Land in the balance: People, nature, economy (part 1)

Who wins and who loses when we decide how Scotland’s land is used?

The South of Scotland faces a complex balancing task: how to make the most of its rich natural capital while addressing population change and supporting thriving local communities. The panel will consider how place-based initiatives can deliver net zero, what stands in the way of land becoming a true driver of economic and social change, and what does fairness look like when weighing up opportunities for people, the economy, and nature. At a pivotal political moment, this event draws insights from expertise and lived experience to ask: how can land use decisions shape a fairer, more resilient South of Scotland?

Transcript

This transcript has been automatically generated so may feature errors.

1:02
Well, good evening and welcome on behalf of the Royal Society of Edinburgh to this event. You’re an intrepid lot, because I think it’s pretty bad out there, so it’s very nice to see you here and all of those people online as well. So we’ve got two audiences, and we’ll hope that both audiences here in the room and those online will be interacting with us, because we’re not going to be talking at you. This is a conversation, in effect, about this really big subject. By the way, I’m Roger Crofts, a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and the convener of the community of interest on the environment, and I have a bit of a toehold in this area for about the last 20 years or so. I know something of of the many and various issues that interact land in the balance. It’s, it’s, I hope you think that’s a good title, because I think we are at a fulcrum point. Is it people, nature and the economy and what we do about it in the future? We set deliberately this event here in Dumfries, and we’re doing a similar one in a month’s time in Galashiels to try and inform the political process. The RSE is based in Edinburgh, but we are the National Academy. There are 1800 fellows, and there are some of my colleagues in the audience here, including Dame Barbara. And we like to think that we are a knowledge community, but across the beautiful you know that Ken speckled Scottish community, so predominantly academics, but a lot of people like myself from from the public sector, from the business sector. So we were that broad church, and our motto is knowledge made useful, and we regard ourselves as providing a platform for public debate. So that’s what we have. My colleagues here on the panel. Are not fellows, but they’re interlocutors of this debate, and they will introduce themselves in a short while. And the other thing we do, and it’s relevant in these political times, when we’re trying to get the politicians to listen, the whole of the platform this afternoon was with political leaders and some pupils from about six different schools from from the area. I thought the kids were not hard enough on the politicians at all, because the politicians were agreeing with each other. You know, it didn’t get warm till later on. So let’s, let’s have a good debate. One final thing, as the air hostess says, the exits are there and there, if you have to, we hope you don’t. We hope you’ll like to stay to the end anyway, and we’ll have a good debate on this issue. So I’ll take my seat and introduce the panel. Will introduce themselves now, and what they’re going to do is to give a short provocation from their own perspectives. And you’ll see from the introductions, they come from different backgrounds. And then we’ll just open the floor here in the room, and also online, if you’re online, put your questions in the chat, and my two colleagues and Fraser will be able to capture those and read them out. If you want to ask a question here in the room, then wait till the microphone comes, because that makes sure that the people online will hear them, unless last thought, Silence, please. That’s it. In your pockets. Quick. Okay, so welcome, and let’s kick off.

6:54
Roddy, yes, I’m Dr Roddy Fairlie. I come from money Ive which is indeed where my grandparents came from, and my mother as well. So and I’ve been there for quite a long time, although I have worked elsewhere in Scotland, and indeed a little bit in England as well, over the years that I worked, you’ll have seen the blurb that was produced, so I probably don’t need to say too much about you know exactly who I am. But one person observed some years ago, you know that, that he always considered me as a bit of a jack of all trades, really. And then he followed that up with saying, but of course, specialization is for insects. And I’ve always quite, quite liked that, that idea of what I am, because, you know, I wrote down a few of the things that some people might identify me with, and part of me is I’m a little bit of a forester, I’m a little bit of an agriculturalist and a bit of a planner. I have been a researcher in my time. I’m a bit of an environmental economic economist, I’m a bit of a scientist, I’m a bit of a civil servant, a bit of a consultant, bit of a manager, you know. And the list probably could go on and on and on, and that’s just in my professional life, you know. So there are other things too, but I think that’s enough about who I am, and so I’ll enter a bit more into the provocations that we’re intended to to start this meeting off with. And the first one I was going to list, I only have three, but the first one is the role, but of the idea of natural capital, it’s a relatively recent introduction into the the area of conservation and environmentalism. You know that we could think of it as as one of the Five Capitals that that, that we we rely on in our cultures around the world, but some people have concerns about it as well, you know. So will it allow us to properly develop a measure to account for the losses and gains in nature and biodiversity? The key problem, I suppose, is in the past that nature’s value has not been adequately accounted for in decision making, and so within that market failure of the way in which our lives are LED, there is something that is needed to do that better. But if natural capital is given a financial value. Might this not hasten the losses, because money is a currency for transaction, and that’s a real danger. Is it possible to give that sort of value for anything as existential to us as nature? And if we get. The value wrong just to include it in formal accounting. That’s a very real danger in economic thinking as as well. When I worked for Scottish Natural Heritage, I was very involved in the development of an alternative way of thinking about natural capital, though, and indeed, of valuing it and thinking of it more in terms of an index, so we would be measuring changes that were happening, rather than attempting to give it any real financial value. A bit, I suppose, like in contemporary economics of the rate of inflation, it doesn’t have pounds and shillings attached to it is just on a riding scale of percentage increases and decreases. So can we maybe consider having natural capital thought of more like that, as simply a way of assessing and being very clear in our understanding of what has been lost or what has been gained? The second thing I was going to say a quick few words about was wind farms, because I know within the community within which i i live, it’s a constant thing that that that provokes various various views. But I’ll start by saying obviously, maybe it isn’t, but obviously I am keen on renewable energy. Renewables are much better than fossil fuels for nature, also for energy security, for carbon balance, and for our health and well being. So kind of what’s not to like, it’s it’s a no brainer to me that I should be keen on renewable energy. And then I was going to add to that, rather than going into all the locational issues, I was going to say, but the energy market isn’t right. We in Dumfries and Galloway get no locational advantage by producing huge quantities of power here in dng. All of which we don’t use a huge amount of it is being exported. Indeed, the way the market currently works means that charges for power in our homes are higher here than they are in London. And in my view, we need to fix that market. And the third thing I was going to say a few quick words about is carbon and the ways in which a great deal of effort, at the moment is being put into various aspects of land use and land management to increase the Capture of carbon, because we have to, because we’re losing so much carbon from the environment at the moment, and that’s certainly adding to climate change and all the problems of that. But are we doing the right things in the way in which we’re trying to sequester carbon, or is it becoming another of these single uses of land that, at the end of the day, means we begin to lose a lot of other things at the same time as gaining that one thing that the land manager is focusing their their eyes on, and in my view, there is a strong risk that we are beginning to move into that territory now with the way in which the carbon market and indeed the land market is is operating, and there are real risks, I think, to wider issues that might flow from that. Thank you.

