Author: Kaiya Marjoribanks, Stirling Observer Wednesday

CONTROVERSIAL plans for a 500-house development in Plean are being fiercely criticised by former supporters.  In January 2009 Stirling Council’s planning panel was split over a decision on the application to develop a site on farmland west of Cadger’s Loan/President Kennedy Drive and south of the M9 motorway at Pleanbank Farm.

But the plans went through on the casting vote of the chair, subject to a satisfactory Section 75 legal agreement being reached. Council officials had said it was contrary to planning policies and there were problems with extending East Plean Primary School to cope with any influx of families to the new homes.

Concerns were also raised about the feasibility of the regeneration package, which would be expected to cover a new village centre (including library and health facilities), school extension, streetscaping and a playpark.

Last year, however, relations broke down between investors Waveband Properties and Plean Community Development Trust directors over several millions of pounds pledged to help invigorate the village, but which the trust said had been chopped in half.

Now the trust is preparing to speak against the development at a special “pre-determination hearing” before the planning panel next month. Plean Community Council has also voted to object to the application.

Tommy Brookes, speaking on behalf of the trust, told the Observer there had been “too many broken promises”. He added: “Members of the trust were first approached by Waveband in 2007. But we still don’t know who or what Waveband is. As far as we know, the main developer lives in Australia, but Waveband is a company registered in the British Virgin Islands. Any communication to the trust has come from a Jersey address in the Channel Islands.

“Why should Plean now believe anything from Waveband when it has never carried out anything promised in the past. Two years ago Waveband promised the trust all legal expenses for involvement in the planning application would be paid. But the trust had to pay its own legal fees – almost leaving it penniless.”

“Waveband also promised a direct legal agreement with the trust for carrying out a regeneration package. But in the draft Heads of Terms Waveband submitted to the council, it has cut the trust right out of the process. Waveband promised the trust that a community development worker would be funded. Instead, the trust has had to pay itself.”

“Any mention of a new school in Plean is irrelevant. Plean will get a new primary school anyway – through the council’s insurance policy, not through Waveband.

“In January 2009 Waveband promised the planning panel a £6 million regeneration package for Plean village – on top of the school, roads and other works sought by the council. Waveband told the trust in April 2010 that this would be cut in half. Waveband is now telling the council there is £6million for everything, including the school and all the council requirements.

“Latest Waveband documents submitted to Stirling Council show that people in Plean will get the small change. The trust will be lucky to get a tin shed. Waveband just wants planning permission to sell the site. This is why for the past year Plean Community Trust has passed repeated statements that it wants nothing to do with Waveband’s application.”

As the Observer went to press local agents for Waveband were not available for comment.

In recent correspondence to council officials, however, Waveband’s lawyers said the current housing market had made some changes necessary and asked that decision makers “look at the proposals in the cold light of 2011 and not the far sunnier development climate that prevailed in December 2007 when the application was first registered with the council”.

They also said community trust representatives had “steadfastly refused” to meet Waveband’s project team to discuss “how the regeneration package might still be delivered in a post-credit crunch environment”. The trust, however, claims Waveband has made no such approach.

Innovative groups with big ideas for their communities are set to share in £269,295 of Lottery funding today. Across Scotland 29 different projects have received the green light to begin developing their ideas, thanks to grants from the Big Lottery Fund’s Investing in Ideas scheme.

Investing in Ideas awards grants of between £500 and £10,000 to test and develop ideas that could eventually become fully fledged projects. The scheme can pay for a wide variety of activities including market research, public consultations and feasibility studies.

Plans to preserve local jobs in New Pitsligo, Fraserburgh by purchasing the village bakery have received a welcomed boost thanks to a £9,500 grant. The Fraserburgh Development Trust will use the award to investigate the possibility of purchasing the bakery and developing it into a social enterprise which would provide employment, training and learning opportunities for local people. This will include obtaining an independent valuation of the bakery and its premises, surveys of the building, developing a business plan and accessing specialist advice on food production.

Young people in Leith will be showing off their musical talents at next month’s Leith Festival, thanks to a grant of £3,900. The Leith Festival Association, which runs a community arts festival celebrating Leith’s heritage, culture, diversity and people takes place between 10th and 19th June in 50 local venues. Thanks to its Investing in Ideas award, the group will pilot a youth music initiative which will encourage young people to take part in the festival through performance and behind the scenes roles. It will also provide these young people with  opportunities to volunteer and gain work experience in the music industry.

