Mark Ruskell
Scottish Green Party · Scotland
“I move amendment S7M-00434.3, to insert at end: “; recognises that, despite a media backlash, a majority of the public continues to back strong climate action, especially young people; further recognises that local communities and workers must have a meaningful participatory role in developing and implementing local climate action, with t…”
“I move, That the Parliament recognises that climate change constitutes an emergency; supports the goal to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius; notes the consequences of climate change that are currently impacting populations and places around the world; condemns any spread of misinformation about and denial of the impacts of clima…”
“Mark Ruskell was right to point out that we need a just transition, as we do not want to replicate the mistakes of the 1980s. However, we need action on electricity prices.”
“We cannot cut ourselves off from the impacts of global climate change, as Reform would want us to do, just as we cannot opt out of global action by pretending that Scotland does not have huge advantages over other countries when it comes to reducing emissions.”
“A study that was commissioned by the Institute for Public Policy Research a couple of months ago showed that 62 per cent of the UK public back strong climate action, and individual policies such as traffic reduction measures, frequent flyer taxes and low- carbon home heating remain popular.”
“We need to accelerate that action, because as we do so, we will build market certainty and create new markets that will provide new jobs and boost businesses. I think that I have made quite a lot of mention of the amount of GVA that it is bringing to Scotland.”
The complete record
Every one of 440 lines we hold for Mark Ruskell, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 9.
“Can the minister say when Scotland will be compliant with the Aarhus convention? Siobhian Brown: I am not able to give an absolute date during this debate. I apologise for that, but we will do everything that we can to become compliant. For example, any change in how planning law works must be considered alongside consideration of how a change to court rules would affect judicial oversight, and conclusions on environmental governance interact with how legal aid may support challenges. That complexity is reflected in the convention itself, which says that the parties shall “establish, on a consensus basis, optional arrangements of a non-confrontational, non-judicial and consultative nature for reviewing compliance with the provisions of this Convention”. It is a review process in which we work collaboratively towards compliance.”
“Those are important improvements that we all want to see in a publicly run railway service. Bus Service Franchising Powers (Implementation) 4.”
“Women, particularly disabled women, experience sexual assault and harassment on public transport and have expressed concern about being less safe in unstaffed stations. What actions does the Government intend to take to guarantee women’s safety, particularly at the growing number of unstaffed stations? Jim Fairlie: ScotRail undertook research and carefully considered when tickets were being purchased and when passenger assistance was required, in order to ensure that stations would be staffed when those travelling needed it. As ticket offices are not closing, passengers will still be able to get that assistance from staff. ScotRail has also given assurances that, outwith those times, tickets can still be purchased on the train, including tickets for discounted fares.”
“Fundamentally, we need to know in a few years’ time whether the bill has changed the pattern of land ownership in Scotland and brought about diversity of ownership and opportunity. It appears right now, at stage 1, that it will not make those changes. If it does not make them, the land reform question will keep coming back again and again until we have some meaningful change. 17:06”
“Communities are fed up of relying on charity. They want the power imbalance in Scotland to be addressed. I turn briefly to part 2 of the bill. There are important measures in it on agricultural tenancy law. Kevin Stewart is absolutely right. We have had some very powerful evidence—in private, I have to say—from farming tenants, which shows the power imbalance that exists in Scotland. We need some clarity on aspects such as resumption compensation. We need the definition of sustainable and regenerative agriculture to be absolutely locked into the bill, as it is in the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024 and will be, I hope, in the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill. That will drive change. We need a commitment in the bill to on-going review and monitoring of the legislation.”
“I have become aware in recent months that Police Scotland is already struggling to investigate alleged breaches of that legislation. There is an opportunity to move such breaches from being criminal offences to being civil offences, which could be investigated by the land and communities commissioner, and to introduce a £5,000 fine for such breaches. It is clear from speeches from around the chamber that many members intend to widen the scope of the bill. That will alarm the convener of the NZET Committee and perhaps others who are in the chamber, but it is inevitable, because the intention of the bill is really broad yet the powers within it are very narrow and quite weak. That provides an invitation for members to meet the intentions of the bill by making it stronger. Monica Lennon is dead right.”
