The beleaguered economy of South Uist could be boosted by a total of £27million from a community windfarm, it has emerged.

The scheme may be built as soon as this autumn on crofters’ grazings on moorland by Loch Carnan.

A study for community landlord Stòras Uibhist has identified Benbecula common grazings, which has an existing access track north of Loch Olabhat, as a good second choice, followed by Beinn a’Charra and Beinn Coraraidh.

Rare wild birds such as the golden eagle, sea eagle, peregrine falcons and red throated divers use the Loch Carnan site and there is said to be a risk, though small, of killing some over the 25-year lifetime of the scheme.

The £8.5million construction of three 328ft tall turbines is being led by community landlords Stòras Uibhist.

It is the largest initiative being progressed since islanders bought out the sporting estate for £4.5million two years ago.

Shares would be sold to individual islanders to help raise money to build the development.

Western Isles Council is to debate its go-ahead at a special meeting later this month.

Highlands and Islands Airports have lodged an objection until a full assessment is made on the impact of nearby Balivanich airport.

If successful, a £75,000 payout would go to the Western Isles Development Trust, with £375,500 of site rentals split between Stòras Uibhist and Iochdar Hill grazings committee.

Regular dividends from the share sell-off should return £3.5million direct to local islanders and, over the lifetime of the windfarm, the accumulated value to the economy should amount to around £27million.

Stòras Uibhist said it was proposed to underwrite the project from £1million lottery cash plus the £1.5 million share issue on top of £6 million from the bank.

If the lottery bid fails the project can still go-ahead with extra bank funding though this would mean lower returns to the community.

The major slice of profits would go to the Stòras Uibhist which said it would reinvest it in community regeneration projects like a major redevelopment of Lochboisdale harbour, new housing, land management, an archive centre, a social enterprise park and the upgrade of Grogarry Lodge.

The largest-ever government-sponsored survey of third sector organisations has produced an average national score for how effectively local statutory bodies help them achieve their aims, of just 16 per cent.

The low scoring has prompted charities minister Kevin Brennan to urge local authorities, primary care trusts and other local government bodies, to redouble their efforts to improve their performance under the National Indicator 7 – ‘An environment for a thriving third sector’.

Brennan said: “Now that the survey has provided a baseline score – we will judge local statutory bodies on their progress at developing their relationship with local third sector organisations.”

However, he stopped short of criticising the statutory organisations, and expressed confidence that their performance would improve.

“Overall, I’m confident that there will be progress, we’ve already had really positive feedback from the survey and I’m pleased to note that local statutory body chief executives are very keen to develop their relationships with the third sector.”

The results differed vastly according to whether the respondent third sector organisations had current contact with local statutory bodies. Where they did, they give an NI 7 score of 75 per cent. Where they had little or no contact, the score dropped to 3 per cent.

The survey was mailed to more than 104,000 charities, voluntary groups and social enterprises, and 48,949 – 47 per cent – completed it.

The full results will be published today on the survey website.

LPL is conducting its own survey into how supportive the public sector is of the community sector .  http://www.ekosonlineresearch.co.uk/lpl.htm

Scottish Government has either commissioned or is about to commission a number of pieces of related research:

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT CURRENT PROGRAMME FOR THIRD SECTOR RESEARCH

 The programme covers three themes that will support the Scottish Government’s five Strategic Objectives, as follows:

1. Alignment of research evidence to government strategy

2. The localism agenda

3. Sustainable growth of the third sector

1. The Alignment of the Evidence in Relation to Scottish Government Strategy

The main priority for Scottish Government analysts is to establish a thorough understanding of the evidence base and understand what the third sector can currently contribute to the government’s purpose (especially cohesion and solidarity) and five strategic objectives.

Project A. Commissioned.

The contribution of the third sector to the Government’s purpose and five strategic objectives

This work will review the current evidence on the third sector in Scotland to evaluate its contribution to the Government’s purpose and five strategic objectives (wealthier and fairer; smarter; greener; healthier and safer). It will identify what evidence we have on the Scottish third sector, and highlight the areas where the sector makes the largest contribution to the Government’s objectives. It will also draw on international evidence to highlight potential areas for the third sector to make an impact, thereby providing an indication of the gaps in evidence and the gaps in the sector for understanding how the strategic objectives can best be met with support from the third sector.

