Exit package remains hidden under wraps!

The never-ending saga of a simple request for information

by OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT EDITOR

This is the story of a Freedom of Information request with a lifespan (so far) of thirteen months which perfectly illustrates how the current FOI system is letting down those who use it while at the same time allows councils and other public bodies to conceal intelligence for longer.

It was back in June 2023 when the draft annual accounts for the previous fiscal year showed that a fortunate individual who had been on the payroll of Scottish Borders Council trousered an exit package worth £160,295 on leaving his or her employment.

When council sources suggested the sizeable award had gone to Netta Meadows, the short-lived SBC chief executive who departed in mysterious circumstances in September 2022 after just 15 months in post, a FOI request seemed the best way to find out where such a substantial wad of taxpayers' cash had gone.

In addition, the local government 'trade' paper Municipal Journal had carried a report suggesting Ms Meadows had submitted a grievance, with a hearing due to take place shortly before she left. 

So, the Borders local authority was asked for copies of all paperwork related to the procedure together with the reasons for her quitting the £136,000-a-year top job.

A month later came this response from People, Performance and Change at SBC: "The Council is obliged to publish details of any payments made to any employee who has a material controlling interest in the affairs of the Authority through the annual accounts remuneration statement. This applies to all members of the Council Management Team who held office during the year. No such payments were made to any Chief Officer in the year 2022/23.  Were any such payments to be made to an individual they would be disclosed within the remuneration statement.  

"As regards the further details you seek, the Council can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any such information.  Any such information held would be exempt from disclosure in accordance with S.38(1))b) of the Act on the grounds that it constitutes personal data and its release would contravene the principles contained in S.86-91 of the Data Protection Act 2018."

Applying to the council for a review of their decision seemed pointless. But under FOI regulations a requester has no choice if the case is to be appealed to the Scottish Information Commissioner. The review process consumed another month of valuable time while interest in who had actually been given the £160,000 golden goodbye had already waned somewhat.

Needless to say, SBC stuck to its guns, and Commissioner David Hamilton was asked to intervene and investigate. Any hopes this would bring the lengthening email trail to a rapid end would soon be dashed.

The appeal was validated in early September 2023. But nothing more was heard from the Commissioner's office until December when there was a request for an update.

According to the SIC: "Please accept my apologies for how long you have been waiting for your case to be allocated to an investigator. I’m really sorry this process is taking so long.  Your case is one of 200 that are still awaiting allocation to an investigating officer.  

"However, our Head of Enforcement is in the process of assessing all of the cases in our backlog with a view to them all being transferred to an investigating officer and I can advise you that he reviewed your case this week.  Our office is also recruiting for additional investigators."

There seemed to be cause for optimism in January 2024 when this email arrived from the information watchdog: "Our new strategy -  From 1 January 2024, we will split our appeal caseload into two separate workstreams, with two distinct teams responsible for progressing appeal cases. Cases received prior to 1 January 2024 will be marked as ‘blue’ cases and progressed by a newly-established, highly effective and experienced team. Your appeal falls into the ‘blue’ category.

"Please be assured that we will continue to progress your application as quickly as possible. Where it appears appropriate, we will contact you shortly to confirm that you still have a live, ongoing interest in the information at the heart of your request and to explore whether there are any potential avenues to explore to resolve your application. My team may also provide you with an indication of the likely outcome of your case.  Please bear in mind that my investigator(s) assigned to the ‘blue’ cases are highly experienced members of my Enforcement Team and we would encourage you to consider the advice they provide you very carefully."

However, this proved to be yet another false dawn. Three months later another update was requested.

The response this time had a familiar ring about it: "Your application is currently awaiting allocation to an investigator. At this stage, I cannot give you a timescale for when it is likely to be allocated or when you can expect to receive a decision. 

"We will, however, endeavour to progress your case as quickly as we can. When your case is allocated to an investigator, they will contact you to introduce themselves and to set out the scope of their investigation. You may also be contacted prior to your case being allocated if potential avenues to resolve your application are identified. Further to the changes set out in our email of 23 January 2024, we have hired a number of new investigators this year and have two more investigators due to start with us at the end of the month. This will allow us to allocate cases more quickly."

With all remaining remnants of patience gone, SIC was approached on June 24th with the following message: "My request’s inclusion in the ‘blue’ category has failed to produce any progress, let alone reach a decision. This is extremely disappointing and frustrating. Can I respectfully ask for a detailed update on ‘progress’ with my case – has it even been allocated to an investigating officer? Has any contact been made with SBC? Under FOI regulations, public authorities are supposed to respond to requests within a given time. Are there parallel regulations for the timescale in which the SIC must produce a decision notice?"

In a rapid response received the same day, SIC declared: "I can confirm that there is not currently an investigating officer for your appeal. However progress has been made by our validation team, who handle certain initial steps before an investigator is assigned. We have requested information from the Scottish Borders Council, and received its comments in October 2023. 