“There is a feeling that the penalty of a one-off fine is really low and that it could just be taken as a cost of maintaining business as usual. I understand that the level of fines provided for in the bill is the highest that can be issued under current guidelines. However, as a means of driving enforcement, we are keen for the landowners and managers who fail to comply with the new requirements of the bill to be prevented from receiving other public subsidies. Another option that the cabinet secretary could consider would be for the £5,000 fine to recur annually until the breach is resolved. There is also an opportunity to strengthen the fines for those in breach of the regulations relating to the register of persons holding a controlled interest in land.”
“It is not a radical bill, it will not fundamentally change the pattern of land ownership—I wish that it would—and it will not fundamentally address the power imbalance. What it might do is bring a degree of transparency. However, if it cannot pass the Taymouth castle test, it will not deliver transparency to a vast number of estates and holdings across Scotland. Communities will be left wondering what the bill has left them with, if anything at all. I will move on to some details in the bill that have not yet been picked up on. The Greens are very supportive of the creation of a land and communities commissioner, who will have oversight over the implementation of land management plans. However, there is an issue with compliance and penalties.”
“It is also clear from the example of Taymouth that we need some consideration of a definition in the bill of sites of community significance— particularly land that is on the outskirts of a village and that could be used for housing, for example, but which falls below the threshold set in the bill. Such land should be part of the picture and part of the scrutiny through land management plans. Michael Matheson made an important point on that. Sites of community significance should be subject to prior notification, enabling communities to have a say if such sites are put up for sale. I am sorry to disappoint Tim Eagle by saying that this is not a radical bill, despite the cabinet secretary’s powerful speech in opening the debate.”
“We were told that the landowner has not only ignored calls from me, as a regional MSP, to provide a land management plan and a master plan for their assets, but has even ignored the First Minister, who is the constituency MSP. This is a real-world situation for which the bill will either work or will not work. As we heard with the situation in Sleat, the bill needs to provide meaningful change and transparency for communities. It is clear from the case that was raised in Aberfeldy that the thresholds for the land management plans that are currently in the bill are far too high. They do not apply to holdings that are separate but managed as a single unit, a point that was made well by Kevin Stewart. Amendments will be needed in that space.”
“I join members in thanking the committee clerks and the witnesses for their evidence over many months of stage 1 consideration of the bill. It is important that the committee got out of the Parliament and spoke with communities around Scotland. We had a powerful meeting in Aberfeldy, which was of a lot of relevance to the bill. Local people talked about their concerns regarding the Taymouth castle estate in Glen Lyon and the lack of transparency from the landowner about their plans. Over a number of years, community and economic assets have been drawn into the ownership of that landowner for an exclusive development. Nobody locally knows what the land will look like in 10 to 15 years’ time, so the issue of transparency is key.”
“As he will be aware, as a former scheme trustee, it is the main duty of trustees to act in the financial interests of the scheme beneficiaries. It is also important to be clear that the fiduciary duties of the scheme are taken into account in advice, and I am sure that Baillie Gifford will be taking note of changes in the valuation of Tesla. I am aware that, in previous sessions, the pension scheme administrators met the corporate body on a more regular basis and that that has not been routine during this session. I therefore undertake to go back to the corporate body and request that. If we decide to take that forward, the corporate body will ensure that there is consultation and discussion with scheme members. I will get back to the member about that in due course.”
