This thread discusses the content article: How to fund community buy-outs?nnAnother version of events at the conference

MSP Roseanna Cunningham's words still echo in my ears "There's nae money". The rhetoric of support was quickly blown away by the MSP's response to a question/request by Jim Hunter to reinstate the Scottish Land Fund or at least to set aside funding specifically to support the Governments commitment to land reform.

On the grand scale of Government spending this is a very small programme. To sustain levels of funding to those of the SLF would require only £10m over three years and the programme to date has only spent about £15m of direct Government funding. In comparison, agricultural subsidy amounts to £600m every year. Although cash is tight it is clearly a matter for the Government Ministers to decide where their priorities lie.

More difficult, perhaps, would be retaining the current impetus. The conference reflected on the slowing down of acquisitions and this has clearly been the case. The momentum of the early days of land buyouts stemming from the crofters of Assynt those on Skye at Borve and Annishadder back in 1993 and the Eigg buyout in 1997 has been maintained if the amount of money being spent on supporting the sector is anything to go by. However the emphasis has changed to that of one of development of existing assets rather than acquisition. The Scottish Land Fund saw 273 grants awarded of which 137 were for acquisitions but also most of the remainder were pre-acquisition assistance i.e. grants to support the acquisition process. There were few development grants awarded. The replacement Lottery programme, Growing Community Assets, provided much more funding and most of this was directed at development as part of the Big Lottery Fund's Investing in Communities Programme. Both GCA and Investing in Communities will continue with the programmes being announced in June 2010 with an expected £400m available to support community growth.

However the expansion of funding through the Lottery also came with an expanded remit to include community assets and not just land assets and also an emphasis in supporting urban areas where disadvantage is more evident. It has always been difficult to argue rural disadvantage, mainly geographic and access to services when compared with urban deprivation in view of the differences in community structure and the sheer numbers of potential beneficiaries.

Other suggested funding routes include a community levy on the energy produced from renewables in Scotland and a land bank. However likely this is, the current economic climate and Government administration will surely have this already allocated.

The Land Reform Act itself was the main subject of the discussion with many identifying problems with certain parts of the Act. Part 3 seems particularly unworkable not least of which, the mapping requirements are extremely onerous. Pairc Trust are determined to be the first community to succeed although after many years of working and waiting they may find it difficult to absorb any further set backs. Volunteer fatigue must be beyond any point of recovery. Only success will satisfy the process and justify any faith they may have left in the Act. The promised improvement and increase in guidance, on top of the already wordy tomes, seems pure sophism. One argument put forward is that the Government never wanted the Act to work and that the civil servants did a very good job on their behalf.

There is still work to do though and a continued theme from the conference was to lobby Ministers to push this further up the agenda. Market evidence suggests a continuing and growing interest in land acquisition despite a few years of quiet. The National Forest Land Scheme in particular has brought forward 29 projects over the years since its inception following the LRA. The lack of Lottery support to grant fund the transfer of public land will continue to be a problem although valuation is also a major issue. Some insight needs to be focussed into how public accounting could include the benefits being "bought" through community actions and management of land resources on behalf of the people of Scotland, and how this should reduce valuations in the same way as valuations are reduced when housing through RSL's is the route taken to disposal of Forestry land.

David Cameron from North Harris gave an emphatic presentation demonstrating his experience in one of the more successful community buyouts. The process starts with people and ends with people and these community projects will continue to benefit people for many years to come. Any short sighted funding or legal process needs to reflect on this.

Highland Council called the conference and the conference called on Highland Council to take this forward with partners in other Councils, other agencies and community representatives themselves. They readily accepted.

www.andywightman.com/wordpress/?p=66

We are looking at revenues from the seabed in the order of hundreds of millions by 2020.

1% of that will sustain a Scottish Land Fund.

The rest can go to a Marine Renewables Fund shared between Scotland's local authorities proportional to the seabed rents generated within their area.


Andy Wightman