Why the sad fate of the once-magnificent Dunoon Pier is a parable for modern Scotland – Brian Wilson
SNP plans for a rebirth of ‘localism’ should, at least in theory, offer hope to communities like Dunoon
Most of us hold a place in our hearts for where we grew up, in my case Dunoon, but please treat what follows as a parable rather than a parochial complaint. Dunoon is a lovely town and its crowning glory was its magnificent pier, a grade-A listed structure topped by architecture redolent of the Victoria era. In most of Europe, it would be regarded as a treasure to be maintained.
The reality in Scotland is different, for the pier and much of the architecture are in advanced states of disintegration. They might as well be grade Z. An account of how this pitiful state of affairs was arrived at is too long for the parable.
But whenever I observe further decline, as I did the other day, the same vintage-revealing thought occurs – this would never have happened if Dunoon still had its own town council which owned the pier.
A kernel of a good idea
I don’t know how an alternative script would have evolved but I’m sure there would have been one because that pier was so iconic, so critical to the town’s identity, so vital to civic pride that the alternative – ie, what has actually happened – would have been unthinkable.
The same story can be told in every Scottish community, where much of value has been lost or left to decline because nobody with power close enough was able to prevent it. ‘Localism’ has been steadily eliminated from Scotland’s political vocabulary, to our cost as a society.
Accordingly, I recognise the kernel of a good idea within the Scottish government’s plans for local government reform which were tentatively launched this week. A combination of regionalism, with strategic powers, and localism close to real communities and their priorities is about as good as it gets, in theory.
By European standards, even the idea of “120-160 community authorities” is modest. Its potential will depend entirely on whether they are given resources to empower real decision-making. Glorified community councils, without powers or money, would be a waste of everyone’s time. That is where the Dunoon Pier test will kick in.
Ministers need to devolve power and resources
We still have little to go on. Before the great local government reforms of the 1970s, they were preceded by a Royal Commission and a long political process that led to a two-tier system which had many strengths but largely dispensed with historic localism.
In contrast, the paper published this week ran to fewer than 2,000 words. To describe it as broad brush would be generous, even as “a starting point to facilitate debate and discussion with the objective of establishing a measure of shared agreement about the scale and the broad shape that reform could take”.
Let’s be honest and accept there is going to be no “shared agreement” about some of this. Reform needs leadership and clear ideas about objectives. In centralised Scotland, a key prerequisite is willingness by government to devolve powers and resources – the exact opposite of current practice. Is that going to change?
The idea of large regions would take us back to the pre-1990s position when there were ten. This would be positive recognition that Scotland is not a single economic entity. The ‘Greater Manchester’ example may irritate our leaders but it is one to be learned from. However, it would be naïve not to foresee opposition.
A disaster for Glasgow
In the early 1990s, the Tories got rid of the regions and gerrymandered the new boundaries to preserve what, at that time, were their political fiefdoms as small authorities on the periphery of cities.
For Glasgow, in particular, this was a disaster because it deprived it of revenue from its wealthier suburbs. However, 30 years have elapsed and there is unlikely to be much enthusiasm in these places for incorporation into ‘Greater Glasgow’. If that is going to happen, it will require political will.
One key to making these reforms meaningful must be to slaughter, rather than merely cull, Scotland’s quango culture, enabling a huge range of powers to be devolved to local levels. The starting point should be to ask why each and every power is better exercised by a ‘national’ body, with top-heavy bureaucracy and built-in remoteness from affected communities, than by an accountable, local authority.
Living on an island, I see daily examples of rule by quango at its most pernicious. From inshore fisheries management through to provision of rural housing and the operation of ferries, a transition to localism would be empowering and transformational. Is there any intention to let that happen?
READ MORE: Scotland's ailing education system desperately needs a 'big idea'. Where's yours, Mr Swinney?
What’s the point of Historic Environment Scotland?
Let me return to Dunoon Pier. I asked Argyll and Bute Council this week what they were doing about it and received a courteous response saying basically that they would love to but are skint. I also asked Historic Environment Scotland, which awarded the grade-A listing. They provided a one-line reply: “We have not been involved in any recent consultation.”
At which point, I ask: “What is the point of Historic Environment Scotland, if it waits to be consulted on a grade-A structure falling into the sea?” Give the powers and money instead to local authorities. Ditto with many of the other 133 quangos through which centralised power is exercised and £6.6 billion spent.
Much of this debate need not be party political. There are people of all persuasions and none who want the best for their communities and see that it is not being delivered. They only need to walk down their local high streets for grim confirmation.
So let the debate commence – but if it turns out to be no more than a money-saving exercise without commitment to changing the balance of powers within Scotland by taking government closer to the people, then it will fizzle out as a divisive waste of time. That would be a pity.
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.