ccllrs promise that within the next few years, community councils most definitely won’t be dead.  But they will be different.

The current model definitely needs review. Some say that a current concept that suits some Ccs, more so those in rural areas and some small villages, doesn’t work for urban areas.  City Ccs often have dense populations and complex and intensely competing needs to deal with.

Elections, usually uncontested, are frequently agreements amongst chums, hardly conducive to fair and representative committees. In others, local politicians shamelessly interfere in what are supposed to be a-political forums. Many well-meaning community councillors do not yet have the skills to resist or cope with poor chairing, interference from those who should know better or wilfully disruptive behaviours.  These practical problems can and will be addressed.  The Scottish Government knows that they exist, and says it is interested in helping to find solutions. We hope that time will prove that right.  

While Ccs have different levels of success in different parts of the country, many of their members are bound together by a common theme.  They want more accountability, interaction with and effectiveness from the authorities and officials who deliver the services to their communities.  They want to achieve this in an a-political way. In law they have statutory rights to comment on licensing and planning issues, but many question just how much effect this is having. They believe in the concept of local democracy and they want to exercise it so that it means something. Many don’t want to have to flirt with a small number of political parties with big ambitions to achieve these goals. 

Some want budgets devolved to Ccs, while others couldn’t think of anything worse than this level of financial responsibility.   Before we get to that level of engagement, we need a better model to work with.  There‘s a rich resource of people from across Scotland with skills, experience and commitment to their communities who need a better model for service than the one they’ve got now.  They are rapidly organising themselves into a credible force, and their plan is to make themselves heard where it mattes so that Ccs can make the difference they deserve. 

To listen to a radio interview on Radio Scotland with the author of this piece click on the MP3 file below:

JennyMackenzieInterview.mp3

Author: The Scotsman 28/11/11

A FEAT of Georgian engineering constructed to power a cotton mill is to be restored to its former glory and turned into a tourist attraction.

The network of reservoirs and a weir in the Ayrshire village of Catrine, built in 1787, was once the largest power scheme in the world. However, the entire structure has started to deteriorate, with sections of the weir at risk of being washed down the river.

The Heritage Lottery Fund will announce today that it is giving £660,000 towards a £4 million project to revamp the feature, which is designated as a scheduled monument. 

It consists of a weir, five reservoirs known as the Catrine Voes, a sluice gate and a fish pass. 

The system is an integral part of the history of Catrine, which began life in 1787 when Claude Alexander and David Dale, from New Lanark, saw the potential of the natural resources and built a water-powered cotton mill there. The village was laid out with the industrial buildings forming the centrepiece of the main square, and houses built for the workers. It is a substantially intact example of Georgian “town planning” and an outstanding conservation area with 51 listed structures.

In 1828, two giant water wheels, 50ft in diameter, were added to the power system to service the additional demands of the mill. Known as the “Lions of Catrine”, the wheels were for many years the most powerful in the world and became a tourist attraction in their own right.

The Heritage Lottery funding will contribute to a project to conserve the weir, upgrade a disused chapel to create a visitor centre and turn an adjoining Victorian villa into a new Community Enterprise Centre.

Rural affairs and environment secretary Richard Lochhead said: “I am pleased to see the Catrine water system being restored. It’s a fine example of Scotland’s industrial heritage that the local community can be proud of and will also help protect the rich biodiversity that fills the river and the surrounding countryside.”

Colin McLean, head of the Heritage Lottery Fund in Scotland, said: “For almost 200 years, the Catrine water system was central to the biodiversity and social history of the area, as it brought with it jobs, housing and economic prosperity.

“This project demonstrates how history can be a living part of a modern community, bringing people together to learn from, enjoy and benefit from their shared past.”

Stuart Nelson, of Catrine Community Trust, said: “The Community Trust and its supporters have worked tirelessly over the last five years in building the case for funding to save Catrine’s amazing industrial heritage and provide much-needed facilities to convey this to the many people who pass though the village on the River Ayr Way.

“This generous award virtually completes the £4m funding package that once seemed very far away and provides a much-needed boost to the capacity of the Trust to regenerate the village and provide employment.”