“That is just one of the reasons why the value of shares in Tesla is collapsing right now, which will impact on our pensions. Therefore, I welcome the news that Baillie Gifford, which runs our pension funds, has been reducing the amount of funds in Tesla. I would like to see total divestment from Elon Musk’s companies as well. Will Maggie Chapman reflect on the fact that, this month, the SPPS is to conduct its triennial review? As an employer, the SPCB could and perhaps should encourage all members of the scheme to give feedback on such ethical issues in relation to the ethical investment policy, which is an important part of the governance of our collective pension funds. Maggie Chapman: As Mark Ruskell knows, I, too, am pleased that the triennial review will get under way imminently.”
“They perform an important role in ensuring the proper running of the scheme. They operate separately from the corporate body in holding scheme assets in trust for scheme beneficiaries. They must fulfil fiduciary duties, including the duty to act impartially, prudently, responsibly and in the best interests of scheme beneficiaries. The trustees act in accordance with their investment strategy, while keeping the corporate body informed of changes as required. The corporate body does not expect the trustees to notify it of the investment decisions of its fund managers. Mark Ruskell: It is quite clear that Elon Musk has promoted extremism and misinformation. He is part of a Trump Administration that has shown utter contempt for human rights across the world. He is a toxic individual.”
“I declare an interest as a former trustee of the Scottish parliamentary pension scheme. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what discussions it has had with the Scottish parliamentary pension scheme trustees about investments in Tesla and any other companies that may conflict with the scheme’s statement of investment principles. (S6O-04477) Maggie Chapman (Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body): Although Mark Ruskell’s specific point is one for the trustees of the Scottish parliamentary pension scheme and not the corporate body, I can advise that the SPCB’s duty, in accordance with the provisions of the Scottish Parliamentary Pensions Act 2009, is to nominate trustees to administer the pension scheme and manage its assets. Trustees are appointed by the Parliament on the passing of a resolution to approve their nomination.”
“I am sure that the First Minister will be as excited as I am to see the Tour de France come to Scotland in 2027. It will be the first time in the event’s 124-year history that it has visited our cycling nation. What lessons were learned on the back of the UCI cycling world championships in 2023? It is important that the Tour should leave a lasting legacy, particularly for disadvantaged communities, once the peloton has moved on from Scotland.”
“To ask the Scottish Government when it will conclude its assessment of the case for a new rail station at Newburgh. (S6O-04458)”
“Although the cabinet secretary is unable to make a direct award to Ferguson Marine, the Government is able to make a direct award to CalMac to run services for the next 10 years. It has the opportunity now to get that right in the next year. I welcome this debate. However, communities need to see concrete changes coming through in service quality and the new vessels before fare increases take place. That is the context for the debate. 15:43”
“I join other members in being hugely disappointed that Ferguson’s shipyard has been unable to secure the contract. Willie Rennie is right: there are echoes of BiFab here. I have no doubt that the skills and dedication of the workers at the yard are there, but Edward Mountain is right that there are questions about the competence of the management. Stuart McMillan is right that the management and the board need to listen to the workforce about how they make that yard competitive going forward. Although I respect the fact that the cabinet secretary would find it very difficult to make a direct award to Ferguson Marine to build the ships, Paul Sweeney makes an important point about incorporating social value in to procurement practice.”
“There needs to be action on governance. The biggest area for action is the new ferries. I agree with the cabinet secretary that the replacement of a third of Scotland’s ferries, including through the four vessels that are being finished in Turkey under some quite difficult circumstances—I acknowledge Stuart McMillan’s point about that—in the next year and a half will make a huge difference. Those vessels will increase service quality, reduce the carbon footprint and improve air quality. Alongside the seven ferries that will come through the small vessel replacement programme—which, I understand, are replacing vessels that have a combined service age of 252 years—that means that the situation will feel very different for island communities in the future.”