13:37
All right, thanks, Roddy, so yes, some gritty issues there, which obviously are relevant locally, but they’re relevant nationally and indeed internationally as well. So that sets the scene from that perspective, Helen, you’ll probably come in from a slightly different

13:55
perspective. Yeah. Brilliant. Thanks, Roddy. That was that was fascinating. My name is Helen keren. I’m the well for the next two weeks, I’m the Chief Exec of the Glen Kens community and arts Trust, which some of you might know from the cat strand in new Galloway. But we do a lot of work around community development, as well as as well as the arts. Very important arts aim to us. So I think that’s why Roger asked me to be here, because I am, in no sense, a land expert like Roddy is, I mean, all of those issues are absolutely resonating with what we see in our communities. But where I’m coming from is, is that kind of representation of community voice, and maybe here as an exemplar of what one community, how one community is organizing to to address these issues. You know, wind farms, commercial forestry, these are all things that we’re experiencing on the ground. So I’m just going to try and batter my phone into shape because of what I wanted to do. And I won’t take too much time on it, but what I wanted to do was read from you extracts from our land, our vision for land use in the Glen Kens, because we created this in 2023 in response to our landscapes changing so fast around us. And I think it’s. Still stands. It stands today, potentially, because not too much is changing. But if I could summarize it, I would say that the communities of the Glen Cairns came together. And as I say in 2023 to say we are a forested area, a farming area, an energy generation area, we are a watery area given life by our rivers and locks. Our natural environment is so special that we’re part of the Galloway and southern Ayrshire UNESCO biosphere. Our landscapes attract visitors from all over the world, and our soil stores some of carbons best Scotland’s best carbon it’s our home, where we live, work and play. And I think that that, I don’t know if that resonates with you, I don’t think it necessarily resonates in the central belt. It’s not just somewhere to go on holiday to or somewhere to extract value from it’s all of our home, and I think that’s a crucial point that we try and say in our advocacy and all of these land uses are intertwined and but are influenced by things out with our control. We in the Glen Cairns. We are, I’ve come to learn we’re an organized and coherent community, and we’ve sought and achieved balance in land use over many years. Now, way before I started working there, there’s a whole track record of community activism in the area, but we are now overwhelmed by the speed and intent of land use change and by the lack of power that we have to affect change. It’s led to disengagement in some and huge frustration in others, the national and the national and regional policy intent, which is, you know, you can get on board with and the connection between that and what is happening to our lands around us, the disconnect feels absolute. The true seat of power in the land use sector is opaque. No one public body holds accountability and Community Interests are not safeguarded. Best practice guidelines are not enforced or adhered to. Regulatory bodies are not able to keep up with market forces. And then the last point in the vision, some of the land use developments in our area appear to be purely extractive. The profits and the benefits are realized elsewhere, the jobs are created elsewhere. And while there absolutely is a greater good call, which that which, again, the communities get. You know, there’s something here about community wealth building and making it work for the host communities of these industries. We’ve got lots of great practice across all the sectors, in our area, but in our in our region, but we also have examples of poor practice, and that’s what we want to want to see, because opportunities are being missed to create thriving and sustainable communities through better, more balanced land use. So that that’s what that vision was, was drawn up in a huge amount of work by a huge number of volunteers, some of whom are here, some of whom are online. I think. Thank you guys. You know who you are the and then, we were adamant that we didn’t want that just to be a vision that just sits on a shelf, which is, unfortunately, sometimes what happens to these things. So I think that something else maybe that we’ve done differently that might be interesting for people to hear is that we’ve organized ourselves to deliver on the vision. You know, you make the statement, you make the recommendation. Say, this is what needs to change. We say, right? How are we going to do that? So I think maybe what makes us a bit different in the Glen Kens, I’m learning to understand it’s not we’ve got amazingly knowledgeable volunteers. They’re extraordinary, but I’m sure that that is true across the region, but we have coupled their passion to the organizational heft of a delivery vehicle, which is the Glen Kens community and arts trust. And it’s boring, but it’s important we really focus on the governance, and we’ve got a clear model of governance that allows us to be credible, I hope, as we seek to get our voice heard in these regional and national conversations. So so we have converted the vision into action. We’ve been working we’ve not had any particular funding. We’ve had bits and bats of project funding. You know what it’s like, but we’ve woven land use into all of our local place plans. I don’t know if any of you are going through that particular pleasure at the moment, but you know, our local place plans for each of the communities within the Glen Cairns that have got them mentioned the land use, we’ve commissioned research into the best ways to do what we want to do. You know, we know we don’t have the answers. So, so we’re continuously exploring, gathering evidence. We’ve created a festival of land most recently, which was absolutely gorgeous because it wove together G cats, twin strengths in community and arts to really connect people with their landscapes. We’ve got a concept of treasured landscapes, which I which I think are great, and trying to get that connection, but then link it in to the national conversation. Because I think to summarize, just to finish up, what all of our actions have in common is it’s not that we want to own the land. For me, community buying of land is not the answer, and we don’t, certainly don’t want to tell people how to use their own land, but we do want to be heard, and we do want to be part of the conversation about how we’re going to achieve this balanced land use, in our case, in the Glen Kens, because it’s not always, at the moment, a given, that the community voices are heard. What did you say, Roger? We want to be consulted, but we also want to be heard. And it’s not that we have the answer, but we want to be part of the discussion. So that’s why we’ve organized, to get our voices out there. So. Um, at the heart of our land use vision is an aspiration that everyone who takes value from our land returns value to it that and so that could be cash from community benefits, but it could also be enhanced Biodiversity, Climate Resilience, or, you know, better access routes for residents. You know, there’s lots and lots I can return value to my quarter acre by doing having a really good compost heap, you know, or creating habitats, which is what I do by not mowing. So, so it’s on all of us to do that, and I don’t think that everyone who takes value from our land should return value to it should be too much to ask, but at the moment, it seems that it is so. So that’s why we’re advocating for the voices of the Glen Kens. So any questions about land reform, land use, I will be passing over to the experts, but what we do is community voice so and on the line of community benefits, I’ll hand over to McNab

20:52
well in a moment. Oh yeah, no, that that really hits a bell. I’m sure with all of you, it hits a bell with me personally, because when I wander around the country, I’m hearing the same message. And one day this this time last week, we were having a debate in the Royal Society in Edinburgh, and one of the phrases that came up was democratic deficit. There’s a lot of consultation. And actually it came up this afternoon as well. The first question from the students was, well, you’re consulting us, but we’re not heard, and you don’t listen to us, and you don’t feed back to us. So it’s a real issue, I think, in the political milieu. Well it should be, and we should be all saying it to the politicians without fear or favor. And I think that’s but the other thing is that communities are saying, well, we’re not going to sit on our hands and complain. We’re actually going to do something about it as well. And you see that, if you go to Orkney, you see that McNab is going to talk about one of the things that he’s working on. At the moment, I’m seeing it in communities in the East of Scotland as well. So it resonates, doesn’t it? So that’s a really good debating topic. And links to Ronnie’s points as well about, well, what are we talking about here? What are the assets? How do who, who is valuing them, and for what purpose? And now over to you, Mike. Now

22:24
follow that. Hello, everyone. My name is McNabb. It says avoid shouting on my microphone. Does it say that on yours? Roger, I don’t think just mine. I’ll try not to shout. Hello. Yeah. My name is McNab. McNab. Laurie mcnab’s My first name. I’ll let you digest that. But by way of background, I grew up near palnaki, and I went away University of environmental science at university, and worked in very corporate sectors, before moving back to the region about 10 years ago. So I now live up at corsic, and I’m here, I think, with, mostly with my Dumfries and Galloway woodlands hat on. So Dumfries and Galloway woodlands is a relatively new charity, about two years old, and we’re interested in trees and habitats that trees are in, but also the people that depend upon them. Our core job is working with landowners with native woodland creation across the region. And so that’s our sort of day to day core job. But I think what’s coming out of that is a sort of side angle is, how can we how can we add value to woodlands that are coming in Dumfries and Galloway? So a couple of headlines that. So Dumfries and Galloway 8% of Scotland, but it’s 50% of Scotland’s milk comes through the region. So you start to think, wow, that. So this is a productive region. We’re on the front line of commercial planting in Scotland. And the comment was made about Galloway Forest Park is there’s probably not a house in the whole of the UK that doesn’t have something from Galloway Forest Park in it. So we are when we might only be 8% of Scotland, but we are very important part of the productive part of Scotland. And so the core mission within Dumfries and Galloway woodlands, yes, we’re looking at native woodland creation. But I keep talking about, oh, bringing all sides together, working all sides together within the forestry sector. But I think the phrase that came up in a recent trustee meeting was about bridge. We just need to try and bridge the different sectors to try and get the best, try and get the best for the region. And yeah, so with my that’s my DG woodlands Hutt, and I’m also a secretary of Community Council, which I’m very proud of. If anyone’s we’re still taking applications for anyone wants to be Secretary, of course, at Community Council, please. That would be welcome at any point. I’ll have a word afterwards, if you’re keen. But it’s been given me an interesting angle on community. How do Community Councils fit into this? How does consultation fit into this? What is community place based angles to it? So sorry, yes, I was asked for provocations. I’ve written three things I wanted to say now. So if it’s happening in Dumfries and Galloway, we should try and add value and maximize value to it. And there’s some nice tie ins with what Roddy and Helen have said there, and it’s been sometimes quite easy in the past. So we’ve been talking to forestry investors about how they can increase the investment and community, social, ecological and economic benefits that come out of what they do. And it’s been in the past, I think it’s been easy to invest in. Dumfries and Galloway from a from a diff from a distance. So people were able to invest in Dumfries and Galloway from a distance. They come here and say, I’ve always been a fan of Dumfries and Galloway. And then they back off again. And I think it’s quite good to try and say, No, you’ve shortened that distance. How can you invest? And how can we change that? And this great comment I had the other day, which is, why would you be interested in this McNab? It’s the middle of nowhere. And I want to say, Well, I hate to break it to you, but nowhere is the middle of nowhere. And I think that’s quite a nice point to say. The population might be low in Dumfries and Galloway, but there are people, and there are habitats locally that are worth protecting. And so yeah, those are my provocation points. I did a very good public speaking thing at the weekend that says, Start with a joke, end with a joke, and have the shortest possible distance between the two, and so I will following that approach tonight.

