Last month, a delegation of policy makers, academics and community workers from Singapore came visiting. In some respects Scotland was a strange choice – our two countries are so different – but they’d done their homework and seemed super-keen to learn. On these occasions there’s a temptation to avoid the ‘warts and all’ version, and having run through the full roster of supportive legislation and policy intent, Scotland was beginning to sound (worryingly) like a land of milk and honey. But one of the visitors then chose to rain on our parade by suggesting that the community sectors in both our countries face the same dilemma – any power that communities might think they have is, in reality, illusory because it depends entirely on the discretion and goodwill of public authorities. Undeniably true in Scotland’s case, and so all the more reason to pay attention to the Scottish Government’s forthcoming Human Rights Bill. Incorporating a number of international human rights into Scots Law for the first time, these rights would become enforceable in the Scottish courts – basic rights, such as the right to a clean environment which many communities find they are routinely denied. Is the illusion of community rights about to become real?
In the most recent briefing…
Something seems to happen during the process of converting a well founded policy idea into a piece of workable legislation that can mean the end product strays so far from the original intention as to render it unrecognisable and often unworkable. Many lay the blame for this at the door of the ultra-cautious government lawyers. A perfect example of this is the current legislation which is supposed to enable communities to purchase land in order to further sustainable development or if the land has been neglected. This piece in the Ferret illustrates the point perfectly.
One of the very first steps in the journey that eventually became the 350+ member strong network, DTAS, was a visit to the island of Mull. The purpose of the visit was to ask the then manager of Mull and Iona Community Trust, James Hilder, if he thought his board might be willing to become a founder member. Over the years MICT has been something of a pioneer, innovating and developing whatever the island requires in order to build community wealth and support its social economy. Their latest project is just one more in a very long line.
Energy is a reserved matter, and although the Scottish Government has some control over certain aspects of our energy system, the big decisions are made at Westminster. Working with sister networks in England and Wales, Community Energy Scotland has been lobbying to shape the forthcoming Energy Bill and in particular to create opportunities for community generated renewable energy to be sold to local people at a price they can afford. Not only has the UK Govt rejected that as an idea but it has frozen Scotland out of the new Community Energy Fund. CES is furious.
If something sounds official, well researched and especially if it’s backed up by big numbers, there’s a tendancy to believe it. The Scottish Government seems to have accepted without question that the Green Finance Institute’s big number (£20bn) was needed to tackle the climate and biodiversity crisis, and earlier this year its environment agency, NatureScot signed an agreement with private bankers to provide up to £2bn of loan finance. Community Land Scotland, concerned about rocketing land values, harboured some doubts and commissioned Jon Hollingdale to investigate the claims. NatureScot’s response to Jon’s report is enlightening to say the least.
One of the most troubling aspects of Brexit (take your pick) is that the environmental protections that have been developed over many years have effectively disappeared and are in some way to be replaced by a new set of domestic arrangements (currently out to consultation). Coinciding with the consultation on the Human Rights Bill and the potential for a legally enforceable human right to a healthy environment, this has the potential to be a moment of real change. The emergence of the Environmental Rights Centre for Scotland has been critical to this process – as is their Environmental Rights Summit next month.
When the proposals for a National Care Service were first published, they were widely perceived as a power grab by national government of core local government functions. Few questioned the need for fundamental reform but the outcry it provoked inevitably obscured those aspects of the proposals that had real merit. The longstanding tensions between local and national government always had the potential to derail these negotiations and so it’s instructive to learn about how similar ‘centralising reforms’ have evolved elsewhere – particularly if the country in question is regularly held up as a model of healthy democracy – Finland.
The Glenkens Community & Arts Trust (GCAT) was formed in 2001 as a direct result of the foot and mouth outbreak which severely knocked the area. The main aim of the trust has been to transform the derelict Victorian Kells Primary School into a centre for community, cultural and business activities. Within three months the local community had contributed enough funds to purchase the building and The CatStrand was on its way. Six years, and a £1 million fundraising campaign later, the building opened in September 2007. Named The CatStrand after the small stream which used to run underneath the…
Find out more