Old Forge Pub

[steve yates]

I suppose Scottish might be different to England, but in England there is literally no chance a pub at the centre of a small remote community that had been functioning as a pub for decades would get change of use to C3.

Nobody involved has said there was the option of changing use to C3, so I suspect Scotland's Planning Rules match the UKs in this regard.

You suppose right, it's pointless applying englands property laws to scotland, they have quite different ones.

 

[Frogmogman]

We've just come through a period where business in the UK received unprecendented financial support from government.

in France perhaps even more so, my business being one of them. Am I bothered to have been in receipt of state aid ? Not at all.

In the nearly 25 years since I set up this business, I reckon it has on average generated about €350k p.a. for the state coffers. That it should be on the receiving end for a short while whilst obliged to remain closed for about 10 months doesn’t seem that unreasonable to me.

that said, it does seem a bit bonkers to me for the state to be buying pubs for people.

 

[dgadee]

"the state to be buying pubs for people."

Ah, the ancient art of rhetoric lives on.

 

[Frogmogman]

Ah, the ancient art of rhetoric lives on.

As nothing compared to your ‘businesses thieving from the tax payer’.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

Just to be clear I'm not objecting to public money being used to buy a community hub for a remote community, if required.

I'm just surprised public money *is* required in this case, and I'd be interested to know why it is.

The why.
Community wins £500,000 in funding for remotest mainland pub

The award ... aimed at putting local assets in the hands of local communities.

The reason.
Land reform - gov.scot

Principles

1. The overall framework of land rights, responsibilities and public policies should promote, fulfil and respect relevant human rights in relation to land, contribute to public interest and wellbeing, and balance public and private interests. The framework should support sustainable economic development, protect and enhance the environment, help achieve social justice and build a fairer society.

2. There should be a more diverse pattern of land ownership and tenure, with more opportunities for citizens to own, lease and have access to land.

3. More local communities should have the opportunity to own, lease or use buildings and land which can contribute to their community's wellbeing and future development.

4. The holders of land rights should exercise these rights in ways that take account of their responsibilities to meet high standards of land ownership, management and use. Acting as the stewards of Scotland's land resource for future generations they contribute to sustainable growth and a modern, successful country.

5. There should be improved transparency of information about the ownership, use and management of land, and this should be publicly available, clear and contain relevant detail.

6. There should be greater collaboration and community engagement in decisions about land.

[Inappropriate content deleted]

 

[penfold]

Rural depopulation is one reason. It's a common enough problem. Travelling across Spain by rail you can barely see a house over many stretches of countryside. See Nobody lives here! Rural depopulation in the EU and citizen engagement in “emptied Spain” • Eyes on Europe

Of course, some prefer "wild areas" to be population free. But that's not my view.

Scotland isn't quite as bad as Spain, but far behind Norway in providing infrastructure to make rural living attractive and having a planning regime that doesn't price the low-paid out.

 

[Mark-1]

The why.
Community wins £500,000 in funding for remotest mainland pub



The reason.
Land reform - gov.scot



Ultimately Scottish voters put into government a political party that supported land reform in their manifest, so the accountability sits with the voters of Scotland. The reason why a political party had a manifesto position on land reform is because some land owners have abused human rights in the pursuit of profit; of which there is a both historical and recent examples. What I don't know, is there an opportunity within the policy to block sales of land and assets if a case is made that the community would benefit if they owned it, or be disadvantaged if they didn't?

Ultimately this is what Scotland voted for and the party that got into power implemented its policies. Community ownership of this asset is likely to benefit the community and visitors positively, because historically it did in the format that the community want to run the pub.

Yesterday you were saying Scotland's planning laws meant the pub's value was the C3 value which effectively meant it wasn't viable to buy it for A4 use, and *that* was why public money was required. (Rather than the £250k that's already been raised plus a bit of a loan.) So yesterday it was all the Scottish Government's fault. (...and Steve Yates suggests you might well have been right.) Personally, I still doubt that but at least it makes sense.

Now you've come up with something completely different which doesn't explain why the purchase can't be funded with borrowing at all. Only now it's some kind of government triumph!

You don't know. I don't know either. Not much point in us discussing it. I'm sure we'll find out in time.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

You don't know. I don't know either. Not much point in us discussing it. I'm sure we'll find out in time.

You asked questions and have been given answers and facts to back up a point of view. It should not be too difficult to weave a thread through the information to see how it all joins up: a remote community, a pub converted to a restaurant, the restaurant closing, the building being sold on, the potential to lose the pub to a housing conversion, the desire for the community to buy the pub, the availability of grants for community benefit, the availability of crowd sourcing mechanisms, a community that has bought its future from past landowners. I don’t think that it’s a difficult concept, plus it avoids having to pay a lender back plus interest.

I do know why public money was used and I have assumed based on the arithmetic why it was £500k, or thereabouts, see earlier posts.

Why the community chose crowd source funding and grant application, over a business loan, I could not say. Why the seller will sell to them and not to someone else I don’t know. But I think I can make a reasonable guess at it all.

 

[Moderator]

The thread has been briefly closed for review, and a number of posts deleted.
Please do continue to discuss the Old Forge Pub, including the Scottish Land Fund/National Lottery funding, but without introducing political aspects - Scottish Government, UK Government, the EU etc etc.

 

[dgadee]

The thread has been briefly closed for review, and a number of posts deleted.
Please do continue to discuss the Old Forge Pub, including the Scottish Land Fund/National Lottery funding, but without introducing political aspects - Scottish Government, UK Government, the EU etc etc.

Dear Moderator, you've eviscerated the discussion! Of course there is a political dimension here. How can there not be?

 

[Forum Admin Team]

Dear Moderator, you've eviscerated the discussion! Of course there is a political dimension here. How can there not be?

In which case the thread is now locked and will be removed in due course.

We tried to keep the thread open and on track (i.e. in keeping with the forum posting guidelines), clearly not appreciated nor worthwhile.