25:45
Very good. That’s also called lifelong learning. Excellent. So it’s about it’s connecting all these pieces. I used to work in the civil service and rang a quango, and one of the things that bugged me, and it’s and it still does, is that the system works in silos all the time, and it’s actually, seems I think it’s actually got worse, and therefore we don’t get these crossovers, the sort of thing that all three of your panel members have been mentioning we’re not getting that added value because we’re only thinking about about employment or or or economy of companies, and we’re not thinking about whether they’re a job for young people, which is a tremendous issue in Dumfries and Galloway, isn’t it, and how the educational system fits on with that. And Helen can speak more about that later if that comes up in the question. So, lots of issues, right? Who’s got a hand up, and people online as well. Microphone here. Remember to tell us who you are, and this is synced. Hello.

27:07
My name is James banks. I am a lecturer in wildlife conservation and ecological restoration the SIUC. So I have a particular interest in everything that’s been said, Really, but in particular thinking about jobs for young people, that is essentially the single thing that links everything that we’ve already heard. I think, how do we take pieces of land, whether they have lots of trees or very few trees, and convert that into an economy where there are jobs that people can do, whether they are unskilled or very, very skilled for the foreseeable future, because we know that AI is going to be an issue, but a lot of the countryside jobs and a lot of the jobs that might be available here will not perhaps be amenable to thinking about the things that we really need, and that is the the health and well being, the sustainable jobs that people can do. I don’t know whether you’d like to comment on, how do we get jobs, basically, for young

28:11
people. Any other other points along that sort of line? Anything online yet? No, I would turn to you first.

28:20
Brilliant. The answer was to be chosen first to respond. So thank you. Thank you The Yeah, that. I mean, what fascinating question that I can’t help, I can’t not also say I think there’s a perception issue, a perception that if you stay in Dumfries and Galloway, you can still succeed in Dumfries and Galloway. Because I think sometimes there’s a perception of, oh, it’s just Dumfries and Galloway. But there are some real benefits to living here, whether it’s a good place to have a pandemic, or whether there was a lot of health and well being. I think people are starting to realize, actually, that Dumfries and Galloway has some real strengths to it. And I think there’s a almost a confidence thing. And I went to a meeting recently in the central belt, and I said, Dumfries and Galloway, and they said, Oh, you’ve come all this way today. And I thought it’s less than two hours it’s taken me to get here. And I thought there’s a perception issue there, that we’re on the surface of the moon. And so I think that there are particularly working the forestry sector. I know that there are recruitment challenges in the forestry sector. It’s how we link that, how we link that to it, but also we want to young people to want to stay in the region, or come back to the region, I would put almost as as important as that, because I have seen when a good job comes up, it’s actually finding the right people to go for the job is almost as much of the challenge sometimes. So it’s getting the people keen and happy to come to Dumfries and Galloway is a key thing.

29:36
Yep, it’s clear, when you talk to people in in the industries that there are jobs, but the system is not connecting, because the training has is outside the rural areas. And of course, once they go away, they often don’t come back and and maybe the education authority here. Daria is looking at it from, well, how much? What’s the unit cost of running that school in a rural area? As opposed to saying, wait a minute, how can we take the training to where the people are? I mean, some work’s been done. Helen, I think, recently in in the Glen, Kens, but also capturing activity in other parts of Scotland, which is quite transformational. Yes, we,

30:22
we commissioned the well, our local wind farm trust commission some research into rural education to try and understand, trying to unlock that issue of, if you always base it on a low population density, then and do it cost per pupil, then you know it’s only going one way. So how could you invest in that education to say and direct answer to your question. For me, I think it’s about shortening the links between what a rural economy needs and then the and then the skills and the jobs that people have there. You know, if people can immediately see that this is a place that they want to, like McNab said that they want to stay and live, I think that that’s the answer. Because, I mean, honestly, I know I’m massively biased, but if you’ve got a job in a house, which I’m not underplaying the importance of, but if you do have a job in a house, then there is no better place to live. I don’t believe. So you know, how do we turn the narrative around to that side of thing? Something that we just did recently is it was a skills and jobs fair in the Glen Kens. We had 19 employing organizations, 57 attendees. We didn’t just pitch it at school kids. We pitched it at career changes. And the whole point, and the employing organizations range from carers to the to the big wind farm renewables, a real range of jobs. And again, it’s making that point that if you, if you want to live and work for us in the Glen Kens, there are, there’s loads of options. But yeah, how do we get that message out there and make the coherent narrative and make sure that there’s housing and transport so they can get to the job? You know, it’s what you’re talking about. Roger with the silos that resonated. Communities don’t think in silos. Communities know what they need to thrive. And the challenge is trying to get them all aligned from from the bureaucratic silos. So, I mean, it’s a challenge, but I think it’s out there.

32:05
Yeah, and you want to say just, just very quickly, I worked with the owners of the Galloway hydro scheme who had been advertising corporate. This is our previous job with Ellen as well advertising graduate opportunities, including right here in Dumfries and Galloway. And with my previous jobs hat on, we said, Oh, would you like to do an apprenticeship? They said, No need McNab. No one’s going to apply. No one applies for jobs here. And they put it over on a very big corporate website come and work in Dumfries and Galloway. And no one locally had seen that. And so it was really interesting to take that opportunity and re advertise it with a local focus. And they got, I think 1011, applicants came from that. And so there’s an element about, again, about getting the jobs in front of the right people. And I didn’t say, just pump something out on a national level. It might not been picked up locally, and

32:52
someone that I think, yeah,

32:54
good evening. I’m a colleague of James’s at the SR you see as well, although I’m probably coming at it from a slightly different slant. My lecture in rural business management, to give you a bit of background, I’m what was previously known as a graduate into business. I was on one of the programs that tried to keep graduates from university or bring them back to the region that they lived when that program was funded by Scottish Enterprise in 2002 I think, was the first year that this program had been funded. My question is an extension of what has already been touched upon around young people and schools. I was one of the advocates to try and keep open some small rural schools. And the recent budget has just or savings has just been announced by the local authority, which includes cuts, or potential cuts to or looking at cuts of schools under 50 students and schools under 25 students. You’ve spoken about silos, yet at the same time, we cannot get qualified individuals and doctors and head teachers and surgeons and engineers and such like to come to the region. Yet it would appear that on a local authority level, we seem to be shutting down communities via the schools and the roads and the busses and all those things. How are we as a region going to make the links between the different departments within the council that seem to be hell bent on reducing the services that we all rely on to actually thrive here.

