 |
Allotments Inquiry |
|
Home
|
Col 3662 Allotments Inquiry Allotments are a local matter. The issues that surround them will vary from area to area. What works in an urban area will not necessarily work in a rural setting, although I recognise that allotments are probably more of an issue in urban areas than in rural areas. The Executive believes that local authorities are best placed to assess the needs of their communities, to develop policy on allotments and allotment provision and to administer allotments as they see fit. Current legislation, even though some of it dates from the 19th century, does not appear to cause difficulties for local authorities. The Executive is therefore not planning to introduce additional legislation. However, I recognise that there is concern about the continuing
provision and management of allotments. We feel that that can be best
dealt with in the shape of best practice guidance for councils. Guidance
produced by the former Department of the Environment, Transport and
the Regions for England and Wales has met with strong approval at grass-roots
level. The Executive values the benefits that allotments bring to individuals and families in Scotland. As the committee will have heard from previous evidence, allotments provide the means to meet a variety of needs: involvement with the community; exercise and healthy diet; social interaction; and improving the environment. Those are the obvious benefits. Getting respite from one's partner may be a less obvious but nonetheless important benefit. I am not sure that research exists on whether the marriages of allotment users last longer than those of people who are not allotment users. The Executive has a legitimate interest in at least most of those benefits. The physical activity task force consultation document recommended that every adult should take 30 minutes of physical exercise—the equivalent of brisk walking—a day, with strength and balance exercises, as part of their daily activities. The opportunity to walk, cycle or garden is as important as the opportunity to play a sport. Allotments can provide an opportunity for people who do not have a garden at home to incorporate activity into their daily lives. Allotments also provide the opportunity to grow healthy and fresh food cheaply. Through the forthcoming planning advice note on open spaces, we are looking to local authorities to ensure that current and future open-space needs, including allotments, can be met. The planning advice note will look to local authorities to consult relevant user groups or carry out necessary survey work in order to establish the demand for facilities. In discussing the value of open space, we recognise that allotments provide economic benefits in their own right. Garden for life is an Executive initiative, which aims to use gardening to help to raise people's appreciation of biodiversity through their involvement in, enjoyment of and care for their gardens throughout Scotland. Garden for life is a partnership project and future membership is to be expanded to include the Scottish Allotments and Gardens Society, Thrive, which is a horticultural charity, the Federation of City Farms and Community Gardens and the British Trust for Conservation Volunteers. The project's aims are to help people to enjoy and understand more about Scotland's biodiversity—the variety of wildlife and habitats—to show how anyone involved in gardening can improve their quality of life and do something practical to help to conserve and promote Scotland's biodiversity, particularly in our urban areas. Col 3664 Convener, I hope that the issues that I have covered today will give you a flavour of how we regard the value of allotments. I know that you will want to dig into and rake over what I have said. We await your report with interest, lest we need to prepare the ground for the seeds of new policy ideas that you might generate. Tricia Marwick: Stop now. Peter Peacock: I am sorry; there is more to come. Convener, you might want to cultivate my support for any new ideas and I am sure that you would want any new ideas to germinate properly, take root and blossom into new opportunities. We all want to nurture and tend for our communities in ways that reap a rich harvest of rewards for them. You will want to ensure that any new ideas do not fall on stony ground and you will recognise that the Executive is fertile ground for making progress on important issues. You might be able to graft existing provisions on to our thinking and to propagate new growth and policy towards allotments. I look forward to your questions and trust that you did not find the latter part of my evidence too much manure. The Convener: We have just withdrawn your honorary membership. Tricia Marwick: I am stunned by your last remarks, minister. In England, local authorities have to seek permission from the relevant secretary of state to close allotments. That is not the situation in Scotland. Given the pressure on space for development ground, particularly in cities, do you think that the Executive should examine some way of ensuring that local authorities have to seek permission from a minister before any closure? Peter Peacock: I understand the point. The difference dates back to the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1959. As I understand it, if the local authority wants to change the use of an allotment, it has to seek the permission of a minister; if it wants to sell an allotment ground below market price, it has to seek the permission of a minister. However, in the circumstances that Tricia Marwick described, in which a local authority sells at market price, it does not have to seek permission. I suspect that that was an oversight in 1959 rather than a deliberate action, but it is difficult to say with the distance of time. Our view is that, in practical terms, the difference does not seem to cause a particular problem. As I said, the