The Cockenzie House Heritage Group today receives £10,000 to help develop its idea of turning the Cockenzie House and Gardens in Port Seton, East Lothian into a community hub with a café, flexible meeting space and visitor accommodation. The group will use the grant to have the property valued and to produce a feasibility study and business plan to help it decide on the best and most sustainable uses for the house and gardens.

Announcing today’s funding totalling £269,295, Big Lottery Fund Scotland Chair, Alison Magee, said: “Through Investing in Ideas we give groups the space and time to test their ideas no matter how big or small. Developing a pilot music initiative for young people in Leith and bringing the village bakery into community ownership in Fraserburgh may seem like two very different projects but they both have one thing in common; they recognise the importance of testing and developing their ideas at an early stage. With this solid grounding behind them I am sure each of today’s successful groups will go onto develop strong and sustainable projects that have the support of their communities behind them.” Other groups receiving Investing in Ideas grants today include A Greener Hawick which will use its award of £10,000 to investigate the possibility and viability of a community owned wind farm and East Renfrewshire Community Enterprise Trust which will explore the possibility of establishing a childcare facility for children aged 0-3 years in Barrhead thanks to its £10,000 grant.

A range of organisations can apply to Investing in Ideas, including voluntary and community sector groups, social enterprises, charities, local authorities and health bodies. For more  information on the programme and how to apply visit: www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/investinginideas.

For a full list of all 12 Investing in Ideas grants made across Scotland today go to: click here

Families are quitting a tiny Hebridean isle amid claims residents are frustrated at having little control over island life and homes they rent.

Canna’s population of 22 could drop to 14 by the end of the year.

Geoff Soe-Paing, who is about to leave with his wife Eilidh and their four children, said islanders needed a “hand in their own destiny”.

Owners the National Trust for Scotland said departures were disappointing but a new family was expected soon.

Since the start of the year four people have left, the Soe-Paing’s family of six is poised to quit and a couple are planning to leave later this year.

The Soe-Paing’s departure will leave Canna’s school with no pupils.

The new family of four expected to arrive on the island over the next few weeks has children of pre-school age.

Mr Soe-Paing and his family have lived on Canna for five years.

“Why can’t we keep people here? Surely that is the question.”

He said depopulation was an issue for other small Scottish islands and was a result of residents not having a big enough say.

“There should be attempts made to let them have a little bit of hand in their own destiny and give them not just lip service to community empowerment,” he said. “People will come and go and that is the short-term viewpoint of the trust. Why can’t we keep people here? Surely that is the question.”

In a statement, the trust said it was very disappointed that people were leaving.

It said it was completing the renovation of a home, known as the MacIssacs cottage, on the island and would shortly be announcing the name of the family taking on that tenancy.

The trust added that it was also looking for more families to join the community.

Alexander Bennett, of the trust, later told BBC Scotland that he hoped a review of property tenures may find a way of encouraging families to stay longer.

He said: “We cannot sell property because we hold Canna in perpetuity for the nation. That means we cannot sell, but we can offer longer leases of up to 15 years which is what we normally do. Under law we could offer up to 20 years and maybe roll it on from there.”

Canna’s population decline comes in the Year of Scotland’s Islands. The celebrations started in April with events promoting the culture and creativity of island communities which are backed by European and Lottery funding.

For a copy of the full report –  More than GDP: Measuring What Matters, click here

This report explores the complex issues hidden behind two simple questions: what is Progress and what is Prosperity? It argues that GDP is an insufficient and misleading measure of whether life in Scotland is improving or not. It takes the findings of the 2009 Stiglitz Report,2 which emerged from the Commission set up by President Sarkozy to advise on how better to measure economic performance and social progress. It recommends that the new Scottish Government applies these to creating a performance framework better able to deliver, measure and report on economic performance, quality of life, sustainability and well-being. The report also shows that over-reliance on GDP as a measure makes it difficult for politicians to back policies that are good for society or the environment if they might hamper an increase in GDP.