34:51
It’s a very big question, but it is, it is, I mean, and of course, it’s, it. Partly the outcome of austerity that is forcing people into making some of these decisions. And in in some ways, I think what is needed is some brave experimentation in doing things differently. If we, as the old saying goes, if we keep on doing what we we’ve always done, we’ll keep getting, you know, the same outcomes. So I would, for example, begin to think quite hard about this whole aspect of since covid, of you know, the wfh working from home, as as being not just a possible thing to aspire to, but equally, being something that we could learn from in terms of, for example, education as well. Now, during covid, we found that there was a certain group of children actually performed better by being taught, not in the home, but while they were there. You know, they access education in a different way. They were more confident about doing things by being at home, rather than having to travel into a school that they might find rather uncomfortable, as far as they were concerned, and and not sufficiently diverse actually, to really excite their particular interests, you know. So if, if we could find some way to begin to not necessarily say that everybody has to go to school, but can be taught, you know, through distance learning, that might be a better way of doing it, rather than just saying, well, we’ll close that school and we’ll merge it in there and have more transportation issues and more and and possibly more children beginning to drop out of of the educational system as as as as well. And the second thing I was going to say is that when it comes to things like apprenticeships and the modern apprenticeship, I think it also fails in a highly dispersed rural area because there aren’t really the businesses that can take on the strength of the tuttelage of the person to actually make the progress through all the stages that is required to come out At the end with accredited completion of a course. But maybe if we could find a group of plumbers who tend to be, you know, father and son or father and daughter, a group of them to collaborate in offering an apprenticeship, you would find a way then, of of of the individual, not just learning from the practice of one particular plumber, but would also learn from another one and another one and another one. And it could be one that did that specialized in heating, another one that specialized on bathrooms, another one that specialized on drainage and so on and so forth. They would come out of that with their rounded course and with the ability to probably start a business of their own. It wouldn’t be that they would necessarily, you know, have to then be employed, because they would, they could have the confidence to do themselves. And it wouldn’t just apply to plumbing. It could apply to a vast range of rural skills as well as these standard skills that we all regularly make use of as as well. So there’s, a couple of ideas anyway,

38:23
yeah, just, just building on roddy’s point there of doing things differently, something that we’ve been we realize now in the Glen kensing again. I’m sure it’ll resonate. I mean, for all of the reason, all of the region, everything we look at, really now we understand, is through the lens of rural depopulation, and that’s housing and its schools and its transport. So something that I would wish that we were doing as a region better, and who that would be, we do our bit. But you know, the regional agencies is, is lobbying up to the center, to government, basically. And because as long as the metrics are to set, the metrics of success are those for urban areas, we will continue to lose out. So as long as people are as long as schools are paid per pupil, we will continue to be disadvantaged. So how about a mindset shift where we say, here’s an idea. How about if, instead of that, we say, every person in every region will live no further than this from a primary school, no further than that from a secondary school, and then we invest in that, we make that, we get that stability. And then you can move to any given rural area knowing that these are your basic human rights, that you are going to be met. And then I would, again, I would assert sign it kind of watch them thrive, because we know what communities can do for themselves if they have the right infrastructure in place. So I think it. The other thing that I’m thinking, that I’m seeing, is that there is a social contract. This is a somebody put this to me, and I loved it. There’s a social contract between herbal and rural areas. And you know, if you want to be blunt about it, the central belt cannot feed or power itself. It’s back to mcnab’s point. And so we feed and power them, and we’re happy to do it. But surely the cost. Pro quo to that is that it’s okay that our children cost more to educate. You know, you the social contract is creaking when when we do our side of it, but yet we have to live or die by these urban metrics that reward high population densities. So that’s what I think we should be doing, is lobbying at a regional level to say, guys, you know, we don’t. There’s got to be an acknowledgement of the difference between rural and urban, and then invest in us and watch us thrive. But you got a hope, haven’t you?

40:36
Well, that resonates, but let’s not leave this point to come to you in a moment. Part of the problem, seems to me, is that the further and higher education provision is not in the areas, yeah. So you come here to Dumfries and Galloway college, or you come to the you come to Crichton royal we go to Park Hill. And do these institutes? Should we not be saying, which is what you’re both implying, that these institutions need to refocus. So can I put it back to you, if the rest of the audience don’t mind, we had two speakers from SR you see, and I used to be on the board, but way, way back, and we never had this debate. But surely, the times have changed. Is there a better way of teaching than, you know, at the central locations that can encourage people to stay locally and to actually begin to develop a provision there with local businesses, is that something that that could be thought about in the the hydrians of SR you see, for instance, we do teach online Yeah, online courses, yeah. We are a rural

42:00
campus inside of Dumfries, but we don’t have the accommodation. There isn’t that facility. So there isn’t the resources in the local area to provide lots of accommodation. So students typically have to live in Dumfries, and so it is a distinct disadvantage for us to get students to stay with us, because they have to travel. And so they are based in Dumfries, and yet, they’ve been educated essentially in agricultural land.

42:37
Yeah, okay, do you want to come back in briefly? Yeah, run the mic round. Yeah. Please take no. Please take the mic. So the online, okay,

42:52
I think a large part of what you’re talking about with the centralization of education to bigger bigger class sizes in singular locations, you’re always going to be up against it. I think that is not just an S, R, U, C problem, but that is in every university and college in Scotland problem. The drive towards bigger class sizes will inevitably affect rural colleges such as Dumfries and Galloway college or Glasgow campus or Glasgow University, UWS and Creighton and the SR you see at Park eight, our strategies are now aligned with expanding The rest of the UK and international students, because we are not going to get any more funding from the Scottish Funding Council for Scottish students. And until that changes, and the Scottish Funding Council open their purse strings and they are funded appropriately to allow that to happen, what you’re going to see is everybody stacking the stack. And you know, the classroom in the places where they’ve got the biggest draw, and certainly for my course in rural business management, which I teach on that is Edinburgh, and because of the nightlife and all of the attractions that James has spoken about that would draw students there. So I kind of think it’s a funding issue, as much as is finding a rural education solution. Our degree caters to the local economy, and we, we do well, but you’re, you’re, you’re kind of batting against that, unfortunately.

44:37
So that really flags up what you were saying, Helen, isn’t it is lobbying central government, because one of the issues that we have at further and higher education in Scotland is the cap put on the number of Scottish students, and that’s a tremendous disadvantage. Now we’ve got a question online, and then I’ll come to the gentleman in the in the yellow spot. Better. And then the lady here, and then there was somebody over there. Okay, we’ve got

45:06
two questions, but I’ll go with one, and after that, we can come back to the online one again. So this is from Jane, what policies or incentives would help landowners and communities work together towards net zero in a fair way?

45:20
Sorry, could you read that again?

45:21
Sorry, I’ll go slower. What policies or incentives would help landowners and communities work together towards net zero in a fair way?

45:40
Well, first of all, you need more willingness, I think, from amongst the landowning fraternity, to actually engage with us and a lot of these people, well, particularly farmers, find it very difficult to have any time left at the end of a very long day, you know, to also then begin to engage with with the community. And I think that’s that’s why it doesn’t really work particularly well at the moment, because there is no framework in place to actually enable the landowners themselves to engage with the community. And there’s certainly a strong feeling amongst the farmers that they and the foresters that they don’t really want to have that a interference in their business. And secondly, the time dedication to actually do it properly. So we’re then left with a situation where, if there is consultation going on, it’s it tends to be done by representative bodies, rather than the land managers and landowners themselves, which disengages it actually from the particular land that communities live within. Because these representative bodies tend to be at a national scale, and that, that disjoint, I think, is one of the things that needs, that needs to be solved. Now, how do we address that? I think, is, of course, what the question is, is really asking about and and it’s finding some way to have greater incentive for the land managers themselves, something that that leads them to to want to, in effect, be part more of the community that that they are in. And so I think things like using existing ways in which they are operating within the community might help, you know, things like using days when particular school events are happening to have as an adjunct to that, you know, some sort of display that is set up that can then interact and and engage with that sector of the community who are coming to, in effect, engage with the community anyway, but can also then address some of the particular issues on and opportunities you know, that are that are on their land. Then the other thing that we could look at more closely is the whole regulatory side as well, you know. So if they are getting, as nearly all land and land managers are getting funds from the state to it to undertake the activities that they do on a day to day basis. For, for most aspects of Land Management, anyway, there are exceptions. Then, if, if we could link into that, again, the requirement, you know that, in effect, there was an expectation that that that they understood concerns of the community and and sought to address them at the application and the report reviewing stage of that process. It’s, it’s an interestingly tricky question,