2. Localism

A key theme of the Government’s purpose is localism, in particular empowering communities and citizens to work together towards building sustainable economic growth with opportunities for all to flourish. The two projects here are specifically related to the new local landscape in which Third Sector organisations are operating.

Project B. To be commissioned.

The opportunities and challenges of the changing public services landscape for the third sector in Scotland: a longitudinal study

The purpose of this work is to assess and track over the next six years the opportunities and challenges that Third Sector organizations are facing with a changing public services landscape in Scotland between 2009 and 2014. The Concordat was signed in November 2007 and has begun an ongoing process of change that aims to deliver public services more effectively and efficiently by taking decisions closer to the public for whom they are designed. Other policies, such as the Crerar Review and Best Value 2 are likely to contribute to changes in the public sector landscape. This work will investigate how these and other local issues impact upon third sector organisations and the work they do, assessing the perceived as well as actual impacts. The outcomes will provide evidence on the impact of the changing local  landscape in relation to the third sector, identifying areas of good practice that can be shared with other third sector organisations, and also areas where greater support needs to be directed. Longer term, his work will also be an additional means for identifying the success level of recommendations resulting from Project C, below, on the role of the third sector within community planning partnerships. The intention is for this to be a longitudinal study with a group of organisations over a period of time.

Project C. To be commissioned.

The role of third sector organisations in Community Planning Partnerships

The Concordat has devolved greater responsibilities to local level and Community Planning Partnerships will play a greater role than in the past in the design and delivery of public services. Comment from thirdsector stakeholders has suggested that third sector organisations do not always have sufficient involvement in CPPs, particularly in this context. This research is intended to establish the current and recommended level and type of third sector involvement in CPPs and make recommendations about effective models for engagement, based on established practice. On the basis of an initial mapping exercise of current processes and involvement, it will provide an analysis of the effectiveness of a range of involvement models, highlighting areas of good practice. It will also identify any barriers (perceived or real) to involvement of third sector organisations in CPPs, on a local and national basis. One of the primary measures of third sector involvement in CPPs will be their influence on single outcome agreements, as CPPs will now be the principle means for bringing this influence to bear. In this context, this work is directly linked with Project B, and ongoing outputs from the two projects are expected to complement each other.

3. Sustainable and Strategic Growth of the Third Sector

A key role has been identified for the third sector in achieving the Scottish Government’s purpose of creating a more successful country with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish through sustainableeconomic growth. In order to realise that potential, the Scottish Government is seeking evidence on which to base strategic decisions about the best places to invest and about how to support most effectively the third sector in developing their businesses.

Project D. To be commissioned.

Evaluating the success factors for establishing a thriving social enterprise

The Scottish Government is committed to developing the number and quality of social enterprises in Scotland, and particularly those that provide services to the BME community. This research will help us to understand the factors that contribute to a successful social enterprise and how these can influence investment decisions, and any specific qualities and characteristics of Social enterprises run for and by the BME community. It will first draw on evidence from SMEs to understand the success factors of standard enterprises. It will go on to classify what constitutes a successful social enterprise by focussing in-depth on a number of organisations from different sectors of both successful and less successful social enterprises, including those providing services to the BME community. The study will also explore the extent to which access to support is a success factor and highlight any shortcomings in the current provision. The case studies will establish whether it is feasible to draw up any success factors and, if so, compare these with the documented success factors of SMEs to identify distinctive aspects of social enterprise success. The research will then be used to establish the viability of undertaking a follow up study to test the success factors at a larger scale.

Author: Andy Wightman

Land Matters – A blog by Andy Wightman. Land Reform campaigner

Cmmunity Right To Buy . May 13th 2009

Well, I’ve just watched the proceedings of the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee and there was quite a bit of discussion about the proposed new Regulations. Thanks to Peter Peacock and Liam McArthur in particular for probing Officials on this question though it was disppointing that the Minister left before the topic came up (though I know that it was not on the agenda for her to have been present).

