The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-08734, in the name of John Lamont, on the City of Edinburgh Council (Leith Links and Surplus Fire Fund) Bill. I call John Lamont to speak to and move the motion on behalf of the City of Edinburgh Council (Leith Links and Surplus Fire Fund) Bill Committee.
16:39
I am pleased to open the preliminary stage debate on the City of Edinburgh Council (Leith Links and Surplus Fire Fund) Bill, and to provide the Parliament with some background information on how the committee has considered the bill so far.
The bill is the fourth private bill to come before the Parliament this session and is one of the less controversial. No objection to it has been received.
The first thing that struck me about the bill when the committee was given the task of scrutinising it was its rather unwieldy title. It was not long before I appreciated that, although there is one bill, it deals with two different and unconnected purposes. Therefore, although it is fair to say that the bill is not controversial, it has still given the committee plenty of substance to consider. We also had to make ourselves familiar with the rather unique procedures that concern an important area of the Parliament’s work.
Before I provide some background information on what led to the bill and talk about its broad principles, I will speak briefly about private bills more generally and why they are necessary.
Private bills propose laws that allow individuals, groups of individuals or corporate entities to acquire powers or benefits in excess of or in conflict with the general law. Private bills for large-scale works are somewhat rarer these days, but the Parliament still sees a steady stream of governance reorganisation bills and the occasional bill that seeks to make changes to private legislation to enable construction to take place. Unusually, the bill that we are debating deals with both issues. The common denominator is the promoter: the City of Edinburgh Council.
The bill’s first objective is to amend section 22 of the schedule to the City of Edinburgh District Council Order Confirmation Act 1991 so that the erection of a statue of John Rattray on Leith Links is no longer prohibited. Currently, section 22 prohibits the erection of buildings, including monuments and statues, on Leith Links.
Members might ask: who is John Rattray, and why should he be commemorated in that way? John Rattray was an accomplished golfer on Leith Links in the 18th century, and was instrumental in setting down the rules for the game of golf. For that reason, the Leith Rules Golf Society wishes to erect a life-size statue of him on Leith Links. In giving evidence, the chair of the statue committee, Pat Denzler, said:
“The aim was to have something iconic to represent Leith.”—[Official Report, City of Edinburgh Council (Leith Links and Surplus Fire Fund) Bill Committee, 14 November 2013; c 13.]
The sculptor David Annand has been commissioned to create that statue. I am sure that members will be acquainted with his work, particularly as one of his bronze statues—that of Robert Fergusson the poet striding out at the entrance to Canongate church—resides not too far from the chamber.
The committee was concerned with ensuring that the power that was sought was indeed necessary and that no unintended consequences would arise from its use. We were clear that the issues of aesthetics and the security of the statue had already been the subject of the planning process. Planning permission was granted on 18 April 2013
“on the basis that the proposals comply with the Council’s development plan and the relevant non-statutory guidelines, and would preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area and have no effect on residential amenity.”
Our site visit to Leith Links on 5 November 2013 further served to reassure us.
The committee is satisfied that the bill is tightly drawn to create an exception only for that particular statue and that no further development can take place on the site at Leith Links. Fundraising to erect the statue is continuing, and the Leith Rules Golf Society hopes that the Ryder cup will help to focus those efforts. The committee also heard that a proportion of the funds that are raised will be given to the promoter to pay for the statue’s on-going maintenance.
The bill’s second objective concerns the revitalisation of a fund that was set up to assist those who were caught up in a series of fires in Edinburgh’s High Street in 1824. The Surplus Fire Fund is constituted under the Edinburgh Corporation Order Confirmation Act 1927, later amended by the Edinburgh Corporation Order Confirmation Act 1967 and the City of Edinburgh District Council Order Confirmation Act 1991. Esmond Hamilton, from the City of Edinburgh Council, explained that £11,000 was originally collected to assist those who were caught up in the fires, and that that had grown into the sum of £1.25 million, which generates approximately £30,000 per annum.
The Surplus Fire Fund lay dormant until 2001, when the Fire Brigades Union contacted the City of Edinburgh Council, which led to the fund’s reactivation. The council’s pensions and trusts committee discussed the future management of the fund during 2011 and 2012, considering how its assets might be put to better use while having regard to the spirit of the fund’s current purposes, changes in society, the effectiveness of its present constitution and engagement with key stakeholders. On 31 January 2013, the full council agreed to promote the bill, which includes three changes to the fund. The bill proposes to transfer the assets, rights and liabilities of the Surplus Fire Fund to the Edinburgh Voluntary Organisations Trust; to amend the purposes for which the fund can be used; and to dissolve the fund as currently constituted.
The committee heard from Ella Simpson, the director of the Edinburgh Voluntary Organisations Council, about EVOC’s experience of running various grant programmes and several restricted funds and about its large network of organisations, which could refer possible beneficiaries of the fund.
I am afraid that you must draw to a close, please.
On the basis of the evidence that we have received, the committee is supportive of the bill’s objectives and believes that a private bill is the necessary and appropriate way to proceed.
I am grateful to my fellow committee members for their hard work and to the clerks for their work in connection with the bill.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the City of Edinburgh Council (Leith Links and Surplus Fire Fund) Bill and that the bill should proceed as a private bill.
16:46
I am pleased to support the bill in its totality, although, as the local member for Leith Links, I have a particular interest in the first part of the bill. I believe that the bill has local support, as is evidenced by the local community councils and other groups and individuals that support it. The only concern that I have occasionally heard has been about the bill maybe taking up public funds. However, it clearly involves not public funds but fundraising by the Leith Rules Golf Society.