49:10
though, yeah, okay, well, it’s a very pertinent question, because that question is actually going to be debated in in Holyrood tomorrow, because it’s the third reading of the land reform bill. And one of the stipulations in the bill is that all landowners with land holding, I think it’s above 3000 hectares, have to draw a plan, and they have formally according if this statute is passed, and I thought, I’m sure it will, from looking at the amendments, they will have to consult the community. Now, whether that’s the right approach or whether it be successful, there’ll be, you know, owners are being dragged in, and lots of will be unwilling, because what we haven’t got is this real, achieve this difficult balance between, well, I’m the right solder. It’s. My property, and as Roddy says, Well, if you’re in receipt of public funds, well that play changes the game play. But the other issue that we have done in Scotland, which I think is quite remarkable, is there is a statement of land rights and responsibilities, and there’s a whole code of practice about it now, which has been drawn up by the land commission. And I think this is, this is the way forward. You will always get some who will say, Well, we would like to work with the community, but the community has got to go halfway as well. And I think some of the political messages, let’s be blunt about it, are not helpful at times, because they’re saying more communities should own a managed land, whereas lots of communities don’t necessarily want to do that, as Helen was reporting from her area, but also they don’t necessarily have the capacity to do that as well. So have you got? Is it something similar? All right,

51:03
there’s another question which is similar, and I guess that’s for Helen, and it’s why does Helen not believe in community land ownership? Surely, by owning land, said, owners become masters of benefits to the wider community.

51:14
I don’t not believe in community land ownership. I just wish we lived in a world where one way to ensure that land balance was achieved was was only done through community land ownership. I think it’s too much to ask of our communities. I would like our agencies, our regional agencies, to be funded to better to enforce the good practice guidelines that are out there, so that we could all relax and get on with walking the dog and doing some Patchwork, rather than having to lean in massively, as many, many people in this room do, to put in their volunteer time, in to kind of trying to fix a system that isn’t working for us. So it’s absolutely not anti community land ownership. I take my absolute hat off to those communities who have done it. I just think it’s a lot to ask of communities that that that that is the only solution.

52:05
Roddy, a quick point on this, yes,

52:07
yes, I agree that we have to get away from it being a binary issue. You know that that community interest in land has to be addressed through community ownership of land. I think there’s, there’s quite a broad spectrum of ways in which the Community Interest can can engage and could be engaged with a lot better, you know, from that stage of straightforward consultation, from sort of Community Supported Agriculture, you know, where there is that direct link in the marketing of produce, you know, from land to the without them owning, owning and managing the land themselves necessary, you know, so there are that range of of of things that could be explored to increase the extent to which The community is engaged in and enabled to express their interest in the land in which they live without necessarily always going all the way to saying, Okay, we have to give them the land with you know, it may move step by step in that direction, and that might be a good thing too. But, yeah, I think we definitely need to sub this binary thing that the only way is land ownership contributions,

53:27
and say that, hold on, Mike, please, just to help

53:30
the terms of indexing and making an inventory of the natural capital, our peatlands surely have to be the place to start, because they are sequestering carbon, and therefore commercial forestry is exploitation of the peatland, which we’ve seen since the 80s, is crashing into government policy on net zero and has been publicly funded. Was, I think it was, Roddy, you mentioned at the beginning that you’d done some work. I just wondered, I was curious, as to how that had progressed, and whether there was any prospect of a full stock check of Scotland’s peat emerging.

54:08
Yes, there is, I mean, there is a pretty good map already of, you know, where the peat is, the depth, though it’s two down to two dimensional, and to an extent, because, you know, with radar mapping, the LIDAR mapping, you can actually get an index of depth as well as extent. So yes, we are quite a long way down that route. What we have to be very aware of as well is that not all peatland is actually absorbing carbon. At the moment, there’s, there’s so much damage to peatland out there, and peatland that has been sure we need to re wet and repair the damage, this huge effort that needs to be put into to to that repair. And then one thing that we’re not very good at at the moment, really is, is under. Understanding just how much carbon is then being taken in by the emitters. There is some that’s being emitted. There’s some that’s coming in that there’s periods when the peatland begins to get a bit drier, and that changes things again. There’s times when it’s wetter, and it does, and particularly in that process of repair, it may well go into a state where actually, for a period, more carbon might be released because of disturbance and areas that are getting sort of wetter, and some methane then being produced, and various things go on, you know, and the data to inform all of that does require more research so as we can find better ways to relate. Then what the research tells us to the what the particular problems are on the land. But

55:47
how do the natural nature scholars?

55:52
There’s lots of people waiting. I mean, there is expertise actually, based on this campus. Of course, the Crown carbon Center has got expertise in in measuring this. I think one of the problems is that when people say and this includes Scottish forestry, and it includes forest and land Scotland and the commercial forestry company, we are doing this to sequester carbon, there is no conditionality that they have to measure the baseline and the change. And that’s, you know, that’s a problem that exists in other countries as well. The gentleman in the yellow sweater has been extremely patient. Thank you.

56:30
Thank you. Absolutely agree with Helen her point about, you know, we’re all for a community empowerment, but I think the pressure that’s being placed on communities to basically make up for the inaction of national and regional governments. You know, whether it’s place planning or whatever, leaving aside the massive inequality of land ownership, and you know, the vested interests. I’m wondering. You know, it’s interesting. There’s nobody from soci that says the Scotland enterprise here tonight, and or not on the panel anyway. And I wonder what they have a large number of staff, but I wonder what they actually do. I mean, they produced a report a while back at the, you know, 91 million pounds was coming to the local economy from wind farms and, you know, but the fact is, that’s, you know, very much distributed where the wind farms happen to be and, you know, and put on to overstrapped, you know, communities who basically struggled to spend that money. The Scottish Government recommended years ago that that be pooled and that people like so see, would take on all of those millions of pounds and distribute it on a more geographically equitable basis, but and also have some influence, I suppose, how it is used in terms of economic and social development, whereas, you know, at the moment, it’s sitting in the coffers of Community Councils and, you know, or not being claimed, and whatever it’s it’s a huge waste of Money. It’s the crumbs anyway, that are just, you know, off the table from these wind farms companies. It’s not a huge amount of money, but, you know, if it was used more judiciously, you know. But again, I don’t know socions Here. They can’t speak for themselves, but what I did write to them about it, what, what, you know, how things could be. You know, the wind farms are there. They’re expanding on it exponentially, but at least if we got a better use of that money.

58:29
Well, I’ll come in from from the chair first. I think many of us are really quite concerned about the bids of of the public sector to want to have this. I mean, Dumfries and Galloway were saying that years back and and it’s no different from sosi saying it now, or any of the other two enterprise companies around the country. Will that be better? How much will they take as part of their running costs? That would that would worry me as citizen Crofts be perfectly honest. But the real nub is, of course, this is, this is peanuts. And I mean, you hinted that in your own question, to the profits that are made by these companies. And it goes back to a point that Roddy was making earlier, which applies in all the electricity producing parts of Scotland that they are having to pay very high rates for the electricity which they produce to be allowed to use locally, you go to walk me, and you’ll get it there larger as well as One of the innovative places. So it strikes me that the other angle, and there are people in the audience who are more knowledgeable about this than I am, is the fact that I can’t remember the technical term now Ted, you can probably tell me is this payment? From basically the consumer when we don’t need the energy from those wind farms. Constraint mechanism, yeah, which is phenomenal, millions and millions, which goes to the companies. So we’ve got a mismatch there as well. So I think there is a whole issue of how much money this is not how it who should distribute it is, but how much should be distributed to allow those things to happen. Anybody want that? Should power generation

1:00:36
be in public hands? Will you just say that in the mic, just for the honor?