The first thing to say is that I had not appreciated that in order to re-register an interest in land, a community would have, in effect, to go through exactly the same process as it did for its initial application. I had absorbed what the then Scottish Executive wrote in their guidance and what is STILL in the latest guidance published on the Scottish Government’s website on 23 April 2009, namely …..

50. We do not expect the renewal process to be burdensome, but it is important to ensure that the initial serious intent to purchase the registered land remains, and you will therefore be required to complete the “Renewal of Registration” application form. As renewal will not be required within 4 years of commencement, a form will be made available in due course. It is expected at this stage that there will be no major changes to your company’s memorandum or articles of association, as these should have been approved by Ministers under section 35(1) of the Act prior to amending. To simplify this process, you should highlight any changes clearly on the renewal form. Ministers will then consider whether your application continues to meet the criteria set out in section 38 and, if content, instruct the Keeper to renew your registered interest for a further 5 years.

This guidance has led people to believe that the re-registration process would be a “light touch” process essentially re-validating the existing registration. Of course, if any details had changed, they would need to be edited. But there was never any inkling in the minds of anyone I have spoken to over the years that they would have to go through the whole process again. The text does not imply generating fresh petitions or consulting landowners all over again and providing them with the right to appeal the application all over again.

It now appears that the Scottish Government believe that this is necessary because of the terms of the Act which says in Section 44(2) that a community body can, at any time within 6 months prior to the expiry of an registration apply under Section 37 to re-register an interest. The first registration that this will affect is CB00015 (Eilean Glas Heritage Trust – see Register of Community Interests) whose existing registration expires on 30 April 2010 and who can thus make an application to re-register their interest from 30 October 2009.

So, silly me, it was clear all along! I should have read the Act more carefully. A re-registration is, in effect, a fresh application with all that that entails.

This means that a community wishing to submit a re-registration has to complete the application form all over again although some of the hard work such as drafting their Memorandum and Articles of Association, will not have to be done again and finding out if there has been any change in the ownership of the land in question will be simpler than finding it out from scratch. The community body will probably not need to prepare a fresh map all over again (though many of the maps associated with existing registrations are defective despite being approved by Scottish Ministers and can thus be rectified).

BUT, the community will need to seek support from 10% of their community through a fresh petition, the landowner will be invited to comment afresh and will be able to mount a legal challenge if they wish. Now that it is clear that even the tiniest administrative error can lead to a successful challenge, the re-registration process allows for such errors in existing applications to be rectified but it may also allows for others to be siezed upon now that one legal firm in particular has created a specialism in derailing community right to buy applications.

All of which changes one thing but not another.

It changes the scope to in any way amend the proposed Regulation to enable the kind of light touch re-registration that had been anticipated. Thus a consultation on these new Regulations may achieve little as the David Brew stated at the Committee today. I have to say though that I think I was the only person in the whole of Scotland to submit comments on the original forms when they were issued for consultation and there was some benefit in this process. I accept that little may be achieved this time round when all that is involved is some redesign.

It does not change the frustration that the process of applying for a registration of interest should be such a complex a bureaucratic process. It now appears that in order for re-registrations to be light touch, we can’t amend the Regulations as tabled before Committee today and that the Act itself will have to be amended – it is a mess. That, in any event, is something that needs to be done for a whole host of policy reasons that have emerged duruing the first 5 years of its operation.

It also begs the question why those involved in this whole process with Government have not been more open with organisatiosn across Scotland with an interest in how land reform develops. We still don’t have a timetable for a review of the Act despite it being promised by a succession of Ministers. We have no forum in which to discuss where the land reform process may go from here, despite it being clear that what has been achieved thus far is simply the start of a process. A whole raft of emergent topics could usefully be discussed including succession law reform, leasehold reform, common land issues and the ongoing focus on offshore tax havens to name but a few.