"The investigating officer, when assigned, will get in touch with both you and the council to introduce themselves and ask you any follow up questions they may have. On the basis of this information a draft decision shall be prepared, and go through a two stage approval process. In terms of our timescales, section 49(3)(b) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 states that (subject to certain qualifications that do not seem to apply to your case) the  Commissioner must "reach a decision on the application before the expiry of four months after receiving it, or before the expiry of such other period as is reasonable in the circumstances."

When it was pointed out to the SIC that the organisation was failing members of the public whose requests were blocked or denied by public bodies, the Commission provided a further response on July 17th.

This time they commented: "At this stage, it is not possible to provide a definitive timescale for when you can expect to receive a decision from the Commissioner. Generally, we would expect an investigation to conclude within a matter of months of the case being allocated to an investigator. 

"However, a number of factors can affect this (e.g. workloads, case complexity, the volume of information we are required to consider, etc.). Your case is currently awaiting allocation to an investigator. For the reasons set out in previous correspondence to you from the Commissioner’s office on this matter, we cannot, at present, provide an estimate date for when this will take place. We will inform you as soon as we are in a position to allocate and progress your case."

CONCLUSION: Scotland's FOI system appears to be in disarray if this case is typical of the hundreds awaiting decisions. As we reported yesterday, 197 requesters are still due an outcome more than twelve months after lodging appeals with the SIC.

Over 190 FOI appeals undecided after 12 month wait

by LESTER CROSS

There are calls for the Scottish Parliament to give the country's Information Commissioner "realistic resources" to deal with Freedom of Information [FOI] appeals after Not Just Sheep & Rugby was told a total of 197 live cases have been on the watchdog's files for more than 12 months.

The sheer scale of the long-term backlog facing staff working for Scottish Information Commissioner [SIC] David Hamilton was revealed after one of our own information requests - originally submitted to Scottish Borders Council in June 2023 - fell victim to lengthy delays after it went to appeal.

We were told earlier this month that our application to the Commissioner which was validated as long ago as last September has still not been allocated to an investigating officer. And the SIC could give no indication when a decision notice would be issued.

After discovering that another FOI requester from the Borders had waited more than two years for her case to be dealt with, we asked the Commission in June: "How many ‘live’ cases currently on the SIC’s books were raised with you at least 12 months ago?"

Our question was deemed to be a FOI request. In a response received last week we were told: "I can confirm that, as of 25 June 2024, we had 197 live cases that were raised with us at least 12 months ago (i.e. on 25 June 2023 or earlier)."

The lengthening list of cases being processed by the SIC has been a matter of concern for stakeholders in the FOI system for some considerable time. But the number raised more than a year ago and still not signed off will do little to lessen the frustration felt by those waiting for decisions.

In February, Mr Hamilton told a Parliamentary committee: "It is unfortunate that we have a backlog, which has built up. As with many organisations, that is partly down to COVID and its legacy, but we are now dealing with it. 

"Fundamentally, we could not keep up with the demand that was coming in, but we have now put measures in place whereby we have stopped the bleed, and we have control of the situation. We are dealing with the backlog in a managed and slightly different way, which has generally been well received across the organisation."

The Commissioner's concern had been that, if someone were to put in an appeal to his office "today", without any action being taken, they could wait for 18 months or two years before it was even considered, which was not an acceptable position to be in. 

He added: "We have now made it a straight-through process, and all the cases that have come in since the beginning of January are progressing straight through to allocation and investigation. That is for dealing with the current cases. Of course, we need to deal with the backlog, too, and we are working on that."

We asked the Campaign for Freedom of Information in Scotland (CFOIS) to comment on the backlog of 197 long-term appeals currently with the SIC.

Carole Ewart, director of the Campaign, pointed out that FOI law in Scotland was only powerful because the rights and duties were enforceable and freely accessible through the powers of the Scottish Information Commissioner.  

She said: "Therefore delays in progressing FOI appeals weakens the regime overall, is hugely frustrating and annoying for requesters and harms the public interest as the system enables information to be kept secret for longer.   The lengthy and established backlog of FOI appeals to the Commissioner proves that the Scottish Parliament must reform Scotland’s outdated FOI law so duty bearers get decisions right first time and allocate realistic resources to the Commissioner to ensure the appeals system operates efficiently.  Consequently there is no operational or reputational advantage to designated public bodies refusing disclosure of information on spurious grounds."

 CFOIS is urging people to support Labour MSP Katy Clark's Bill to reform the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 as it would "strengthen rights and duties".  

Ms Ewart added: "The law is now 22 years old and the range of operational problems is increasing from levels of non-compliance such as the failure to respond to requests within 20 working days and the problem of outsourcing public services to other bodies making accessing information difficult. We look forward to supporting the Bill because the public interest is served by working together to build a resilient future for FOI".

COMING NEXT: OUR EXPERIENCE AT THE HANDS OF THE FOI SYSTEM

Borders bid for National Park status 'lacked coherence'

by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

An assessment panel which considered five nominations for the designation of Scotland's third national park rejected a bid from a Borders campaign group and claimed opposition from the local council had been an important factor in their decision.