“It is clear that a range of factors have got us into this situation. There is the ageing ferry fleet, and all the problems that there have been with procurement. That fleet has operated at full capacity, which means that, when a vessel has been out of action, problems have cascaded throughout the service. There has been a dramatic increase in usage—which is probably partly down to the road equivalent tariff—without the increased capacity to deal with it. Then, there is the complex administrative set- up: the tripartite arrangement of Transport Scotland, CMAL and CalMac. It is really opaque and you could say that it has made some poor decisions. When the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee looked at the issue, we called out the “‘pass the parcel’ culture” that exists between the members of the tripartite arrangement.”
“Perhaps in the future, ferry fare increases will be more acceptable—once the benefits from the new vessels start to come through and once the new Clyde and Hebridean services contract comes through, and people can see the benefits. At the moment, however, those benefits are not there. Communities are being asked to feel the pain without any particular gain. Ariane Burgess spoke passionately about the case work that she is doing in her region and the real everyday problems that people living on the islands have. Katy Clark talked about the long- term frustration of people living on Arran and what they have had to live with over the years. That is the reality. That is what the 10 per cent increase in fares will be seen against: the reality of what services are now, rather than what they will be in the future.”
“Despite the bluster that we have had in the debate, it is clear that we are on the cusp of major positive improvements in our ferry services. That will be a positive legacy for communities, and I hope that, in the years ahead, the cabinet secretary will be able to reflect on her role in delivering that. However, I say to the Government that this is the wrong time to increase ferry fares by 10 per cent, just as it is the wrong time to increase rail fares, given that we are in a cost of living crisis. As an occasional visitor to the islands, I would be content to pay an extra 10 per cent on a ferry fare, but for members of island communities who live and work on the islands and who need a daily ferry service for education, work, business or healthcare, a 10 per cent increase in fares will be very difficult to swallow.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it can provide an update on the work to end conversion practices in light of the resignation of the United Kingdom Minister for International Development and for Women and Equalities and the inevitable delays that that will bring to the joint work that is required under the chosen four- nations approach. The Deputy Presiding Officer: That is not the question that is in the Business Bulletin, Mr Ruskell. Mark Ruskell: Apologies, Deputy Presiding Officer. That was a previous edit. To ask the Scottish Government whether it can provide an update on its work to end conversion practices, including whether it anticipates any delay to its joint work with the United Kingdom Government on this as a result of recent ministerial changes. (S6O-04435)”
“However, we cannot refuse the fact that gull numbers are decreasing in their natural habitats. We must do something to get them back to their natural habitats and to reduce the tension between the gulls and the people living in communities.”
“It is clear that the Tories are now declaring a war on wildlife. It is seagulls this week; it will be white-tailed eagles next week and beavers the week after that. I am pleased that the minister recognises that herring gulls in particular have declined in population by almost half in the past 40 years, and that a lot of issues that have been described are a result of poor waste management issues in many of our towns. Will he listen to science-based organisations, including RSPB Scotland, and support the wider recovery of sea birds and the habitats that they need to thrive? Jim Fairlie: I did not answer Douglas Ross’s question—I apologise. I am absolutely prepared to meet with anyone to try to find solutions to the problems that we have. I accept that there are problems.”
“It is alarming that some people think that it is acceptable to look at their phones while they are driving; that is a concern on any of our roads. There are also campaigns on speed, which highlight among other things the fact that the impact of travelling at speed—in some cases, people also do not even wear their seat belts—not just on the driver but on other people can be extremely severe and result in death and harm. Those aspects are part of the campaigns that I am talking about, and that is why we are putting a record amount of funding into road safety. ScotRail Services (Cancellations) 6.”
“It is clear that councils are doing important work this year, using the Scottish Government budget, on road safety, enforcement of pavement parking restrictions and the roll-out of 20mph limits. However, does the cabinet secretary agree that the success of those measures comes down to improved driver awareness, particularly in built-up areas and particularly about the dangers of speeding and dangerous parking? What national road safety campaigns can be deployed to get the message across that speeding kills, that we should slow down in town and that drivers should park responsibly? Fiona Hyslop: I have just indicated that there are a number of national behaviour change campaigns, the most recent of which is on distracted driver behaviour.”