1:00:40
Should power generation be in public hands? We’re once again talking about how the big companies come in and they make their money here and they siphon it off to wherever they live. Should we be looking at communities generating their own electricity to sell locally? It’s you’re talking about doing things more drastically. Would that be a possibility that we take it into public hands, perhaps Scotland wide, perhaps more in rural communities where we would benefit from it, regional hands? Yeah.

1:01:13
I mean, I think there is a point there. Ronnie, you may want to comment as well. I mean, you know, our major power generation companies are not even British owned, and that’s also true of many of the wind farms in this area, of course. So there has to be a question of, how did we allow that to happen? Other countries don’t so almost whether it’s do it

1:01:40
yeah, there are examples, but they tend to be small ones. In Scotland, you know, there is community wind turbines that, you know that the communities then are, in effect, generating their their own power. We could explore doing that a lot more. Have to be a lot to make it significant, really once, because these tend to be small island communities, really. One quite interesting one that is about to be done is that Orkney, Orkney council have brought forward proposals to construct, really, quite an extensive wind farm that will be, you know, any any effect Orkneys power. Now, if, if that could work in in Orkney, I kind of think, you know, we ought to be looking for ways in which other councils, and I’m thinking here, of course, of Dumfries and Galloway, you know? Why? You know why? Why not? I mean, I’m, I’m sure they would start by saying, Oh, it all comes down to the financing, really, you know, how can we do that? And Orkney is lucky because, you know, it has quite a lot of oil money that that can be reinvested into other things. You know, in effect, they’ve got their own little sovereign fund. You know, that doesn’t necessarily apply everywhere else, but I think, I think you’re right that there ought to be incentives that enable and empower councils to do more of this and communities. And it doesn’t have to be the councils. It can be in places communities.

1:03:17
Come on. Then what about well, I, you know,

1:03:19
as a community council. I think there’s a fund. Should the should the energy companies be in UK or public hands? Yes, absolutely. What concerns me so much is political bandwidth. I don’t think we have the ability to make big decisions anymore in this country. We should be we should have cheaper electricity in Dumfries and Galloway, because it’s generating Dumfries and Galway. Businesses should be encouraged to come to Dumfries and Galway because the electricity is cheaper. There’s so much you speak to people and they want and they Well, it makes sense. How on earth can we change the political discussion to actually tackle some of these bigger challenges? We used to do things as a country, we don’t. We just everything that we don’t even know in the power lines. So we don’t know the wind farms, we don’t know the power lines. And that is returning value to primarily Spanish shareholders. Is our own power lines. It’s just like the like the train network as well, is subsidizing Deutsche Bahn, the whole thing. Where is the political bandwidth to take these big decisions? I think that’s the question we should be asking ourselves with the elections next

1:04:13
year. Have you thought of putting yourself forward?

1:04:18
Public may have spoken already. I’d love to come back to the man’s now that you found my voice just quickly. I’d have to come back to that man’s question there about, how do we get the different departments of the council to work together and listen to what the people want, and if we want to have provocative, thought provoking discussion here, there is an element of this which is on us. So what is the biggest way you can protect a bus? Is use the bus. What is the biggest way you protect shops in the High Street? Use shops in the High Street. I’ve spoken to people who do all the shopping in Aldi, and it’s the same breath say, Oh, the shopping in Castle Douglas is not like it used to be. I think we have, we are consumers. We have power here. We have who, Which school do our children go to? That this is there is an element of personal choice in here as well. Here we need to have a courageous conversations to say we we have spending power. Are we have. My children get my daughter gets free music lessons. She’s in the p5 whatever it is that gets free music lessons, and there’s a waiting list to get into it, and they could take five students, and in the first week, only three students turned up. And so those three students are now getting free free music lessons. And the question comes to mind is that is nearly 50% of the capacity has been signed up by someone, and they haven’t turned up because it’s free. And I think we free. And I think we need to be honest with ourselves, as as citizens in the freezing Galloway to say, Are we the decisions we’re making? Is that supporting what the local authority can do? That was my response to that

1:05:36
question, just on the community benefits, just Just on that point of host because I suspect that the room might be split depending on whether you live in a community that has wind farm community benefits, or if you don’t, that seems to be how the how the thinking divides. So I have been given this a bit of thought, because we’re a community that does get relatively limited, and, you know, not, you know, it’s far more than others get. It’s sort of hundreds of 1000s a year. And we, and I would like to think we’ve used that well, but you know, you’ve got to have that critical thinking of what’s fair, what’s equitable. How is this all working? And where I’ve kind of come to it is, is you’ve got to have a real clear understanding of what the value of the what the reason for the community benefits are, and if the and the wind farms will never say it’s compensation, because that gets into a whole world of pain, but if you acknowledge that there is an impact on a host community from having a wind farm, whether it’s the construction or whether it’s the visual inspect or whatever your view on it is, if you acknowledge that there is an impact and the community benefit is in response to that impact, then that, for me, implies that the community benefit stays with the host community. Now for me, there’s then a second conversation that if we nationally or regionally decide that they that the big company, the big developers, are making sufficient money to pay more money, and that money is put into regional, national funds as a hypothecated tax. Effectively, then great. You know that that benefits us all, but I think you’ve got to have that clarity of thinking as to as to what the community benefit is for because if it’s just a tax on the developers, then say it’s just a tax, and then it can be spread regionally, nationally, whatever you want. But if it is a recognition that the host communities are impacted by these developments that benefit the whole nation, then for me, that’s the reasoning that the community benefit stays with the with the with the host community. And very quickly, I completely agree that some communities are not using it well. Again, it comes back to community capacity, you know, time, willingness to do it. But I think for me, that’s more about communities learning and working together. You know, we are strategic, we are ambitious. And I would imagine it’s not for me to decide. I’m not on the decision making panel, but I could see a world in which when we have fulfilled our immediate community priorities, if so see or the council came and said, Are you prepared to put some of your money into the region wide transport system, 5g system, whatever that, that would be a conversation we would have. But we would be having that conversation as equals, that this is our money, and we will decide where to spend it to best benefit our residents, because we are the ones impacted by the by the by the developments. So, I mean, you know, if there is more money to go around, great, you know, all for that. But I just it’s that critical thinking on what is the community benefit for?

1:08:14
Okay, there’s a lady must be sitting on the floor. Arise, madam.

1:08:21
Thank you so much. I suppose I just want to push back slightly on the idea that if energy is made here, we should all have it cheaper because it’s made here, and we live here because I think it just brings us back to some kind of birthplace lottery. And that’s fundamentally the issue that many of us have who try and exist in the world. And it’s the issue with land ownership and the issue with inherited wealth that are because, for some reason, I was born into something. I access things more cheaply, or have access to more cultural capital, environmental capital, economic capital. And so I suppose, for me, people in this room and in this region, as someone who’s grown up here will see this as radical, and I agree, we have a lack of political bandwidth, and I would say, like, a really dangerously growing lack of political imagination. But I wonder what kind of economic reform is actually needed, and how, like, broad we can be with that. Because from education to home ownership. I’m hearing a lot of tinkering around the edges that will not materially impact my life and my community’s life, and will also not wrestle with the fact that we are living within significant planetary boundaries that seem to be overlooked for the benefit of growth, growth which many people don’t experience, growth which is actually just an imagined system, an imagined game of Monopoly. And I also wonder how, through ideas like transition towns, a rural region like Dumfries and Galloway can actually model and drive that change, and who we would need to do that? Well. I’m

1:10:03
passing the buck here on the panel, I can see that, no, no, I know that was a fascinating, really deep question. I won’t