forthcoming planning advice note will encourage local authorities to take a view about land use generally and open space in particular. In the circumstances described by Tricia Marwick, in which a local authority wants to Col 3665 sell land because of its potential premium price—in city locations, in particular—the evidence is that it would seek alternative ground for people to continue to have access to an allotment. In that way, there is both the benefit of the capital receipts to the local authority, which can be invested for wider community purposes, and the maintenance of provision for allotments. In practical terms, we are not sure whether it is necessary for us to act on the difference. However, we will be interested in what the committee's report says on that point and will pay close attention to its recommendations. Tricia Marwick: I accept your point. However, you are talking about existing sites and we have already established that, although local authorities have the responsibility for allotments, there are guidelines about the need for physical exercise, nurturing, digging and all the other words that you used. If allotments are allowed to close without reference to the minister, that will undermine other Executive policies. My other concern is that there is an increased demand for allotments, particularly in the city areas. We have concentrated our remarks on what happens if local authorities want to close allotments. However, there does not seem to be anything to encourage local authorities to look for space in which to create allotments. Will the Executive examine that? Peter Peacock: We are examining best practice guidance and believe that it would be best and most practical to pursue that with COSLA, perhaps by using the helpful examples produced by the City of Edinburgh Council. Guidance in the south was also helpful. We have no inhibitions about encouraging the use of such guidance. The Allotments (Scotland) Act 1892 puts local authorities under a duty to consider representations about the need for allotments. If they believe that the land is needed, they must acquire land for allotments. There is a duty on local authorities to listen to what people have to say. If a clear demand is articulated, they would have to have regard to their duty. As I said, the planning advice note that is being introduced will point out the need to plan for such demands. I do not want to give the impression that we are not paying attention or not wanting to act on the issue. The question is whether there is a necessity to change the current provisions given that the local authorities are under certain duties and that they seem to be reacting responsibly towards the demands of their communities. Mr Harding: From the evidence that we have taken, financial support for allotments from councils tends to be somewhat limited. Does the Executive consider that such financing is solely a Col 3666 matter for local councils or could it provide incentives for local authorities, given the contribution of allotments to Scottish Executive policies? Given your evidence, perhaps you would consider seed-corn finance. Peter Peacock: Splendid. Primarily, we regard financing as a matter of discretion for the local authorities. It would not be right for us to impose more duties on them than they have already. In that context, practices in local authorities vary in relation to the amount of financial support and infrastructure that they provide to allow people to utilise allotments properly and effectively. In the evidence that was submitted to the committee, questions were raised about the availability of lottery funding. We have checked the situation. The national lottery neither rules in nor rules out allotments as beneficiaries of funding, so there is potential for funding. On my way to today's meeting, I spoke to someone who told me that the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation also provides something like £500,000 a year to support the development and infrastructure of allotments. Potential funds are available beyond the local authorities, but local authorities can devote resources to allotments at their discretion. On the scale of local authority funding—apart from the land values, which might be significant in some cases—the expenditure on an allotment is not heavy and is therefore within the discretion and capability of the local authority. Mr Harding: In England, the New Opportunities Fund highlights the fact that allotments are eligible for funding. You do not mention allotments in the documents on Scottish funding or in relation to the representations that you made to NOF Scotland. Peter Peacock: That was the point that I was making. We spoke to the NOF, which told us that it is open to applications for resources to support allotments. The NOF has not ruled that out. Mr Harding: That is not mentioned in the funding document. Peter Peacock:You mean the NOF funding document, I believe. In view of the evidence that the committee received, one of our officials spoke to the NOF to tease out that question. As we understand it, the NOF has not mentioned applications specifically, but it has not ruled them out either. Perhaps it would be helpful if we wrote to the convener with what we discovered. Alternatively, we could speak to the NOF and ask it to clarify the matter. Ms White: The Local Government in Scotland Bill deals with community planning and best practice. In that context, could an incentive be given to councils to manage better or advertise allotments? Col 3667 Ms White: Following on from what Keith Harding said, will you say whether the Executive has considered carrying out an audit or a mapping of allotment plots to discover how many there are and how they can be promoted? In evidence to the committee, it was mentioned that there should be an allotments working group. Have you thought about establishing such a group? I apologise if you mentioned that in your opening speech. 16:00 Ms White: I am as concerned as other members. Allotments are marvellous and, as the minister said, they improve people's health. However, people who live in deprived areas often do not know that allotments are available, which is perhaps why the Executive should get involved. If COSLA were to initiate a mapping exercise and advertise that allotments are available, people in deprived areas would benefit most. It seems that, unlike in some areas that I will not mention, the poorer areas that would benefit most do not have allotments. Would the Executive be prepared to work with COSLA on that? Peter Peacock: I have no problem with discussing that with representatives