A rival bid from nearby Galloway will now be taken forward following the approval of Scottish government ministers.

The Borders campaign started in 2016 to promote the benefits of a new designation for an area of the former county of Roxburghshire as a national park adjoining the existing Northumberland National Park on the south side of the Cheviot Hills.

Promoters commissioned an independent study which was published in 2017.  The document claimed that the proposed area met the three conditions for National Park status required by Scottish legislation and reported enthusiastic support from local people, communities and businesses.  

It argued that designation would strengthen the economy within the National Park and the surrounding area, encouraging tourism and attracting other companies to the region. It also suggested that establishing and running a National Park need not be costly but would soon yield a substantial return on investment.

However, campaigners were dealt a devastating blow last December when members of Scottish Borders Council voted 27-2 to back a recommendation by local authority officers not to support the establishment of a park.

The report to council cited potential negative impacts, including increased house prices, additional bureaucracy and pressures on infrastructure and services. Members also criticised the park proposal for not incorporating in its geographical area large parts of the Borders.

Former council leader David Parker declared: "This has been a half-baked proposal since its inception. We have had seven years for the campaign group to set out why we should have a Borders National Park and they have consistently failed to to do that.

“In fact is this is not a Scottish Borders National Park, it’s a bit of Roxburgh National Park, with most of the Borders not included in it."

In their final report published today, the independent panel chaired by Simon Fuller, states: "Whilst smaller than the existing two National Parks, the area proposed (c.136,000 hectares) was deemed by the expert panel to be of an appropriate size for consideration as a National Park. The panel felt the coherence of the proposal could be clearer, particularly in relation to the River Tweed, which featured prominently in the nomination text, but was much less central to the geography of the proposed National Park area."

The panel recognised that a limited number of natural heritage designations within the area were of outstanding national importance with the River Tweed being an important Special Area of Conservation (SAC). However, it was noted that the Tweed fell only partly within the boundary of the nomination.

"In terms of how a National Park in the Borders could meet the special needs of the area, the nomination lacks a coherent assessment of the vision and opportunities for natural heritage enhancement. It demonstrates a good understanding of the pressures and opportunities of National Park designation for enhancement of cultural heritage. The nomination presents a range of issues relating to the sustainable use of natural resources and the area’s social and economic needs, however there is a lack of specific detail about how National Park designation could help to address these issues."

The panel assessment also claimed the role of a National Park in promoting tourism and addressing visitor management issues was not coherently set out in the nomination. 

"It does not appear to take account of wider regional or national strategies. The nomination presents some issues that are of wider strategic importance and identifies the general role of a National Park, however it lacks specific detail of how a National Park in the Borders would address issues such as climate change mitigation and adaptation and nature friendly farming."

The nomination lacked more recent evidence of local support. Support from local businesses and community councils was mentioned but not evidenced. 

"The nomination has not been supported by Scottish Borders Council and a resolution by the Council states that it does not believe that a compelling and cogent case for a National Park in the Scottish Borders has been made. The panel noted that further public and stakeholder engagement and consultation would need to be undertaken to determine the level of local support comprehensively."

The panel’s overall assessment was that the Scottish Borders nomination did not sufficiently meet the appraisal criteria and therefore should not currently be considered for designation as a new National Park. The opposition to the nomination from Scottish Borders Council was also considered to be important.

£440,000 in council bailouts for loss making Great Tapestry

EXCLUSIVE by OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT EDITOR

Scottish Borders Council has had to 'subsidise' the Great Tapestry of Scotland gallery in Galashiels with £220,000 cash injections in each of the last two financial years as the five-star tourist attraction continues to receive less than half its expected visitor numbers.

New figures issued to Not Just Sheep & Rugby by the local authority show the £6.8 million tapestry building pulled in 22,303 paying customers in 2022/23 and 22,115 in 2023/24 when the building was closed for two weeks for essential maintenance.

Financial modelling created before the decision was taken to bring the tapestry panels to the Borders was based on a predicted annual attendance of 51,000 people.

Under the terms of an agreement drawn up by the project's stakeholders, Scottish Borders Council [SBC] agreed to underwrite any revenue losses sustained by the gallery's operators, the Live Borders trust which delivers sport, leisure and cultural services for the authority.

We asked: "Under the agreement reached by SBC when the tapestry project was signed off, did the council make good a financial shortfall recorded in each of those two financial years, and if so, what were the sums involved?"

In its response, the council told us: "In financial years 2022/23 and 2023/24, the Council agreed to provide additional financial support to Live Borders to assist with the significant financial pressures faced by the Trust as a result of energy inflation, the cost-of-living crisis and ongoing the recovery from the Pandemic.  

"In both years, around £220,000 of that support was directed to the Great Tapestry of Scotland’s operational deficit, arising from increased energy costs and lower than targeted visitor numbers linked to the post COVID operating environment."

Indeed, COVID may well have been a major factor which has resulted in the tapestry's recent financial woes and visitor performance. But the newly released statistics are a far cry from the estimates on which councillors sanctioned development of the project, including £3.5 million in capital funding from local taxpayers.