My last contact with the Land Reform Branch of the Scottish Government (they have a new name now I think) was in May 2005. I have plenty to keep me busy and am not looking for opportunities to have to give more voluntary time to this issue than is strictly necessary but one can’t fail to get the impression that there is no appetite for taking the land reform agenda forward or making existing measures more straightforward. I’ll relate an anecdote about this in a separate post.

Meanwhile, what to do about re-registrations?

Amending an Act is not something undertaken lightly but in this instance I think that a simple amendment NOW could provide time to sort out the situation with re-registrations.

Section  44(1) should be amended to read 10 years instead of 5 years. This would extend ALL existing registrations for a further 5 years. Thus there would be no need at the moment to address the question of how re-registrations are dealt with.

Anyone up for that?

DTAS Asset Transfer Programme

PROGRAMME CONCEPT

Experience in the UK suggests that there are three main barriers to increasing asset transfer:

• Political will
• Officer imagination
• Community capacity

A programme to increase successful asset transfer will need to address all three aspects.  A key ingredient of success will be to change attitudes within local authorities and to some extent within the community sector as well.  The programme outlined below therefore focuses on raising awareness of the benefits of community asset ownership; identifying, disseminating and developing effective practice in asset transfer through targeted studies and demonstration work; and providing key resources for those involved in asset transfers.  The key target groups for the programme are councillors, local authority officials, and community groups.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of the programme is to increase community asset ownership by encouraging and supporting local authorities and community groups to achieve fair and effective transfers of assets to community organisations within a wider strategy of local community asset development.

The objectives of the programme are:

a. To raise awareness amongst councillors, local authority officers and community groups of the benefits and risks of community asset ownership and assets transfers.

b. To identify and disseminate lessons from effective practice in encouraging community ownership and management of assets through assets transfer and wider policies to support community asset ownership.

c. To provide training, toolkits and other practical resources for councillors, local authority officers and community groups on asset transfers.

d. To provide targeted support in selected local authority areas to develop a joint strategy and action plan on assets transfer.

e. To provide targeted development support for selected community groups to enable them to take on transferred assets.

Author: Doug Reeler, Community Development Resource Association

The word sovereignty is well-used by small-farmer organisations and allied practitioners when they speak of food sovereignty or seed sovereignty as a right of autonomous self-reliance, of local ownership, of decision-making from a stance of consciousness and free-choice, not subject to the will and whims of those outside who may seek to control or exploit.

Sovereignty is a particularly powerful concept when applied to organisation, suggesting the same authentic qualities, describing a home-grown resilience, an inside-out identity, the idea of an organisation being the expression of the free will of its own constituents.  It should be clear that rights like food sovereignty can only exist if they are embedded in strong, sovereign organisation.

Sovereignty is both a quality of organisation to be developed and a right to be respected and defended.  If development is about shifting or transforming power there has to be a clear concept of where power can be rightfully and sustainably held – sovereign local organisations and social movements are an obvious location.

But sovereignty is hard to come by. We witness vibrant, if disorganised, community-based organisations, movements and local NGOs, continuing to line up for funding, fitting themselves, their work, structure, language, indeed their life, into the templates of short-term funded projects and tightly contained project-cycles.  Local organisations continue to be the service-providers of donors and government to achieve their externally formulated project goals, with a few participative processes thrown in to give them local flavour.  And all gamely assisted by NGOs and professional consultants, themselves competing for funding and held to account against external measures.

Some of the larger international NGOs working out of a rights-based approach have begun to recognise the importance of supporting local organisations and movements as rights-holders. But despite the speak of “rights” we continue to witness local organisations or “partners” being assessed against templates, checklists and models of a “best practice” organisation developed in the North and having their capacity built accordingly.  We witness lively volunteer-based organisations and emerging grassroots movements being rebuilt into more professional organisations losing their character and representing only those interests of the community that align with funding or NGO guidelines. We witness them developing into better-behaved citizens, possibly alleviating some small vestiges of poverty in the short-term, but angry only when the funding slows, no longer at the injustices they were born out of, becoming a pale shadow of their potential at best and a blockage to authentic development at worst. We sometimes wonder whether the NGOs and donors of the development sector have become latter-day missionaries, undermining indigenous potential and naively and unwittingly softening up the natives for more post-colonial globalisation!