of COSLA. Col 3668 Dr Jackson: Tricia Marwick referred to the progress of the national planning guidelines. Following from her question, does conflict occur in, for example, urban areas where there is a great demand for building land and where alternative sites that might be suggested are not good choices for allotments? Would the national planning guidelines help in such situations, or would a further measure, such as ministerial intervention, be required? Frank McAveety said that he is considering better practice guidelines and that he is working with COSLA. He seemed to imply that those discussions are just beginning. What progress has been made? Peter Peacock: The Executive does not have the active relationship with COSLA that Sylvia Jackson suggested. However, it has no inhibitions about discussing the matter with COSLA. I suspect, given the issues that COSLA has dealt with in the past few years, that the national planning guidelines have not been at the top of its agenda. The planning advice notes are forthcoming, but I will advise the committee of the statistics after the meeting because I do not have the date to hand. Tricia Marwick asked whether the planning advice notes would help to create guidelines against which it might be judged whether it is right to sell a piece of ground. In principle, they might help with that because that would put land use and open-space use in an area in proper perspective. I am not sure what the benefit would be of ministers having the power of veto over sale of allotments. I suspect that, generally speaking, local authorities will not seek to sell ground that is currently used for allotments unless there is a very high premium attached to that—in other words, if there is significant community benefit to be gained from selling the ground. If ministers were to become involved in the process, the same factors would come into play. Ministers will have to consider whether it is right to protect a piece of ground for all time, given its value and the fact that the proceeds of any sale could be used for much wider community purposes. Col 3669 Although people might see it as helpful for ministers to be able to block the sale of allotments, I am not sure where that would take us in practical terms. Local authorities are bound to take into account the same factors that a minister would take into account and will probably reach the same conclusions that ministers would reach. If there is an overriding reason for selling a piece of ground, the authority's concern will always be to find alternative ground for the local community's use. However, such sales do not happen every day. Iain Smith: Most of the issues have been covered, but there are a couple of areas that I would like to explore further. The evidence that we received from allotment owners and groups suggests that there has in recent years been a significant lack of investment in allotments and that many allotments that are under-utilised might be better utilised if investment were made in improved drainage, water facilities, toilets and so on. One problem is local authorities' lack of access to capital resources. Will the combination of the new prudential regime for capital and the power of well-being provide local governments with opportunities to explore imaginative ways of developing their allotments to make them more attractive? Peter Peacock: Indeed. Iain Smith points to important changes that are being made under the Local Government in Scotland Bill. Those changes are backed up by practical provisions, such as the abolition of section 94 consents and the move to a prudential regime, which will increase significantly local authorities' ability to make capital investment and to make judgments about where to allocate that investment. The recent quality of life fund did not apply specifically to allotments. In future rounds of funding we might revisit that issue. Funding for allotments could be introduced as a permissive rather than a mandatory category. The quality of life fund was about genuinely improving the quality of people's lives by improving open spaces, removing derelict cars, cleaning up graffiti and so on. If allotment ground is fully used and has the proper infrastructure, that benefits the area in which it is situated—it benefits both the environment and individual families. In the near Col 3670 future there will be more opportunity for investment. Such investment runs with the grain of what the Executive is seeking to achieve. Iain Smith: We have touched on the issues of whether there is a latent demand for allotments and whether people do not demand allotments because they do not know that they exist. It is possible the local authorities are able to say that there is no demand for allotments because they do not advertise them. Will the guidance—if it ever emerges from COSLA and the Executive—encourage local authorities actively to advertise allotments in order to establish how much demand for allotments really exists? Peter Peacock: That is a good question. If the committee emphasises that issue in its report, that will have a bearing on events. Let us consider the matter in commonsense terms. Since I became a member of the Parliament, I have been resident