According to Jura Consultants, the specialists who produced the business plan based on the 51,000-a-year figure. the venture was set to lose money in each of the first five years.

However, the losses were expected to be £79,679 in year one, followed by deficits of £53,919  and £12,038. After five years, losses were expected to total £185,000 whereas the actual shortfall has already reached around £440,000 in two years.

A separate financial model devised by senior officers at Live Borders showed a loss of just £2,005 in year one, then surpluses of £23,755 and £65,633. A five-year 'profit' of £202,500 was predicted.

The real figures just released were not included in a Live Borders performance report which was among a collection of papers submitted to councillors last month when they started to consider the way ahead for the trust in light of serious financial challenges.

A page dedicated to the Great Tapestry of Scotland included the following 'key statistic': "Increased 2024 Travel Trade bookings by 307% resulting in an additional 294% of coach trade footfall".

Meanwhile, elected members were given attendance figures for a range of other facilities run by the trust. The total number of visits to all Borders museums and visitor attractions increased in 2023/24 from 87,272 to 98,324. At the same time, the Jim Clark Motor Museum in Duns enjoyed an uplift in patronage from 8,365 to 9,593.

A total of 1,416 researchers used Hawick's Heritage Hub Archive (1,157 in 2022/23) while Borders libraries had 111,512 service users, and mobile library visits totalled 28,191.

A joint statement from SBC and Live Borders following June's council meeting to discuss the way forward declared: "As with other such trusts across the country, Live Borders has experienced unprecedented challenges over the past five years, including the Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent slow recovery, massively increased utility costs and changes in customer usage trends.

"In addition to Live Borders exhausting their own financial reserves through the investment of millions of pounds into facilities and maintaining services, the Council has also supported Live Borders financially over a number of years, with additional funding over and above the annual budgeted management fee."

According to the statement, a joint transformational change programme has been progressing aimed at delivering high quality services through a financially sustainable and high performing partnership between Live Borders and the Council. This followed an independent joint review of sport, leisure and cultural services and facilities which took place during 2023 and received significant input from Borderers.

Projects within the programme include the development of detailed options appraisals and associated consultation on the future of the Council-owned buildings operated and managed by Live Borders which meet various criteria, including high repair/maintenance costs, decreasing user numbers, increased running costs and where there is the potential to relocate or co-locate services.

David Robertson, Chief Executive of Scottish Borders Council, said: “It was clear prior to the joint review that changes were required to help Live Borders get on a sustainable footing and protect the continued delivery of key services to our residents and visitors. The combination of the decisions taken today will support those aims and give us the opportunity to review which organisation is best placed to deliver various services."

And Alison Moore, chair of Live Borders, commented: “I and my fellow Trustees accept the decision by elected members to seek to change the governance of Live Borders to that of a single member trust model, and we will work with Council colleagues to ensure that this transition is orderly and takes place as quickly as possible.

“The uncertainty that has hung over the future of Live Borders has been difficult for the staff, who have continued to deliver excellent local services for Borderers through these challenging times. I pay tribute to them and offer them my continued unwavering support as we work through this period of change. It is important that any further changes are decided upon and progressed in a timely manner as we need a period of stability for Live Borders." 

 

European funds still bankrolling Tweed catchment projects

by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

The latest phase of a 6.8 million Euros environmental initiative to upgrade river and coastal habitats in the Scottish Borders and Northumberland will see significant restoration works on the Till to combat pollution from agriculture and enhance water quality.

The Harehope River Restoration Project is out to tender with an estimated £400,000 price tag. According to the contract notice, published by Tweed Forum, the works will include channel and scrape excavation alongside a large timber installation.

Tweed Forum is working in conjunction with Natural England, the Environment Agency and Newcastle University to deliver the so-called Life Wader project, a five-year plan backed by a contribution of four million Euros from the European Union.

Consultants AECOM have been involved in designing the restoration plans for the Breamish which forms part of the River Till, a tributary of the Tweed.

According to AECOM: "The River Breamish flows through Northumberland National Park and is a designated Special Area of Conservation due to its importance for species including Atlantic salmon, brown trout, sea trout, otters, and floating beds of water crowfoot.

"However, a three kilometre reach near Harehope has been heavily realigned and degraded by past land use practices, including extensive straightening, and raised flood embankments. There have been structural failures in places, leading to frequent overtopping. It also affected the river’s ecology and its ability to support fish populations."

The project will restore meanders to the river for more than two kilometres, rehabilitating over 40 hectares of floodplains. 

"Our design involves low-cost, high-gain strategic breaching of the embankments with large wood dams to deflect flows back into floodplain meanders. The restored river will have re-naturalised form and function, with improved habitats for fish and other aquatic species". 

The Life Wader project which began in 2021 aims to improve almost 50,000 hectares of freshwater, dune and marine habitats from favourable/not secure and unfavourable status towards favourable/secure status – and to restore species to designation levels. This in turn should deliver climate change benefits, increasing the ecosystems’ resilience to extreme weather events and other climate change pressures.