The Scottish Round Table which created this report was established by the Carnegie UK Trust to look in more detail at how to better measure economic performance and social progress in Scotland. We were concerned to ensure that the strong social structures and healthy environment, necessary to create a flourishing Scotland, were not overlooked as a result of working to measures mainly focused on economic activity. In short, we are  advising that the Scottish Government should measure what matters.

In the short-term, Scotland’s new Government needs to learn from the experience of measuring a wider set of indicators through the National Performance Framework (NPF) and engage with and be guided by the recommendations of the Stiglitz Report to create a new framework with new indicators.

In the medium term – which we see as being across the next parliamentary term – the Scottish Government should work alongside wider civil society to host a much wider debate about the aspirations of Scotland, the relevance of wellbeing as a goal and how we can develop better measures of well-being that resonate with the wider population.

Our two main recommendations for the short and medium term lead us to four key factors in applying the Stiglitz Report to Scotland.

1. When the Scottish Government chooses what it measures, it is by default defining what matters, and what it focuses attention and resources on;
Our Round Table is clear that too much emphasis is currently placed on the importance of GDP as a measure
of progress. It is an important indicator but not one that should predominate. It should simply be one of a small
select number of indicators used to track economic performance and social progress. Through its NPF the previous administration made an attempt to move in this direction. That Framework can be a building block in helping Scotland go beyond GDP; by creating Scotland’s ‘GDP Plus’ dashboard of headline indicators.

2. Whatever the Scottish Government measures, the critical issue is connecting this measurement to the actions that help move Scotland towards its end goal;
While the new Government needs to consider how to improve on any framework or dashboard, more critical is
working to ensure that it is better used in policy making and in clearly aligning work across each part of government. Over the last four years, Scotland’s Government used the NPF to improve how performance was measured. We saw this as a significant development in how government is organised. Certainly others outside of Scotland have much to learn from this recent experience. However, we do not see that in practice our Government used the Framework to its full potential, or that it led to more informed or joined up-decisions.
The Scottish Government made the NPF the responsibility of national and local government. Next, Government
must look more closely into how to build a sense of shared responsibility and partnership in both deciding the
contents of a framework, and then in aligning the work of local government and agencies to ensure effective
partnerships on the ground.

3. To achieve well-being we need to look at how we measure, deliver and hold Government to account;
Over the last four years, Parliamentary accountability has not been based around the Framework. This has meant that, outside of the civil service and Cabinet, few people have understood how to use the Framework to scrutinize Government performance. Government’s chosen method of reporting – Scotland Performs – is thorough but technical, and does not encourage a debate about how better to organise government and develop and deliver better coordinated policies. It is also not very well known outside central government. Scotland Performs should be maintained – it is critical that statistics are easy to access and use and seen as objective – but our preference would be for Government to report annually against any dashboard or framework it sets itself. A critical factor is the need for wider civil society to also hold Government to account. What we choose to measure defines what is important, and what Government focuses its effort on. If we want Government to be more ambitious and focus on delivery of well-being, wider open and public discussion will be crucial.

4. Having reviewed in detail the 12 recommendations of the Stiglitz Report, we are of the firm view that they are relevant and timely and the new Government needs to make their implementation a priority;
Below we set out our 12 recommendations, with advice from our Round Table on how to implement the findings of the Stiglitz Report. If the Scottish Government wants to be better at delivering well-being through having a healthy economy, and by tackling inequalities in our society, then it needs to take the Stiglitz Report seriously and look closely at our findings to see how they can be implemented in Scotland.
While our focus has been on Scotland, our findings are relevant across the UK. The UK’s four governments all
need to better understand how to measure well-being and report on their own performance. Our Round Table was established in Scotland in part because of existing Scottish interest in this topic. We also see that other governments can learn from Scotland’s experience in using performance frameworks. It is vital that the UK’s four governments take lessons from each other in reviewing and applying the Stiglitz Report. We would like to see more cooperation on this vital topic.