This is development without local sovereignty and it has long accompanied the deepening poverty of the marginalised of this world.  It is also extremely difficult for the development sector to admit this veiled role without exposing its own lack of sovereignty and backbone.

The situation may be dire but it is not hopeless. There are sovereign organisations and movements on all continents bucking this trend, often supported by developmental donors and NGOs, and the sector needs to seek them out and learn from them.  There are many initiatives, programmes and projects that hold great promise if they can adjust or transform themselves towards incorporating a more directly organisational approach or indirectly providing support in this direction. 

If this is true then it requires that development practitioners, including donors, pay more attention to the concept of organisation itself and the practice of facilitating the development of authentic and sovereign local organisation and social movements.  There may be a growing body of professional OD facilitators in the sector, some of whom are developmental, but we believe that it is a discipline that needs to be more widely learnt and become more central to the practice of the sector as a whole, not just a small professional enclave.

What are some of the key aspects of the identity of a sovereign organisation or movement?

… such an organisation strives to know and work with its own purpose.  It works on and out of clear principles and values and has the courage to hold onto these.

… it is an authentic expression of the will and voice of its own constituents. It can provide services but is not the service provider of another organisation’s purpose, and while it may accept funding it is not a surrogate vehicle for the funded projects of outside agencies.

… a sovereign organisation is culturally and structurally unique, not a clone of some external “best practice” template.

… a sovereign organisation is politically conscious, knows its rights and responsibilities and understands the power relationships it is held in.

… a sovereign organisation is able to cooperate and work with co-travellers and peers without losing its sense of self.  Sovereignty does not denote parochial, insular behaviour, though there may be phases of independence, of inward development and of finding own identity, before opening up to collaboration.

… sovereignty is both a quality and a process of continual learning. The ability to learn and adapt will determine its sovereignty in a changing and volatile world and thus its increasing effectiveness. A sovereign organisation learns from many and varied sources, primarily its own hard-earned experience, but also through its diverse horizontal learning relationships with co-travellers and peers.

It is in encouraging and supporting these qualities and processes that we may find the real challenges of developmental practice for NGOs and donors.  What it requires is the time to see what is living in communities that is authentic, that has potential, accompanied by a deep respect for what is local and indigenous and a subtlety of practice to give thoughtful and careful support where it is needed.

Perhaps it requires practitioners and donors who are working on their own sovereignty, beholden to their own purposes and values, derived from the needs and rights of those they seek to support, rather than as the funded, outsourced agents of higher powers.

Dear LPL,

I thought you might be interested in work that Urban Forum is doing on reform of the banking system, which we’ve been working closely with DTA on, among others. Urban Forum only works in England, but the banking system obviously affects the UK as a whole. It’d be good to link up with Scottish third sector groups on this…hence my email.

Frustrated by the lack of obvious ‘return’ on the huge public investment in the banks and a lack of vision and ambition over what our post-recession society might look like, we’ve developed some ambitious proposals under the banner of community reinvestment. Our aim is to establish a new approach to financial services that places social objectives above the pursuit of profit and creates people centred financial services fit for the 21st century.

We are calling for a Community Reinvestment Act to be introduced and for community reinvestment banking to be established within financial institutions. These measures would:

    * Reduce financial exclusion and the financial burden of being poor and eliminates discrimination in availability of financial services
    * Increase the range and size of investment available to support social and community enterprise and support the growth of the community development finance sector
    * Establish sustainable sources of grant funding and other support for community groups and activity of public benefit
    * Rebuild public trust and confidence in banks and the banking system by creating a new economic model that serves public interest.

In short we want banks to become a force for sustainable, positive social change, rather than contributing to increased social inequality and we have strong reasons for believing there is a genuine opportunity to bring about this sort of change if we move quickly to build momentum on the back of political interest.

We are keen to establish a broad coalition of support for community reinvestment and we are asking people to sign up to support these proposals (individuals and organisations). If you feel these ideas are something you want to support, it would be fantastic to get a message of support or an endorsement from you. It would also be great if you would help us to get the message about community reinvestment out, in whatever way you are able.