Key objectives include delivering:  

 Improved water quality in and around the River Tweed, the Tweed Estuary and key coastal stream entry points into the SAC [Special Area of Conservation]/SPA [Special Project Area] sites;

 Enhanced cross-border working with regulators on water quality;

 Removal of opportunistic macro-algae smothering intertidal habitats;

 Reduced disturbance to birds/mammals/sensitive habitats by assessing sites’ carrying capacity and pressure points, including pressure from tourism.

Issues that are affecting the area include: elevated levels of nitrates and phosphates that negatively impact water quality, and affect fresh water, coastal and marine habitats.

The presence of excessive macroalgae growth smothers intertidal plant species, among them seagrass, which impacts a variety of ecosystem services, such as providing food for internationally important wading and waterfowl birds.

The agencies involved in the Life Wader project are concerned about growing recreational and visitor pressure, especially on the coast, which is damaging habitats and disturbing sensitive bird species.

According to the partnership: "the arrival of new invasive alien species and persistence of established species threaten native species and sensitive habitats in riparian, coastal and marine areas. Low levels of awareness of the interconnectivity between the river, coastal and marine habitats hamper long-term conservation efforts".

Median age in Borders tops fifty for first time

EXCLUSIVE by DOUG COLLIE

Statistics published by National Records of Scotland [NRS] have revealed that the median age of the 117,000 people living in the Scottish Borders has passed 50 for the first time, giving the region one of the highest age profiles in the country, and almost eight years above the Scottish figure.

The 50.14 median for the Borders in mid-2021 means half of the population are older than that figure, and the other half are younger. Only neighbouring Dumfries & Galloway (50.74) and Argyll & Bute (50.63) have a higher age profile in mainland Scotland while the national median stands at 42.98.

It seems likely the Borders median age will have increased even further since 2021 if the trend between 2012 and 2021 has continued. These are the median ages for the Borders over that period: 2012 - 46.55; 2013 - 46.99; 2014 - 47.44; 2015 - 47.86; 2016 - 48.23; 2017 - 48.59; 2018 - 48.98; 2019 - 49.40; 2020 - 49.77; 2021 - 50.14.

Local health and social work services have been struggling to cope with an ageing population for many years. The latest set of very detailed statistics suggests the issue of caring for the elderly will continue well into the future.

Despite the increase in state pension age from 60 to 66 for women, and from 65 to 66 for men, the number of pensioners resident in the Borders has increased from 28,329 in 2012 to 28,682 in 2021.

NRS estimates there are 1,293 men and women aged 90 or over living in the Scottish Borders Council area compared to just 163 in 2011. The total of 85-year-olds has increased from 497 to 594 in the same period.

The agency has also revised the 2021 estimate of numbers living in the Borders to reflect new information gleaned from the 2022 census. The original figure of 116,020 has been 're-based' upwards to 117,070.

According to the latest data the area continues to rely on inward migration to boost its population. In 2020/21 there were 841 births and 1,329 deaths registered, representing a natural change of minus 488. The comparable numbers for 2012 were 1,107 births and 1,281 deaths (-174).

The tables depicting inward and outward migration to and from the Borders indicate a total 'inflow' of 5,430 in 2020/21 alongside an 'outflow' of 4,170. There were 3,010 arrivals from the rest of Scotland and 1,960 from other parts of the UK.

At the same time 2,410 people left the area and settled elsewhere in Scotland with 1,340 moving to England, Wales or Northern Ireland.

Although the region's population has increased significantly from 101,230 in 1984, and from 105,450 thirty years ago, the population density - numbers of people per square kilometre - stands at only 25 compared to the Scottish average of 68.

Fears expressed in sections of the British press that Scotland's tax regime would result in a mass exodus have proved to be unfounded, according to national migration statistics from NRS.

The report reveals that net migration into Scotland in 2021-22 was substantially higher than any other year in the past decade. Net migration more than doubled between 2020-21 and 2021-22, from 22,200 to 48,800. The next highest figure from the last decade was 28,100 in 2018-19. 

"Total migration into Scotland is a combination of international migration and migration from other parts of the UK. The increase in total migration was largely due to an increase in international migration. Average net migration from other parts of the UK has been fairly stable over the last decade, averaging +9,000 people. It was higher in 2021-22, at +12,500 people.

"Most of the increase in total migration in 2021-22 was due to higher levels of international migration. The net figures for international migration increased from 13,300 in 2020-21 to 36,300 in 2021-22. This was due to a combination of more in-migration in the last year, and lower levels of out-migration over the past two years".

Borders Tories success with 'crazy' 20 mph zones

by OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT EDITOR

Tory councillors who sanctioned blanket 20 mph speed limits in 90 Borders towns and villages despite the policy being vilified by their own party at national level appear to have been vindicated following a significant drop in the number of crashes in local built-up areas.

And to back up their case, statistics from Police Scotland show speeding offences per 10,000 of the population fell dramatically from over 40 a year pre-Covid to just four in 2023/24.