“I ask the Government to consider how we address what lies at the heart of the issue: the need of park home residents, and many other people in Scotland, to have a secure and peaceful place to retire to, free from anxiety. The points that have been made about reform are well made, including the possibility of having a statutory tribunal process. It is clear that these residents’ rights are not being protected right now. Murdo Fraser’s proposed amendments to the Housing (Scotland) Bill provide strong food for thought. We will consider them, but I also look forward to working across the parties with other colleagues as we move forward. 13:19”
“It raises the question why people who reside in park homes are not, as a point of principle and justice, eligible for the same protection as those who live in traditional dwellings. I recognise that there is a wider housing crisis in rural areas, and that there is in some areas arguably an imbalance across holiday accommodation, private and social rents and owner occupation. We really need to address that, because I see it happening in Perth and Kinross and elsewhere. Older people need the ability to downsize and live in smaller lodge-style units for rent, surrounded by a supportive community, and possibly even with the option of co-housing, all of which bring a huge amount of benefits. That is the model that many people want and need, but it does not fit easily with the park home model or with existing planning policy.”
“What has happened in Blairgowrie, and elsewhere across Scotland, highlights the weakness in our current legislation on park homes and ownership rights, and shows that unscrupulous companies can missell to consumers, seemingly without any consequences. We have also heard about energy supply issues. The Deputy Presiding Officer and other members will know that, following storm Éowyn, residents of the Fordell Gardens site in Fife were left without power for nearly 48 hours. However, they found themselves ineligible for emergency aid from Scottish Power, which meant that they had to either pay out of their own pockets for alternative accommodation or brave the cold until power was restored. The utility companies’ stance amid the current cost of living crisis is completely unacceptable.”
“It is now up to the Government to consider whether amendments to the Housing (Scotland) Bill, and perhaps other legislation, could be lodged to rectify that. In the chamber, we often talk about the needs of tenants. Park home residents in Scotland are a particular type of tenant, and they face a particular type of issue. We need to understand that better and consider the options for reform. All of the current issues are really concerning, particularly for the most vulnerable residents of the parks affected. We have already heard examples of that. People are in quite impossible situations. Often, residents are elderly or have disabilities, yet they are facing all that stress.”
“For example, Perth and Kinross Council has issued six enforcement notices to lodge owners at Bendochy, where lodges were being used as permanent residences when the original planning consent was not for that purpose. However, those units were clearly advertised as homes that were open year round and, arguably, they were missold as permanent residences. Residents there face uncertainty over their housing security, due to those misleading adverts from a company that has now been liquidated. Oliver Mundell: Does Mark Ruskell agree that it is wrong that individual residents, rather than park owners, are often more likely to face local authority enforcement action? Mark Ruskell: I feel that that is a very clear injustice.”
“I thank Murdo Fraser for bringing this important issue to the chamber. As a fellow representative of Mid Scotland and Fife, I am aware that residents of park homes face serious issues. At lunch time, it was good to meet Gordon Morrison from SCOPHRA, which I absolutely support in seeking reforms in this area. It is clear that, as we continue to face a housing crisis in Scotland, especially in our rural areas, and as increased demand for homes outstrips supply, park homes will continue to meet a housing need. However, I agree with Oliver Mundell that the situation right now feels like the wild west, and further reforms really are needed. Housing is a fundamental human right: everyone in Scotland deserves a warm, safe and secure home, including those who live in park homes. However, that does not seem to be the case at the moment.”
“Bus services might be a cheaper option, and I welcome the constructive agreement that we have reached with the Scottish Government on a future bus fare cap pilot scheme. However, buses do not always provide the fast connection that is needed to get to a place of work or for longer-distance travel. For people with caring responsibilities, especially women, spending hours on a bus—or, indeed, on multiple buses—at either end of a day does not fit with family life. When that is paired with a complex and unintegrated ticketing system, the cost for women of travelling by public transport adds up. It is unclear what progress has been made towards delivering an integrated ticketing system that would go at least some way towards reducing the complexity and cost of journeys in Scotland.”