There are number of actions we’re suggesting people might undertake – signing our petition, contact their MPs, debating the issues etc – on our website. See: http://www.urbanforum.org.uk/community-reinvestment/calling-for-community-reinvestment

The attached paper provides further information on these proposals and the rationale behind them. I’d be happy to discuss any aspect of the paper or to clarify anything that’s not clear – feel free to drop me a line or give me a call.

We’re truly excited about the possibility of achieving something positive out of these difficult times and it would be great to have you on board! Do let me know what you think.

With very best wishes

Toby

Toby Blume
Chief Executive
Urban Forum

Download paper here http://www.senscot.net/docs/communityreinvestment070509.doc

Meeting with Alex Neil MSP, Minister for Housing and Communities.  LPL were represented by Angus Hardie,  Ian Cooke (DTAS), Pauline Hinchion (CRNS) Jon Hollingdale (CWA)

The Minister welcomed the delegation from LPL to the meeting  by emphasising the SNP’s devolutionary credentials and consequent commitment to devolve power down to the most local level possible.

LPL  position is that we welcomed Scottish Government’s current commitment to community empowerment and the publication of the action plan which we saw as an encouraging first step. Our concern as expressed to the Minister was whether there would be sufficient momentum , commitment and resources from local councils to deliver the Plan.

The Minister was interested to know whether there were parts of the country where councils were more in support of the empowerment agenda than others.  LPL confirmed this to be the case.

The Minister agreed with our proposition that in times of economic recession there was a risk that some councils would become more entrenched in their position towards the community sector and would reduce the resource allocation to the community sector as a means of protecting what they consider to be core services.  Also recognised that the last time this happened, under a Conservative Government, it caused lasting long term damage to communities which is still being felt today. LPL emphasised that this experience has shown that investment in building community resilience is a crucial part of a recession survival plan and that Scottish Government should make its position clear in this respect.

The Minister was presented with an illustration of contract procurement  which contain an explicit community benefit clause as an example of how progress can be impaired by competing inter-departmental priorities within a single local authority.

The question of how to deliver the culture change within local govt which everyone agreed is critical to making any progress on the empowerment agenda was discussed.   Training for councillors forms one of the action points in CEAP and it was agreed that LPL should be able to contribute to the delivery of this.

While it was acknowledged that the Concordat meant that it would be for local councils to decide their own priorities the Minister asked whether we felt there were things that Govt could do to assist.  LPL asked that the issue of Govt delays re guidance for public bodies over the disposal of public assets at less than best consideration be resolved. The minister agreed to investigate why more progress in this issue had not happened.  The Minister also suggested that LPL should formally request of the Environment and Rural Affairs Committee that they consider a full review of the operation and effectiveness of the Land Reform Act.

Part of the discussion focused on housing associations and whether there was more that the RSL movement could do to contribute to the empowerment agenda. It was agreed that many housing associations were playing a key role and the Minister quoted Cordale Housing Assoc and the work taking place in Renton as exemplars of community empowerment.

In terms of making sure momentum is not lost, The Minister suggested that the June meeting between COSLA and Scottish Government would consider progress to date and what proposals were necessary in order that momentum is maintained around this agenda.

Community Energy Scotland, the Dingwall-based charity, has won the contract to deliver the Government’s flasghip community energy scheme across Scotland.

The Scottish Government’s Communities and Renewable Energy Scheme (CARES) is the rebranded SCHRI programme which has already enabled communities to develop over 400 of their own renewable energy projects. 
 
CARES is open to any non-profit distributing community organisation and can provide funding for technical support, relevant training and the installation of renewable energy equipment.   Funding is available for a wide range of renewable energy technologies to generate electricty with a particular emphasis on generating heat.     The maximum grant available is £150,000, an increase of 50% on the levels available under the previous Scottish Community and Householder Renewables Initiative.

Nicholas Gubbins, Community Energy Scotland chief executive, said: “We are delighted that Community Energy Scotland has been selected to deliver the scheme.  There is already a high level of interest and enthusiasm within Scottish communities for developing their own energy projects.  These projects can bring real benefits to communities, helping to address energy costs and making a significant contribution to Scotland’s carbon and renewable energy targets.”