Scottish Borders Council [SBC] was the first local authority area in Scotland to introduce widespread 20mph speed limits in 2020, and now have a hybrid 20/30/40mph system across all towns and villages. 

The Borders initiative appears to represent a completely different attitude towards lowering speeds in every built-up area from that adopted by senior political figures in the Conservative party.

There were pledges in both the UK and Scottish Conservative manifestos published just before the July 4 General Election to crack down on the widespread introduction of 20 mph limits by bringing in a 'Backing Drivers' Bill.

According to the Scottish document's roads policy: "Ensure that 20mph zones are only introduced in specific areas such as around schools and with clear community consent."

Meanwhile the Tory party nationally declared in its manifesto: "Rule out top-down blanket Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and 20mph zones. While 20mph zones can help improve road safety in residential areas or outside schools, misuse undermines public trust and risks congestion and pollution.

"We are clear they must only be considered on a road-by-road basis and with the support of people who live there. We will require any new schemes to be put to a referendum and introduce a ‘right to challenge’ existing Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and 20mph schemes."

And last year when the Labour government in Wales decided to follow the Scottish Borders lead with 20 mph limits in all residential areas, the move was branded 'crazy' by the then House of Commons Leader Penny Mordaunt.

At the same time ex-Prime Minister Rishi Sunak declared that he wanted to stop "hare-brained" road calming and safety schemes, including 20mph zones, to end what he claimed was a war on motorists. The PM said he wanted to ensure such measures would no longer be forced on drivers. 

Sections of the Right Wing press were also hostile to any lowering of the speed limit below 30 mph.

Daily Mail columnist Richard Littlejohn wrote this in September last year: "The imposition of 20 mph zones on main roads is a bridge too far. And the penalties for straying a few miles an hour over the limit are out of all proportion. 

"Sticking to 20 mph is virtually impossible, as I discovered, even with your foot off the accelerator. It also makes you a more dangerous driver, as you spend most of your time braking hard, eyes glued to the speedo, rather than keeping your full attention on the road ahead and its surroundings."

In a statement released this week, SBC said: "A recent examination of road accident data has indicated a significant reduction in crashes involving pedestrians, cyclists and motor vehicles within 20/30mph limit areas in the Scottish Borders. Statistics indicate a reduction in crashes since the introduction of 20mph zones".

A total of 16 crashes that resulted in an injury within 20/30mph zones were reported to Police Scotland in 2022. This is significantly down from previous years prior to COVID. In 2016 there were 55 crashes within 20 and 30mph speed limits, 38 in 2017, 41 in 2018, 38 in 2019, 19 in 2020, and 21 in 2021.

The council added: "The figures released by Transport Scotland indicate that our settlements are now safer and there is less potential for accidents and injuries to vehicle occupants, pedestrians and cyclists."

 Councillor John Greenwell (Conservative), SBC’s Executive Member for Roads Development & Maintenance commented: “We can’t make any assumptions about longer term road trends, but this is extremely encouraging news that indicates a reduction in the number of crashes across the Scottish Borders.

"It is obviously positive news to see fewer crashes being recorded meaning our roads and streets are safer places for all. Twenty mph is gradually becoming the new normal across built up areas and more and more local authority areas in Scotland are introducing reduced speed limits as a safety measure."

The 15 Tory councillors on SBC form the largest political group at the council. 

Plea to Tweed anglers: stop killing salmon

by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

Anglers on the Tweed have been urged not to kill any of the fish they catch between now and the end of the season on November 30th as concern grows for the survival of the endangered Atlantic salmon. 

It has been estimated that hundreds of salmon hooked or netted on the Borders river last year were despatched after being caught even though many other rivers in Scotland and further afield had already adopted a 100% catch and release regime.

In an open letter to fishery proprietors on Saturday, Jonathan Reddin, Chief Commissioner with the River Tweed Commission (RTC) told the owners: "Against a backdrop of declining adult salmon abundance throughout its range, the Commission is actively encouraging anglers to maintain the upward trend in catch and release rates and to follow best practice guidelines for returning fish." 

Mr Reddin said the RTC, like other Boards and Trusts in Scotland, was working with a broad range of stakeholders to address a number of identified pressures on the Atlantic salmon.  These include water quality, quantity (specifically the effects of temperature extremes on fish), riparian planting to offer river shade, pollution control, barrier removal or improvement, predation and enforcement.

He added: "Rod exploitation of different salmon stocks is a particularly important pressure, with appropriate Tweed management actions in place for Spring, Summer and Autumn fish. The introduction of a Catch and Release [C&R] policy for Atlantic salmon is not a new topic for the RTC. 

"In 2010 the Commission considered evidence presented by the Tweed Foundation which led to the adoption of a 100% C&R policy in the Spring for the whole of the Tweed Catchment. In 2015, the Scottish Government introduced a Spring Close Time Order, with a mandatory 100% C&R requirement from the 1st of February to the 31st of March.

"While the RTC welcomed the Order, we further committed to the conservation of salmon by choosing to maintain the voluntary 100% C&R until the end of June. In addition to our Spring Policy, the RTC also introduced a 100% release of all hen fish after the 14th of September."