1:10:12
jump on that. I will jump on that. Yes, I will jump on that. The so I think there’s a lot in there that I really, really, really interested in the forestry, which the sector I’m working in, you could say the benefits are felt on the national stage of planting trees and the DIS benefits are felt on the local stage. So there is an element of that there. So I push back on your pushback of the wind farm question, slightly on that. But I think that comes the come the problem we have at the moment, you talk about political bandwidth or tinkering, is no one quite has responsibility for anything anymore, and you can never quite get the right person in the room to make the decision. I think that’s what’s really missing at the moment, is what was Wellington’s phrase, a bad decision is better than no decision, because it feels like we’re living in a world of no decisions at the moment. And so the ability to actually get the right people in the room and come together as a region, I think, probably irrespective of where that person may sit in the political ladder, have a coherent voice that probably might immediate come back on that

1:11:05
point, there’s the, you know, this question of private land ownership, inherited wealth. I mean, I find it fascinating that you know, for all the rhetoric and the Acts of Parliament, you know, since we had the Scottish Parliament, we’ve had very little change. It’s not been a sea change at all. It’s small communities who felt they had the capacity in one way or another, even though sometimes it proved they didn’t that got money to buy a small bit of land. We haven’t had the major changes, except one or two nasty ones which really stuck in people’s gullet like over for instance. But otherwise, and I think the irony is, of course, that unlike other countries, we are quite we don’t block foreign owners coming in and buying land as well. And I don’t want to get into whether there are good or bad ones. There are some very good ones, probably the largest one in Scotland, and some of the inherited wealth ones are very good as well. So it’s, it’s very easy to also paint it at black and white, but, but we’re in a political stasis on this, I think, which is what you’re saying. McNabb, where do we go forward on it? Because we’ve not got the community capacity, we’ve not got enough money in the system, and a sort of Land Management laws, including the land reform, this latest Land Reform Act and the natural environment bill, which is going through Parliament, don’t necessarily have the sea change and the grouse, the grouse more legislation from last year either. So it is that little. It’s almost, you know, you’ve hit the nail on the head, haven’t you, in the big sense, because we’ve done all of these things, we’ve got the willingness of the parliament to legislate, but it’s not changing it. So I leave it at that. Do you want to add to that? Either of

1:13:19
you. I was just gonna say the you must have read donut economics by Kate Ray worth, yeah, yeah, yeah, so, so, yeah. So that’s that’s fascinating for me, with that, that space between where we’re meeting our needs and not exceeding our planetary boundaries. And I would say, when I, when I, when I looked in I felt that donut economics was a word for what we’re doing a lot in our in our rural communities. I didn’t know I had a name but, but it is that sense that we can’t just keep growing. We just want to we just want to be sustainable. We just want to live in that safe space. So I don’t know the answer. I do know that most conversations in the Glen Kens ended in revolution, so I’m glad to hear that’s true in Dumfries as well.

1:14:05
Yeah, and we had exactly the same conversation in Orkney at the Science Festival in September, where we included the people working in the renewable energy and the guy who runs the festival and myself. Well, the revolution’s just started, but the fact of the matter is that we’re having this conversation. There is an inherent frustration in the way that the questions are put in the way we’re answering them as well, because it comes back to we’ve got a voice, but the voice is not being heard. And why is, is that, what are the blockages in in the whole society? That’s meaning that despite the good work that’s being done here and in other parts of Scotland, and we can, we can just badge them all and say, This is really tremendous. Best Practice, but it’s not, it’s not getting through.

1:15:05
Just add very quickly, Roger, I think a word we should be using a bit more is greed as well. I think we have a problem with greed and that use people accept profits being made and work hard and you make your money. But I think we are losing the link slightly there when various online websites Pay more tax in a year than Amazon and Apple put together. I think we’re losing the balance with it all. I think that’s when it comes back to the big thinking. Is what we need to fix these things.

1:15:29
Ted, hi, yeah, just going on community benefit, sticking with that for a second. I wonder if we’re looking at it in the wrong way. I actually was part of a company that introduced community benefits for wind farms in in Scotland, on the first Scottish wind farm. And it was a voluntary thing we did. We were an environmental company, and we saw that we were having an impact on that area. And so it was, how do we work with the communities? At the time, the power companies gave us a really hard time saying, you can’t offer community benefit in that way where you’re offering them a fixed sum per year for the life of a wind farm. So we were actually held in contempt by the industry itself. But what happened was everybody wanted to work with us, because the community suddenly said, these guys are credible, these guys are real. And actually, it made a difference in the way it’s thinking so, and it’s become an industry norm. Now. It’s still a voluntary payment, but all of the industry does it. So rather than looking at the wind industry and saying, wind has to do community benefit. It’s all on the wind industry. Why not look at any industry that is looking to go into a community and do something? It can be forestry. It can be a farmer. It can be in urban areas where a business is coming in and as they go for planning consent and do their development phase, the region says, What are you going to do for the community? And then you’re putting the onus on every industry, every business that is coming in, how are you going to work in partnership with that community that you’re going to have an impact on some positive, some negative. What are you going to do? And in that way, you could change the relationship between them and us into a requiring them to work close with the community. I don’t know what your thoughts are on that, and it takes away your issue, sir, of should the Glen Kens give up theirs for Dumfries or anywhere else, as any developer comes in and is making money out of anywhere in Dumfries and Galloway, they should be putting back into the community. It’s just a thought another way of thinking. It’s

1:17:59
an interesting point coming from somebody who ran natural power, and it’s very early days as well, that sort of tension between the partners, I was going to add, there’s a

1:18:10
question earlier about policy. What policies should we introduce? And of course, you do shiver slightly when you think there are more policies being introduced, because we do have quite a lot of policies. And the idea of someone being required to undertake community consultation makes me shiver slightly, because I think that’s not going to be a productive they’re being told to do it. The only beneficiary is the whole committee that get the booking for the community consultation event. I think what’s the actual positive that’s come out of that? And so it ties in a little bit with Ted’s point there is that there is an element of pick the best, make and make an example of the best and try and raise aspirations. I think that’s probably where I sit in this in this debate, is trying to work with the best and not shame the worst, but Lift, lift the standard on that basis. Because I think we live in a very heavily policyed, guidance said world, and I think it’s quite good to have examples rather than sticks.

1:19:01
And you are right, Ted, of course, if, if people could link the benefits of things that are happening in their communities, then in ways that align with their own priorities, then you’re starting to move forward into a world where you’re where you’re embarking on a joint enterprise, which is, surely, is where the developers or the or the industry would want to be as well. So, and I think the important thing in your point, which you which you alluded to, but it doesn’t have to be cash, you know, if they came and treated the community as a royal strategic partner and said, What are your aspirations? What are your priorities? Do you want better roads? Do you want better access? Do you want jobs? Do you want apprenticeships? You know? And actually, again, heard, heard what the communities were saying. We were saying to spend, you know, whether or not they can do in tongland, transmission line will get renewed. Who knows? But if it does, there will be significant capital community benefit accrued with it. And we said, Imagine if on the day that the concrete for the first pylon was poured, we opened an education and learning hub for the Glen Kents. And, you know, do you think that that would balance out some of the views on the on the new pilot online? You know, there will always be people anti, and there will always be people Pro, but if people can make the link between, well, this happened, and maybe, but, but then this happened as a direct link, then then you’re starting to feel like, like you matter, like you’re important, like your priorities are being part of the greater conversation. So I think it’s, it’s, it is community benefit, but in its wider sense. And yeah, absolutely, you know why? Not every industry. Yes, sometimes wind gets a bashing, but actually they’re the ones doing it, and other industries are slipping under the radar completely. So yes, there please.