Energy Minister Jim Mather, said: “I want to maximise the benefits of renewable energy to communities throughout Scotland.  There is so much more a community can gain from renewables projects, over and above financial benefits. For example, increased community cohesion and confidence, skills development and supporting local economic regeneration. CARES is here to continue and build on the support previously delivered through the Scottish Community and Householder Renewables Initiative (SCHRI).  I am increasing the maximum grant level by 50% above that offered by SCHRI so that capital grants of up to £150K are now available and I would urge community groups to get in touch with their local CARES Development Officer and see what support is available to help their community to develop its own renewable energy project.”

Jack Welch, volunteer project co-ordinator for Guildtown Community Association, Perthshire, said: “Through SCHRI we were able to install a heat pump and solar thermal panels as part of our hall refurbishment.  As well as creating a very warm comfortable environment, the confidence we gained from carrying out this project has inspired our community to take forward other sustainable projects and we look forward to working with Community Energy Scotland through CARES.”
       
Community Energy Scotland      www.communityenergyscotland.org.uk
CARES      www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Business-Industry/Energy/19185/Communities
Householders will still be able to access advice and grants through Energy Saving Scotland. See:
http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/scotland/Scotland/Scottish-Community-and-Householder-Renewables-Initiative-SCHRI/Household-renewables

Further information

Community Energy Scotland is an independent Scottish Charity.  Its main headquarters are in Dingwall but it has 11 offices in communities across Scotland. 
It has 3 key areas of work. 

1. Delivery of the Scottish Government’s Communities and Renewable Energy Scheme (CARES) across Scotland.
2. It also assists community groups to develop their own larger-scale renewable energy projects designed to generate long-term revenue to underpin their own community’s development. 
3. It also supports community applicants to Big Lottery Scotland’s Growing Community Assets programme. 

To date, Community Energy Scotland (and its predecessor organisation, Highlands and Islands Community Energy Company) have delivered 507 community energy projects.  243 of these have been the installation of renewable energy plant into community facilities.  Community Energy Scotland is also working with 36 communities developing their own wind and hydro projects to generate long-term revenue for reinvestment in their local area.  Community Energy Scotland is the only Scottish Charity which offers all of the following: 

• Development advice and guidance on community energy ,
• Funding for start-up, technical assistance and capital installations
• Pre-development funding for community led and owned income generating projects
• Annual community energy conference 
• Nationwide community energy network / forum

For more information contact Marion O’Hara, Community Energy Scotland Tel. 01349 860122 or marion.ohara@communityenergyscotland.org.uk.

Assist Social Capital is holding an international conference

in :  New Lanark
on :   4th June 2009
conference title : Social Capital & Community Resilience
for more information : Assist Social Capital www.social-capital.net

Irish Government puts the development of social capital at heart of economic recovery plan

Martin Cullen TD, Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism commenting on the supplementary Budget for 2009 said: “Today Ireland finds itself in the most challenging economic conditions. Our task now is to protect jobs, restore economic activity, while we bring stability to the public finances, maximise short-term economic activity and improve our country’s competitiveness. It is important that even as we manage immediate difficulties, as we have done very successfully in the past, that we are also positioned well when the financial upturn inevitably arrives.”

The Minister added: “The Arts, Sport and Tourism sectors are important drivers within the economy – both as contributors to economic growth and to employment levels. One fifth of the working force in our country earn their living from tourism/hospitality, arts and sports. Between them they generate almost six and half billion euro in foreign currency earnings per year.”

Minister Cullen said: “The ‘Framework for Sustainable Economic Renewal’ recently published by An Taoiseach sets out how Ireland can become the innovation and commercialisation hub of Europe. The Framework highlights how the Smart Economy rests on four pillars – developing human capital, building physical capital, securing social capital and protecting our environment. I believe that the arts, sport and tourism sectors are critical to achieving the Smart Economy. Tourism can sustainably exploit our environment while adding to our human capital. Arts and culture provide intellectual capital for the smart economy while both sport and culture provide essential social and physical capital.”