Mr Reddin said the RTC was committed to ensuring that fisheries for wild Atlantic salmon were sustainable and had actively engaged with individual fishing beats to comply with the Tweed codes and to operate best practice when handling those fish returned.  

"Our engagement has resulted in an increase in the rates of C&R from 2008 with 96% achieved in 2022.  However, after a drop in the return rate to 93.1% in 2023, the lowest return of the four main salmon rivers in Scotland, we would like to remind anglers of the importance of maximising release rates.  Tagging and radio-tracking studies have demonstrated high survival rates and successful spawning for salmon released after capture – up to 100% under certain conditions. However, the longer a fish is out of water, or poorly handled, the less chance it has of survival.

"Whilst not mandatory we recommend Fisheries to consider their policy on Catch and Release and extend it to 100% for the full season. The simplest way for anglers and ghillies to make a positive and significant contribution to salmon conservation is through best practice, catch and release."

Writing on his Tweedbeats website in May, local fishery proprietor Andrew Douglas-Home again made the case for 100% C&R on the Tweed.

He stated: "In 2023 there was a minimum of 366 salmon reported as killed by Tweed rods. I say “minimum” and “reported” because of course those who would kill, and not record, get a free run, for who would ever know? 

"The Tweed net at Gardo [near the river mouth at Berwick] killed 246 salmon, a pariah to many but, yet again, they killed fewer than the rods, which is not a good look for the rods. Our Tweed rods killed almost 1 in 3 of the salmon killed in 2023 in the whole of Scotland. 1 in 2.5 of all the salmon killed in Scotland, including the nets, were killed on the Tweed."

Mr Douglas-Home pointed out that the Tweed still catches more salmon than any other river in Scotland, and the scientific view was that killing 612 Tweed salmon, between rods and nets in 2023, was not critical to the spawning effort.

"However, by the opposite token, ICES (International Council for Exploration of the Seas) has said that catch and release has been a crucial component in maintaining reasonably stable spawning numbers. But as a species under threat, endangered even, it just looks pretty awful allowing, tantamount to condoning, any deliberate killing."

In his latest Tweedbeats editorial published today, Mr Douglas-Home offers this comment on Mr Reddin's open letter: "This is, absolutely and unreservedly, the right thing to do."

But he also expressed anger after learning that salmon had been caught and killed while he had been away from home.

He writes: "Imagine the dismay, on returning from a brief Gallic adventure, to find our tenants here both upset and annoyed, one of them especially walked off the river after witnessing beautiful fresh Atlantic salmon being killed and carried dead up the opposite bank. He was visibly upset and annoyed that any anglers could be so myopic and supremely selfish, in the face of what we are all trying to do, which is save the species and at the same time continue to enjoy our fishing.

"That the people who booked the fishing there did so specifically after 1st July so that they could (legally) kill a salmon cannot really be in doubt, for I am told they did exactly the same thing last year, killing some/many of what they caught.

"Sadly, it may be that the only way to stop this is to make the killing of any Atlantic salmon in Scotland illegal; it should not be necessary, we should be able to self regulate, but can we? On the evidence of last week, the sad answer is 'No'".

Borders flood warning service to be upgraded

by OUR ENVIRONMENT EDITOR

A succession of serious flooding events across the River Tweed catchment over the last ten years has prompted Scotland's environment watchdog to commission a wide-ranging analysis of the region's flood warning systems in a bid to improve the current arrangements and examine the potential for extending the service into new areas of the Borders.

A significant number of locations are classified as being vulnerable to flooding, with 4,600 homes and other properties at risk from rising rivers and streams. The annual damage from flooding across the catchment is put at £10.5 million.  

Statistics provided by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency [SEPA] include a breakdown of the financial impact as follows: 45% residential properties (£4.8 million); 37% non-residential properties (£3.9 million); 7% emergency services (£710,000); 6% roads (£610,000); 3% agriculture (£300,000); and 3% vehicles (£290,000). 

According to SEPA: "Within the catchment it is estimated that 104 cultural heritage sites are at risk of river flooding. These sites include scheduled monuments, gardens and designed landscapes, battlefield sites and listed buildings. Approximately 42 protected environmental sites are at risk of river flooding. These include three Special Areas of Conservation, two Special Protection Areas and 37 Sites of Special Scientific Interest".

Now, the Agency has engaged leading environmental, engineering and risk management consultants Jeremy Benn Associates to oversee a project titled Recalibration of Flood Warning Models - Catchments in Scottish Borders. The £125,000 contract covers many aspects of flood monitoring as well as the provision of specialist training for SEPA staff.

Recalibration involves correcting or adjusting the settings on precision equipment used for measuring. In this case the network of river gauging stations already operating on the main Tweed and its tributaries will be checked for accuracy.