Author: Polly Toynbee, Guardian

On Monday, David Cameron will again try mouth-to-mouth resuscitation on his “big society”. It took another near-death blow from this week’s report by the Commission on Big Society, which found 78% of voters say they have no idea what it means. What began as a clever replacement of Margaret Thatcher’s notorious “no such thing as society” has eluded both popular imagination and real-life substance. Lord Wei, its standard bearer, has retreated somewhat. His inability to define it flummoxed officials, as he issued nothing but stirring anecdotes of good citizens – of whom, thankfully, there have always been many. The Third Sector Research Centre says a steady 25% of people volunteer at least once a month, with twice as many in prosperous areas.

But 5 May 2010 was Year Zero to Cameron’s government. Nothing good ever happened before, with nothing to learn from the last decade. Soviet-style, the past is eradicated. The very names of policies that worked well have been airbrushed from the record. For there is nothing new about the big society. Labour embraced communitarian ideas, influenced by Robert Putnam’s Bowling Alone call for social capital in an atomised society, and with Richard Sennett’s call for mutual respect in poor communities. Neighbourhood renewal schemes were a hallmark of Labour policy, but you would think Labour’s “V” initiative for young volunteering or Volunteering England never existed.

Instead, here come the National Citizens Service and a new bank holiday for volunteering – though the commission’s report found 80% unlikely to use their day for community activity. Around 2,500 community organisers are to be trained – but the contract was carefully not given to Citizens UK because it is too good at this, and in danger of organising against the cuts. Meanwhile, Timebank, mobiliser of 300,000 volunteers, has been axed by civil society minister Nick Hurd – a great surprise. I chaired its 10th anniversary debate where Hurd praised it to the skies and tweeted a congratulation for “countering the cynicism of the big society”. But even it fell in the purge.

Next week I’m summoned to give evidence to the public administration select committee’s hearings on the big society. Of course, I’ll start by saying it’s A Good Thing: whose heart isn’t warmed by volunteers improving their own and others’ lives? But Cameron’s big society words are hollow when he strips the voluntary sector bare. Peter Kyle, acting head of Acevo, the charity CEOs association, says £1.4bn government funding has been cut from charities this year, rising to £3.1bn by 2013 – replaced with a paltry £100m “transition fund”. Thousands of applications rushed in and each charity had to prove it had suffered at least a 30% government cut.

In search of big society ideas, I will urge the committee to look at the New Deal for Communities, the boldest initiative ever tried. This week I visited Aston Pride, the NDC that topped the 39 schemes Labour created in the nation’s worst areas. Each was given about £50m to spend as local people chose over 10 years. That committed funding drew together communities weary of half-hearted previous attempts, always abandoned when money ran out. The 17,000 inhabitants of this multi-ethnic, high-unemployment patch of Birmingham had 17 often fractious mosques and six diverse churches, but slowly and with difficulty they came together and transformed the place.

A shabby, underused park was renewed, now with beautiful sports grounds; a local museum refreshed; a new health centre reaching people the NHS had neglected; schools springing to life through bringing headteachers together, funding equipment and giving a hot breakfast to every child. The main emphasis was on training and job-finding, with money skilfully levering in funds from other partners. The results were spectacular, with lower crime than the city average, school results and youth employment that rose faster, while antisocial behaviour fell. Small businesses were supported and hundreds of volunteers took qualifications.

Perfect? No. But the change is remarkable. When Aston Pride ended this March, local people were mortified at receiving no recognition, not even a junior official from Eric Pickles’s Department for Communities to visit, or a letter of praise for being the top NDC after all those years of giving so much and overcoming such obstacles. Simon Topman, a local manufacturer who took over the chair of Aston Pride after it ran into early trouble, expresses his disappointment, afraid that with all support gone, the area may start to slide back again.

But above all, he is indignant that the government does not want to learn how it was done. This really is the big society, creating new local champions, bringing people together in the hardest places, levering in outside help. Cameron would not like to know the truth: it only happened with money so local people could employ their own chosen professional support – and those things are not free. In Witney, people have time and money – but in places like Aston, with no resources, nothing happens. This is not a little light volunteering in the library – this is heavy-duty hard grind, often quarrelsome, and the people who made it work really are local heroes, whose own lives were changed. But that’s all erased from the record. All that hard-won experience in creating community is lost.