“The cost crisis has not happened overnight: the price of public transport has been steadily rising for years and years. Over the past decade, we have seen an increase of nearly 70 per cent in the cost of public transport, compared with an increase in motoring costs of only around a third. There is a widening gap between people who drive and those who do not or cannot drive, which will structurally build in car dependency for people in the working-age population who are ineligible for concessionary fare schemes. Working people on low incomes will continue to find their monthly outgoings being dominated by transport costs as much as, if not more than, they are by energy costs.”
“Those are eye-watering amounts of money for commuters to be shelling out. Peak-time ticket costs are an unfair tax on working people, and they must be scrapped. Although I acknowledge that some better deals are now available, such as flexipasses and season passes, those all require commuters to dig deep into their pockets up front. In a post-Covid world in which patterns of work are no longer fixed, investing in a season pass will not be an attractive, convenient or affordable option for many people. However, for many, it will be the only option that they have, if they want to get the train. Of course, flexipasses are not even available on all routes, which means that some passengers are barred from cheaper fares simply because of where they live and the journeys that they make.”
“A peak-time return from Perth to Glasgow Queen Street station will set a passenger back £40.10, compared with an off-peak ticket costing £20. Meanwhile, people heading from Stirling to Waverley station will pay £19.90 on a peak journey, compared with £12.10 for an off- peak one. Those are prices before ScotRail’s above- inflation increase to ticket prices of 3.8 per cent. That increase in ticket prices will outstrip percentage increases in many pay packets next month, including those of staff who work here in the Parliament. Unless the Scottish Government revisits the decision to increase rail fares, passengers between Perth and Glasgow Queen Street, for example, will pay £41.62. Tickets that are already too expensive will become even more costly at a time when household budgets are already stretched.”
“I acknowledge up front that bringing ScotRail into public ownership has been a welcome move by the Scottish Government that has put the public interest at the heart of our rail services. However, the cost of rail travel is now the critical issue for travellers. It is time for the Government to intervene, to use its power and to act in the public interest to deliver a more affordable service. We all see from our inboxes that rail travel is now too expensive for too many people, and that ticketing is complex and confusing. The fact that rail fares are even higher in England is cold comfort to our struggling constituents, who want to see action here in Scotland. The return of peak fares in September last year has seen day ticket prices more than doubling in some cases.”
“With that will come opportunities for community benefit and community ownership, and that is real energy security.”
“That is what Labour head office says, and that is probably the best news that Labour back benchers have had all week. However, Stephen Kerr raised a valid question, because it is still not really clear what GB Energy will do in Scotland, how many jobs it will create and how long it will take to do that. I take on board Sarah Boyack’s point that it is early days, but I note for clarity that there is a huge record of success in the development of renewable energy in Scotland, which is bringing down bills and keeping the lights on across the UK. For example, the onshore wind sector deal, which the Greens were proud to work on with SNP ministers during our time in government, is now starting to help to double the generation capacity from onshore wind in Scotland by 2030.”
“However, despite all the bluster from Anas Sarwar at First Minister’s question time today, when I asked Michael Shanks at committee about the role of GB Energy in promoting nuclear projects, he sounded pretty reasonable. He said: “Clearly, we have a political difference on nuclear”. He went on: “there are no plans and there will be no engagement on that issue, because it is clear that the Scottish Government would block those applications. That is the legitimate position that the Scottish Government has taken on that planning matter, and I do not think that there is a confrontation or a conflict on that.”—[Official Report, Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, 21 January 2025; c 53.] That was real clarity—no new nuclear in Scotland.”