In 2022 SEPA published its Flood Warning Development Framework (FWDF), making several strategic commitments for improving flood forecasting and warning with the aim of reducing the impact of flooding through the provision of reliable and timely flood warnings. One of the key areas for improvement is the Scottish Borders area which includes the River Tweed and various sub-catchments, as well as the Liddel Water, close to the village of Newcastleton, and Eye Water in Berwickshire.

Paperwork produced by SEPA in connection with the Borders project explains: "Several significant changes have occurred since the flood forecasting system was originally developed. This includes the construction of new flood defences, channel changes and updated hydrometric information (including a significant number of years of records, and rating changes).

"Several large floods have been recorded in the area, including Storm Desmond and Storm Frank in December 2015, which caused considerable damage and affected a large number of communities.  More recently, in February 2020, Storm Ciara and Storm Dennis affected large parts of the Tweed catchment, causing flooding to homes, business and transport infrastructure."

It is hoped the main outcome of the project - due to be finalised next April - will be an improved flood warning service in the Scottish Borders. 

SEPA states: "This project is being commissioned with the following high level objectives:

• To review and improve the flood forecasting approach in the Scottish Borders. 

• To identify the main catchment challenge(s) and develop a flood forecasting solution that acknowledges and addresses these. This will include snowmelt.

• To review flood warning areas and thresholds, taking into account new data including observed flood information, flood studies and schemes.

• To revise forecast locations based on new information or channel changes (such as flood protection schemes).

• To report on model calibration and performance, and recommendations for future improvements.

• To assess the feasibility to extend the warning service to new areas, such as Bowmont Valley and Bonchester Bridge. 

• To train flood warning duty officers and participate in a knowledge exchange programme."

Scottish Borders Council has completed a number of flood protection schemes in the area with varying standards of protection which include: Galashiels Flood Prevention Scheme - completed 2014; Jedburgh 1987 (Jed Water) and 2016 (Skiprunning Burn); Selkirk Flood Protection Scheme: completed 2016; Hawick Flood Protection Scheme: ongoing construction programmed 2020-24; Romanno Bridge Flood Protection Scheme 2023. 

The council has also erected a small earth embankment within Newcastleton to help reduce the risk of flooding. Another informal flood defence wall has been erected in Jedburgh at Malestriot Court which includes a gate that can be closed.

*Note: Flood modelling - A flood model is an important part of developing projects to manage flood risk. A model helps interpret how a river system behaves during flood conditions. It assists in the identification areas that may be affected by flooding. It also enables SEPA and other agencies to assess the impact of both natural and man-made features upon flood risk.

 

  

Another £10 million added to Borders debt pile

by OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT EDITOR 

An unprecedented borrowing spree by Scottish Borders Council continued last month with yet another £10 million loan secured from UK Treasury funds, bringing the 2024 total to £56 million and adding significantly to the authority's indebtedness.

New data published by the Public Works Loans Board [PWLB] shows the Conservative/Independent-controlled council set up the £10 million facility on June 28th, agreeing to pay interest of 5.27 per cent, and with a maturity date in June 2025.

When SBC borrowed £10 million from the PWLB in March at 5.39 per cent with maturity a year later it was confirmed the interest paid would total £539,000. On that basis, it would seem a further half a million pounds will be needed to service the latest cash advance.

And all of that comes on top of the £1.6 million in interest which will accrue from £30 million borrowed in January at 5.35 per cent. In addition, the council arranged a further loan of £6 million at 5.4 per cent in April.

As we reported last month, the commentary which accompanies SBC's draft annual accounts for 2023/24, maintains that the Borders authority remains 'under-borrowed'.

Director of Finance Suzanne Douglas stated: " The Council continued to maintain its’ under-borrowed position only borrowing £40 million in the final quarter of the year to support capital spend compared to £70 million originally anticipated. This means that the capital financing need was not fully funded by external loan debt and instead internal cash supporting the Council’s reserves, balances and cash flow has continued to be used as a temporary tactical measure. This strategy remains both prudent and cost effective."

The accounts show the authority's outstanding external debt as at 31 March 2024 was £251 million. The average rate of interest paid on a portfolio of more than 40 separate loans was 4.53% while the amount owed to the [PWLB] increased by more than 15% from £184 million in March 2023 to £212.4 million a year later. That total will have increased by a further £16 million since the end of the last financial year.

The PWLB money is used to pay for major works. As Ms Douglas explains the £90 million Capital spend in 2023/24 represents the highest amount the Council has delivered demonstrating significant investment in key projects across the Borders.

SBC, in a cross-party budget statement issued in February, revealed that as part of the 2024/25 budget there would be a freeze on Council Tax. However, it was planned to invest £121.6 million in major capital projects, including new schools and care facilities, as part of a 10-year capital plan worth over £450 million.

This year's capital programme is set to cost £30 million more than last year's record spend on project delivery. It may therefore be necessary to set up further loans before the financial year is out.

According to Ms Douglas's commentary: " "The Capital Financial Plan aims to ensure that capital borrowing is within prudential borrowing limits and remains sustainable in the longer term. In this regard it is important to recognise that capital investment decisions taken now have longer term borrowing and revenue implications which have the potential to place an undue burden on future taxpayers."