However, the big society can still sound great. David Brooks, the currently fashionable US guru, author of The Social Animal: The Hidden Sources of Love, Character and Achievement returned from a London visit to eulogise the big society in the New York Times on Friday. Though a journalist by trade, he seemed to have swallowed Cameron’s press handout whole, without inquiring into the truth of any of it. Just about every word of this short article is misleading (including views he attributes to me). He says: “The [big society] legislative package has been a success.” There is no such thing as yet. He praises Cameron for decentralising, for giving local communities money to “run things themselves” (what money?) and says “Cameron’s reforms are fostering the sorts of environments where human capital grows”. Where has he been to see that? He concludes, “No other government is trying so hard to tie public policy to the latest research into how we learn and grow.” Or, sadly, how we deliberately forget and shrink. Let’s hope New York Times readers are not so easily deceived by travellers’ fairytales – so far British public cynicism is rather better grounded.

A full copy of the response from the Forum can be seen here

Glasgow and West of Scotland Forum of Housing Associations (GWSF) has published its response to the Scottish Government’s discussion document about regeneration, Building a Sustainable Future.

Written by Dr Kim McKee of the Centre for Housing Research at the University of St Andrews, the paper draws on discussions with many of the 50-plus community-controlled housing associations and co-operatives (CCHAs) who are GWSF members.

GWSF Chair, Peter Howden, said: “I am pleased that the Scottish Government invited views about the future of regeneration policy earlier this year. We have submitted our paper to the new Government and look forward to discussing it with them, in particular the greater role many CCHAs are willing and able to play in regeneration.

“Regeneration is as much a part of what CCHAs are about as the lettering is in a stick of rock. We are part of our communities, so we know at first hand that good housing is not enough to tackle really deep-rooted issues such as poverty, poor health and inequality.

“Kim McKee’s excellent paper captures the current achievements of CCHAs in taking local action, to make their communities stronger and better places to live. And it sets out a vision of how we could take things to a new level in the future, through our own efforts as community anchor organisations and with commitment on the part of government and public bodies to support to community-led regeneration.

“I would stress this isn’t just about how much we spend on regeneration, it’s about how well we spend it. In the current climate, it’s vital that we get the best value out of available resources. CCHAs show that local, community-led solutions help achieve exactly that”.

Dr Kim McKee said: “CCHAs are more than just social landlords. Given their local scale and place-based focus they are important anchor organisations in their communities. They add real social and economic value through their significant contributions to cross-cutting policy agendas around health, worklessness and inequality. With more support, they have the capacity and potential to deliver even more.”

Following the success of the 2-year Promoting Asset Transfer programme, the Scottish Government continues to recognise asset ownership as being key to community empowerment, and is committed to supporting DTAS’ role in advancing this important agenda. DTAS has therefore received further funding from the Scottish Government to establish a Community Ownership Support Service (COSS). This will enable us to take forward work with both local authorities and community groups to explore and advance effective transfer of local authority assets to community ownership.
 
Through its team of advisers the COSS can offer Scotland-wide support and advice to both local authorities and community groups including:
 
For Communities:
 
• Expert advice  on all aspects of asset transfer
 
• Training courses on the asset transfer and asset development process
 
• Sign-posting to other support agencies
 
• A comprehensive web resource including information on good practice, toolkits and case studies.
 
Communities will also be able to link into DTAS’ network to explore the wide range of business models being adopted by other communities throughout Scotland and across the UK.
 
For Local Authorities:
 
A bespoke advice and support service focussed on community asset transfer which could:
 
• Assist Council staff in developing or revising the asset transfer strategy for your authority.  This could take the form of discussion, workshops, resources, study visits, and good practice examples.
 
• Provide an independent review of an authority’s current policy and practice on asset transfer, identifying priority areas for development.
 
• Provide training sessions with elected members and/or council staff (key officials or cross departmental) to explore various strategic, operational and practical aspects of asset transfer.
 
• Provide bespoke training for community organisations within your local authority area to build their capacity to explore and take forward ownership of local assets.
 
For more information or to discuss how we could help you contact the Community Ownership Support Service (COSS) on 0131 225 2080 or email Rebecca@dtascot.org.uk

To see the whole programme click here.
To receive discounted price for Scottish Community Alliance supporters quote discount code : SCA

The world of communication is changing. This is the digital age. It has still only just begun. People are spreading the messages they feel passionate about through social media and supporting causes through online giving, volunteering and social activism. More employees are using digital and social media to get their knowledge from news, YouTube channels and podcasts. Online blogs, networking sites and forums have given a powerful megaphone for anybody with an opinion. Celebrities are using twitter to support
campaigns and journalists use online content to inform their news content.