in a flat in Edinburgh during the week, but I have not managed to get my window box properly up and running yet. That is the only access that I have to any kind of ground. I refer to developments in Edinburgh as an example of what is happening in other cities and big towns in Scotland. Many people are moving into residency and different occupancy patterns are developing in Scotland. It is almost certain that there is hidden demand for allotments. When the legislation that created allotments was passed, and during the war years, there was high awareness of allotments. Recent fashions and trends have diverted attention from them, but changes in lifestyle are restoring the need for such facilities to exist within easy striking distance of heavily residential areas. People should be encouraged to understand how they may gain access to an allotment and what that involves. Dr Simpson: You stress the wide variety of policy linkages in respect of allotments. Apart from the health issues, which I obviously have some interest in, there are the questions of social inclusion, recycling, waste management and so on. What is the Executive's view of the possibility of fostering some sort of national grouping to promote and protect allotments, advise the Executive and inform the public of the issues? Such a body might provide a counterbalance to local situations. Peter Peacock: I have no reason to be opposed to that suggestion. If people feel that having a national working group on allotments that would try to ensure that all of our policy provisions in relation to allotments were proper would be a good idea, I would not stand in their way. However, I question whether the Executive is the right body to do that. Those who have practical insight into the Col 3671 working of allotments—the users and the local authorities—might be in a better position than the Executive to organise work at a national level. If we can offer support and opportunities to fine tune Executive policy, we will be more than happy to do so. Tricia Marwick: The issue shows the importance of the work of the Scottish Parliament and its committees. The petitioners came to the Parliament in the hope that there would be an inquiry or an investigation into their situation and that is what has happened: the Local Government Committee has conducted an inquiry, we have a minister before us and a report on the issue will be produced. Peter Peacock: We will listen carefully to what the committee has to say, as you have been taking evidence on the matter for a long time. If there is anything that we can reasonably do to ensure that progress is made, we will do it. I characterise our approach as being more carrot than stick on this occasion. The Convener: The minister finishes the way he started. One of the reasons why we conducted the inquiry was to find out whether we could have a national plan in Scotland whereby someone who had an allotment in Glasgow and who moved to Edinburgh, for example, would have the same support system and so on. My understanding is that, in Edinburgh, if a piece of land is sold to a developer for housing, part of the deal is that the developer must provide space for allotments within a certain area. I do not know whether that happens throughout Scotland. The minister said that during the war people had allotments—he obviously remembers the war, but I do not. Those allotments were at the side of railways, but I understand that such land must be cleaned up now before it can be used for allotments. I am an allotment holder, so I make this point on behalf of people who are not, such as the woman who talked to the minister during the break. It is difficult to get an allotment; people usually have to wait a couple of years before getting one because there is such great demand. You have said continually that you will take up issues that are raised in the committee's report and I hope that you will do so. However, I must say that I was disappointed to learn that you did not get your window boxes organised. I thought that you might at least be growing some herbs to cook with, but it appears that you are not. Peter Peacock: Not yet. That was my firm intention—the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Col 3672 I accept the point that you make about the practice in Edinburgh. That is why I said in my statement that people have been looking to Edinburgh to identify best practice. Given the increasing mobility of labour, access to allotments in the area to which one moves is important. As the convener indicated, the City of Edinburgh Council has done some thinking in that regard. The point about transactions involving land being released for development is a good one because it is clear that developers have an interest in the matter. The progress that you say Edinburgh has made in that area is interesting and is an example of the kind of initiative that we need to learn about. There is a lot of good practice around that we need to share. The point that has come through to me most clearly today is that we must ensure that people are aware that they can get allotments. Allotments might not be as fashionable as they once were, but that is not to say that there is not great demand for them, in addition to the hidden demand that could be drawn out. I am more than happy to reflect on that with COSLA; indeed, I will raise the matter at the meeting with COSLA that I am about to go to. The Convener: It is important to remember that the issue links to other areas of Executive policy, such as social inclusion and keeping fit. I am actually 105 years old, which will come as a surprise, but I have had an allotment for 12 years. We move now into private session to discuss our draft stage 1 report on the Proportional Representation (Local Government Elections) (Scotland) Bill. 16:16 Meeting continued in private until 17:05. ------------------------------------------------------ © scottish parliament 2002 |