The Minister said today’s supplementary budget for 2009 was the “most critical Budget in our economic history.”

Town Centre Regeneration Fund

Introduction

The Scottish Government recognises the important contribution made by Scotland’s town centres to the achievement of its purpose of increasing sustainable economic growth. Town centres are a key element of the economic and social fabric of the nation, acting as centres of employment and services for local communities and a focus for civic activity. We want to see town centres reach their full potential and to support local economies through these challenging economic times.

The new Town Centre Regeneration Fund is a sign of our commitment to the improvement of Scotland’s town centres and local high streets. We are making available £60m in 2009-10. We want these significant new funds to support community and business leaders to regenerate and grow our town centres. This funding will help our town centres adapt to modern markets, and supply the access, mix of facilities and services, and environment that will meet the needs of local communities and businesses.

Applications for the scheme are now open. For an application form and more information about how to apply, download the information below. There will be two rounds of assessments of applications. The deadline for consideration in the first round will be June 5 2009. The deadline for the second round will be Aug

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built-Environment/regeneration/town-centres/tcrf

How much is available ?

£60 million capital is available from April 2009 to March 2010. While there are no minimum or maximum award levels, we will expect all projects to make a strategic contribution to the long term plans for their town centre; and we expect all areas of the country to benefit. In practice, this may mean that bids for less than £100,000 or for in excess of £3,000,000 require additional scrutiny.

What will the fund support?

The Fund aims to support local community and business leaders to make real and lasting improvements to town centres across the whole of Scotland. We will consider all capital activity. This might include for example:
 Improving pedestrian or vehicle access to a town centre
 Improving parking provision within a town centre
 Attracting increased footfall, both by day and by night
 Diversification of the mix of services and amenities within a town centre, underpinned by an understanding of the requirements of the local community
 Acquisition of gap sites and vacant properties for redevelopment
 Streetscape improvements which enhance and improve how a town centre operates, providing these are of sufficient scale and ambition to represent a capital investment
 Remediation of vacant or derelict sites within the town centre to fit them for retail, residential, business or recreational use
 Purchase of gap sites to allow for use as residential, retail, business or recreation
 Remodelling of existing premises to provide a suitable mix and floorplan of retail, business, residential and recreational uses, or to comply with Disability Discrimination Act legislation

We will be looking for evidence that the investment is needed, and that it will contribute to long term strategic improvements to the town centre. Inclusion in local plans and evidence of the support of local partners will be important.

What will the fund not support?

The Fund is capital only and so cannot support any non-investment activity. This might include, for example:
 Running costs such as staffing costs
 Marketing activity
 Payment for consultants, including for masterplanning activity
 Partnership engagement exercises

We will also not offer funding retrospectively or as a substitute for programmed spend. For the avoidance of doubt, this means that capital investments which have already taken place or for which funding has already been allocated will not be reimbursed.

What is a “town centre”?

Scottish Planning Policy defines town centres as:
“city, town and district centres, irrespective of size, that provide a diverse and sustainable mix of activities and land uses which create an identity that signals their function and wider role.”

Based on this definition, each local authority in Scotland identifies in their development plans a network of centres. We want all town centres and local high streets across Scotland to be able to benefit. All areas recognised in local authority development plans as town and district centres will therefore be eligible for funding. This will include town centres and high streets within cities, although city centres are excluded. All funding applied for must be spent within these areas; although we will welcome bids for multiple town centres within the same local authority area or across local authority boundaries.

Who can apply for funding?

We want to encourage a diversity of ideas and ensure that all parts of the community have an opportunity to get behind their local town centre. We will therefore accept bids from local authorities, Community Planning Partnerships, Town Centre Management organisations, Business Improvement Districts, local Chambers of Commerce, Urban Regeneration Companies, businesses, Registered Social Landlords and third sector groups.

Organisations applying to the Fund must:
 Be established organisations with an appropriate legal personality
 Be located or operating/trading in a recognised town centre
 Have appropriate management and governance arrangements in place to support our investment