“In the context of the Great British Energy Bill, I welcome the changes that the Scottish Government has secured to embed a more consultative approach between the Administrations, but there is still a danger of overreach from a future Westminster Government. There will be a role for this Parliament to bring transparency to those relationships, and the convener of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee made some important points about the role of the committees in that. When we reflect on the evidence that the committee received, there is clearly a sense that the Labour Government is working more collaboratively with Scottish ministers, which is very welcome.”
“Scottish Greens will back the legislative consent motion at decision time, but I want to sound a note of caution, because we have come through a period in which devolution in Scotland and Wales faced unprecedented attacks from the previous Westminster Government. Intergovernmental ways of working in the UK are still largely based on precedent and good will, rather than being codified in legislation as they are in most other countries that have a devolved context. Ways of working that are based on principles of respect, such as the Sewel convention, have been seriously undermined and contested in recent years to a point where they have become almost meaningless.”
“I will be cutting them off if they do not. With that, we move to the open debate. I call Christine Grahame—you have up to four minutes, Ms Grahame. 17:30”
“What constitutes the “adequate provision” set out in legislation is currently a very low bar, as is the requirement around consultation. As we look to the next libraries strategy in 2026, now is the time for Government to connect with grass-roots communities and library professionals, hear their voices and act to protect the future. Libraries must remain the beating heart of our communities, and I look forward to hearing the reflections of other members and the Minister for Public Finance in the debate. The Deputy Presiding Officer: It will surprise nobody, I am sure, to hear that the debate is heavily oversubscribed. We will need to extend it, but even so, I am conscious that, with a delayed decision time and a number of events in Parliament this evening, I will have to ask members to stick to their time, if not less.”
“A total of 53 libraries have closed across Scotland since 2014, and many more are now slated for closure, so it is a critical time right now. The Perth and Kinross Council area is not alone. In my region, library closure proposals in Stirling are back again for consultation, while Clackmannanshire Council is proposing to cut every single library except one. The Scottish Government’s public library improvement fund is a welcome source of project funding, but it does not stop the systemic reduction in core funding that we are now witnessing. A redefinition of what constitutes statutory library provision, especially in rural areas, is desperately needed, and I would welcome a commitment from the Scottish Government tonight to explore that.”
“In fact, the council’s finance and resources committee was meeting this afternoon to scrutinise the administration’s draft budget, ahead of a final decision later this month. It looks like communities are finally being heard on the issue, and there is at least a stay of execution that can be agreed. I think that it is fair to say, however, that Perth and Kinross Council has overstretched its resources on projects such as Perth Museum, without fully considering the impact on core library services. While Edinburgh has introduced a tourism levy in order to invest millions in its cultural offering, thousands of overnight stays across Perthshire currently bring in no levy income at all. That needs to change. Many campaigners across Scotland feel like they are on a treadmill, with proposals to cut libraries being brought back year after year.”
“Negotiation has to be respectful, and the cuts must be taken off the table first. The council is also exploring options such as click-and-collect style services and more mobile libraries, but those should be additional services, not a replacement. Once again, I stress that libraries are not just about borrowing books—they are about so much more than that. Closing local services will also force people to travel further. Should Birnam library close, for example, residents will either need to travel for half an hour to Perth or negotiate a dangerous junction on the A9 to head north to Pitlochry. Both options are costly in time and in money. The council has options. This year’s budget settlement provides the flexibility to stop the cuts this year.”
“They have a positive vision that is about thriving libraries, not just fighting closures. Communities have been meeting with Culture Perth and Kinross, which is the arm’s-length company that was set up by the council to run the libraries. CPK is, admittedly, in a difficult position, as years of underfunding from the council have meant that it is now at the point at which it has to either shut services or pass them over to community-led management. However, rural communities in Perthshire are already being asked to take over other services from which the council has retreated, and volunteers can only do so much to backfill cuts. Community-led management might be an option for some libraries, but negotiation cannot take place under the threat of immediate closures.”