1:20:40
Mike hallery, I’m Farmer and land agent. I’m just thinking back to the early point, so I apologize if I start to ramble a bit. There’s been a suggestion from the room, and I think from the panel, that possibly capitalism and the market doesn’t work. We’ve talked a little bit about power. I think about water south of the border, rail network, etc. We haven’t really expanded on the market and natural capital. I think the market is completely skewed as it stands. Wind seems to be the king. We’ll cut down trees. We don’t mind birds of prey being killed, wind gets to go ahead, followed by forestry. We’re happy to plant trees. I think about my local community pen punt. I’m approaching 50. I remember my primary school days. There was 80 kids there. We’re down to 40 now. We’re risk of losing two teachers. People seem to be at the bottom of the natural capital equation, and I think it possibly needs rebalance before it’s too late. And I would like to hear people’s thoughts on that. Thank you very much. You’ve

1:22:02
got to go it? No, I think that great, great question, and it feels slightly like we are we still early enough in this debate to make a change as well, which is the exciting thing with this, is this natural capital still further to run. I kicked back a little bit against the phrase of natural capital when it first came along, because I thought this is exactly us trying to monetize a whole new sector that we haven’t yet monetized. And look how well monetizing has done for us. But the response was that actually natural capital, we have to, we have to speak to the biggest group of people, and money is what the natural capital is what the biggest group of people understand. And so there was a response back that actually no natural capital is the right, is the right phrase for it. But no, yeah, absolutely, it’s, how can, how can we change the dynamic to have an area like Dumfries and Galloway, or an individual landowner or a community in Dumfries and Galloway negotiating with a enormous company based in London with investments across the UK, I think there is, yeah, that’s a really, really tough one. And I’m reminded of, was it church, or was that democracy is the worst form of government, apart from all the others, and I feel a little bit like that with capitalism, is it’s the worst form. But apart from all the others, it’s just, how can we how can we learn from what we’ve done? I think one point to come out of the wind debate is the community benefits of wind have ended up being a cash payment. And I think with natural capital, I’m hoping that there is a step forward to say it’s not just about cash. It is about services. It’s about input into different infrastructure. And I think there’s a win there, if we could get three or four of these wins to say this is how we can learn from what’s happened previously. There’s a non answer fee.

1:23:31
I mean, well, I think that link between natural capital and then the wider issue of capitalism is is quite a deep area to to explore, because natural capital is really more a way of of trying to put nature or trying to bring our economics into the the way In which the globe actually itself works, you know, so it, it isn’t really about trying to have a column in economic tables. It’s labeled nature, and we can account down the side. It’s it. It’s more about recognizing that, that the really big system that economics is a tiny little bit of is the natural processes, you know, so it’s embedding economics into where it should be, as recognized as as a small part of this much bigger whole of how, of how the globe actually operates. And that, of course, is no easy task for a start. Just by thinking of it conceptually that way, you would instantly realize that, Oh So, the value of nature is much, much bigger than the value of our human economy. And well, of course it is, and of course it must be. And. As I said at the beginning, there’s something existential about it as well, you know, how, how can you adequately value it? You know, if, if you said, Then said, well, let’s strip all that out and transfer it into something else. Because, of course, without nature, we wouldn’t be here, you know. And but then, if you try to do economics in that sort of way with an almost infinite value being attached to nature. Well, basically, you can’t do the equations of economics anymore that. That’s kind of why I think we, we need to have a change in our perspective of of how systems work, and then introduce that, that wider perspective into the way in which we use values and recognize, of course, that money isn’t the only way of valuing something. You know, we all have children, but we wouldn’t sell them. So,

1:26:00
let him come back just a moment. What I think is interesting about this as well, you know, you’re speaking as a farmer. Natural capital, to me, in your context, is the one vital asset that you have, is the land, is the soil? Is it not? And do you not see it like that as you know? Way of where your starting point, if you like,

1:26:30
I’ll address that. I think that’s an easier one for me. Yeah, soil. Farmers live, live and die by their soil, and they have to look after it. Agricultural support is slowly progressing towards investment in soil and more looks at biodiversity, carbon sequestration. It’s moving slowly, but it is moving that direction. We’re relearning some of the things that my grandfather would do. You’ve got to line your soil, optimize PHS, things like that. It’s back to old school farming. It’s a common quip, but if the farmers making some money, then they’ve got the money to invest in looking after nature and biodiversity as well. But they’ve got to, got to have a business and survive in the first instance, my my bug bear, and possibly what I was thinking a little bit on natural capital is we protect apex predators within huge fondness as a as government and nation with eagles. See, well, not so much golden eagles, but seagulls, causing devastation on some farms, there is farmers wives generally worried at lambing time whether their husbands will come back in from the lambing field due to the predation by sea eagles. There is badger predation. There is red kites, not so much buzzards, because the red kites have seen them off. Now there are devastating ground nesting birds, hedgehogs, etc. The to me, the natural capital market is protecting or overly protecting the top end, and agriculture is blamed for decimating the lower end, and hands are tied behind their back. So that’s a more in depth look at maybe what I was hinting at. Thank you.

1:28:26
Yeah, thank you. Thank you for that. It’s a very valid point, and when, in a sense, we’re not asking that’s we’re not debating those because we’re taking as read that we must protect more of these totemic species. I’m I’ve spent quite a lot of my life in that field, but I understand your point, because have we got that balanced word that is in the title of this evening? Think there’s one more online,

1:29:01
interconnected questions online. The first is, but as Scotland’s fourth land use strategy consultation closed on Fifth October, how do we get better at reconciling commercial forestry, wind farms, rewilding grouse moors and Hill farming? And then a follow up from Chris spray to does this point is, what have we learned and what has been actioned on the ground from the first three land use strategies these past 14 years?

1:29:30
Two minutes answer the big question,

1:29:34
Molly, go for it very quickly. Then I think the best way to do that is to start thinking very hard about the outcomes we’re looking for, rather than all the little bits. And once we have an understanding of what the outcomes from from the land that we need are, we can then begin thinking closely about the integrated land use that is needed to deliver these outcomes. At the moment, it’s kind of just a bun fight, and that doesn’t that. Doesn’t help,

1:30:04
right? Each of you, what’s your headline message from from this discussion to the politicians, because we’re still writing the manifesto for the Royal Society of Edinburgh, and we’re going to lobby hard with all the political parties,

1:30:26
reinstate the social contract between urban and rural. You stop measuring us by your by your standards, and acknowledge that that you need us just as much as we need you. While I’m very happy to give up Deliveroo and Uber and eating out and nightclubs. When I moved to the Glen Kens, I did not expect to have to give up my children’s education, access to healthcare, transport. So so you know, you’ve got to maintain the basics of rural infrastructure to keep the social contract going, because it is creaking.

1:30:59
We voted on that one. Thank you. Right now. How

1:31:03
do I follow that? Now? That was That was brilliant. Helen, no, I think what I would like to say politicians that we’re facing some big decisions, and I feel like they we will back them if they make we will back their efforts if they could set out the reasons they’re doing this. And I think the worry is that that we dance from yes, no and yes, no, and we end up dancing around the edges. So, my God, the building is on fire. Could you please make some decisions and we will back it if they feel right decisions? I think that’s probably

1:31:34
my Yep. Okay, well, McNab said earlier, quoting Wellington, that that a bad decision is better than no decision at all. Actually, I’m not sure any of us in this room would necessarily agree with that, depending on what the bad decision was. So what I think, from what everybody has been saying, is that it would be what we’re really looking for is better proposals from our politicians for the range of complex and and difficult issues that we’re all facing, and to come forward with some some steps that are quite brave in order to address them, because they are big problems, and just touching them on the edges all the time is allowing them to continue to get worse, rather than than, than get better. So that’s, that’s, I think that’s really my feeling okay, of what has emerged from the conversation we’ve had this evening, really, is that that’s what we need. Some, some, something that

1:32:45
we’ve often talked about rural voice. I remember it well with with Barbara on many occasions, but it is, but it’s turning in the table round, isn’t it? It’s saying, Oh, it’s all bad. It’s saying, We’ve got ideas, we’ve got examples of good practice. This is what we can do, if you’ll just give us the wherewithal. And the wherewithal is not just the resource, it’s also the authority and the responsibility, because that’s the system’s not working. I think we’re all agreed on that, with the nods around the room as well. So get to the hustings and tell them, and tell them nationally as well, because it’s right. It’s a very it’s not a dichotomy between urban and rural. It’s because it’s so unbalanced actually, and the rural voice is so important. Make it known, but say it positively. This is what we can do, if you can only help us this way and that way and the other way. Thank you all very much, online and in the room here, I hope You’ve enjoyed that and go safely home. Good night. You and.