Third sector organisations have come to embrace digital communications and social media as an integral part of their marketing and fundraising strategies. With the rapid pace of innovation in technology, in online user behaviours and trends, this convention will keep you informed and your organisation forward thinking; give you the knowledge to transform your outlook and approach in utilising digital media; and help you inspire innovations and strategies.

I am proud to present to you over fifty of the best speakers and a coalition of excellent partners sharing our vision for this event and working with us to achieve it. That vision is simple: to give you the best and very latest knowledge to realise the massive potential of digital comms and social media. It is a subject better understood by marketers and fundraisers, although this convention will refresh and enhance that knowledge. But it is also a subject that needs to be well understood and embraced by all professionals, whether CEOs and Trustees or front line workers. We are now living and working in a digital age with a digital generation. This presents both enormous challenges for the sector but even more opportunities. As more ideas come forward each day we are adding to the choice of presentations and workshops in the programme, so please do check back on the website or follow us on twitter – share with us your ideas.

See you in June.

Shirley Ayres

Convention Director THIRD SECTOR 2011 Digital Communication & Social Media Convention

To see the whole programme click here.
To receive discounted price for Scottish Community Alliance supporters quote discount code : SCA

Dr. Edgar Cahn, creator of Time Dollars and one of the founding fathers of Time Banking visited NESTA for an afternoon seminar on May 10th 2011.
 
Edgar Cahn is a civil rights activist and a social innovator. He developed a radical new framework for social welfare and social justice that turns recipients of service into co-producers of change.
 
Believe in people
 
Edgar’s argument is that civil society is vastly undervalued. While markets are a great way of determining commodity prices, they are unable to put a true value on the unseen economy of mutual help and collaboration which we take for granted.
 
These support systems form the bedrock of our society: they raise families, form strong communities, maintain safe neighbourhoods, and care for our elderly. And yet because there is an abundance of these resources, they are devalued.
 
To view video of Edgar Cahn’s talk click here
 

Author: Steve Wyler, Chief Executive, Locality

When I spoke to minister Greg Clark recently about the Localism Bill, he asked me to meet the Countryside Landowners Association, to try to soften their opposition to the Community Right to Buy.
 
Well, I did try. I visited them at their grand offices in Belgravia. They were, of course, very well spoken. “Do please understand what is at stake,” said their President, “We have 35,000 members, owning half the land in England and Wales.” 
 
So, less than half of one tenth of one percent of the population still own more than half the land?   
 
They are of course “horrified” that the government is considering a Community Right to Buy, even though the Localism Bill doesn’t in fact give communities a real right to buy, but merely provides a window of a few months to help communities prepare a bid if land or buildings of community value come up for sale.
 
It turned out that their biggest objection is that ‘lifetime transfer’ might be affected by the provisions. There is already an exemption for transfer though inheritance, but that’s not good enough for these people. As they explained, the very wealthy make sure to hand down their land to their sons and daughters at least seven years before they die. “Is that for tax avoidance reasons?” I asked. “Naturally,” they said, “This for us is a line in the sand.”
 
All of which was a salutory reminder that the rich and powerful never give up their wealth and power without a bitter struggle, even if, as in this case, they disguise it with a veneer of gentlemanly behaviour (“You must realise,” they said, “We take our social responsibilities very seriously, we don’t consider ourselves owners, but rather custodians of land for future generations…”).
 
The new Locality Board met last week and started to address the question of what it will mean for Locality to ‘speak truth to power’, as we promised at our launch event last month. We are managing the Community Organisers programme, which at its heart is about identifying ways for those without power to challenge those who are powerful. If, as is very possible, the spending cuts produce civil unrest in the coming months, where will Locality stand?  What should our position be on direct action? Which are the big causes we should rally behind?
 
We will be discussing these questions with members in the coming weeks and months, leading up the first Locality member conference in Manchester, on 1-2 November, where we intend to lay the foundation for a manifesto for our movement. Do please share your views with us – as if we could stop you! You can find our comments page here.