There is a great sense of history in Leith. We have a rich and varied history, and there is an on-going campaign for a Leith museum, which I shall speak about in Parliament on another occasion. Part of that history is the significance of Leith Links, which is one of the first places where golf was played. I do not want to enter into an argument about where golf was played for the very first time, but it is indisputable that the rules of golf were first written down by those who played golf on Leith Links. Indeed, in the 1740s, the City of Edinburgh Council, the promoter of the bill, offered a silver club to the winner of a golf competition on Leith Links on the condition that the rules be written down. I am pleased that the rules were written down on 7 March 1744, which is my birthday—well, 7 March is.
It is appropriate that a statue of John Rattray will be put up, as he won that trophy on three occasions. He was a very colourful character, being a surgeon, an archer and a Jacobite as well as a distinguished golfer. It is fitting that his statue will be put up on Leith Links as quickly as possible. It is also timely, given that there will be heightened interest in golf in Scotland this year because of the Ryder cup. I hope that that will provide a boost to the fundraising for the statue.
For the reasons that John Lamont has explained, it is clear that a bill is required to change the law. I know that explaining that to people has provided a great deal of amusement and attracted interest, but that is in the nature of some private bills. It was not quite so clear that a bill was required to change the Surplus Fire Fund. In fact, I was rather alarmed to read that the drafting of section 42 of the Charities and Trustee Investment (Scotland) Act 2005 was ambiguous and that its interpretation was difficult. Apparently, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator thought that legislation was not required, but the City of Edinburgh Council decided that it would play safe and ensure that nobody could challenge the way in which it wanted to broaden the scope of the purposes of the Surplus Fire Fund in order to attract more applications for grants and awards.
I support that objective. The reason why I was disturbed by the comment about section 42 of the 2005 act is that the people who were responsible for that act are Johann Lamont and myself. I was amazed to think that we should be in any way connected with defective legislation.
That apart, I commend the committee for its very detailed and conscientious examination of the bill. I read its report and the Official Report of the evidence session, and I thought that the committee interrogated every nook and cranny of the bill. I am pleased that the next member to speak, Anne McTaggart, was one of those distinguished interrogators.
16:50
As a member of the City of Edinburgh Council (Leith Links and Surplus Fire Fund) Bill Committee, I am pleased to contribute briefly to the debate, which deals with an issue that I am sure is of importance to the local community.
In my role as a member of the committee, I have gained a valuable insight into an important and historical local issue that necessitates full consultation prior to any recommendation being made. I feel that the debate has illustrated the vital role that Leith Links has played in the life of the local community, and I believe that everyone who has an interest in the area should be consulted before any decision is made. That is why I have very much enjoyed being a member of the committee and, in particular, the opportunity that it has given me to visit what, for local residents, is an important site.
I am happy to support the installation of the John Rattray statue, especially as the local community has been involved in a consultation process on issues such as the potential effects on the local area of tourism as a result of people visiting the site of the statue, once it has been installed. I am particularly pleased to note that the proposed artwork highlights the valuable role that public consultation has played in this Leith-based initiative. [Interruption.]
Order, please. The fact that chatting was going on meant that the member thought that someone was trying to intervene.
The consultation process afforded the opportunity to seek guidance from Police Scotland, which, following its viewing of the initial plans, indicated that the site was vulnerable and that
“consideration should be given to installing public space monitoring CCTV or other measures”
to ensure that it would be safe and secure. The committee was informed that such concerns had been taken into account and that the plans had been changed to lessen such risks, but it is important that consideration should be given to ensuring that any statue that is installed on the site meets all the necessary requirements for safe installation, including on-going health and safety requirements.
I am pleased to support the initiative for which the bill provides, which will provide an additional structure that will enhance the landscape of the local area, and I thank the committee’s convener, John Lamont, for his outstanding patience and guidance, and the committee clerk, Claire Menzies Smith, for her patience and guidance.
I invite Sandra White to wind up the debate on behalf of the committee. You have six minutes.
16:53
I thank the convener, John Lamont, and congratulate him on his highly informative contribution. I am sure that most members in the chamber found it extremely interesting. I also thank Malcolm Chisholm, who—as he mentioned—is the local member, for his welcome local knowledge. I found what he had to say very interesting, as I am sure that other members did. In addition, I thank my fellow committee member, Anne McTaggart, for her comments and her work on the committee.
When the committee and the clerks went to visit the Leith Links area, it was evident that a great deal of attention had been paid to exactly where the statue would be erected and to ensuring that it would not be in front of anyone’s windows and would not disturb anyone. As Malcolm Chisholm mentioned, the local community councils have been highly supportive of the bill’s provisions overall.
As the deputy convener, I am very pleased to close the debate for the committee. As well as thanking the committee members for their scrutiny of the bill, I thank all those who also contributed to the scrutiny by providing oral evidence, such as those who proposed the bill and the statue. I also thank everyone who wrote in with their thoughts, from the police to people in the community. I thank the committee clerks for their assistance, which was most welcome to me because I have never been a member of a private bill committee before. I found it very interesting to learn about the difference between private and public bills, which the convener has explained, and why private bills have to come through Parliament in this way.
It is very much an honour to be deputy convener of the committee. As I said, this is my first time as a member of a private bill committee, and I may be called forward again for such a role. I am always happy do my duty, as are most MSPs.
As I said, I visited Leith Links with the committee. I believe that the statue will be an attractive addition to Leith Links and that it will promote awareness of the rich history of golfing on the links, which Malcolm Chisholm mentioned, and relevant historic connections. The Leith community will benefit because the statue will attract visitors, who, as Anne McTaggart said, will make use of facilities and businesses in the area, which can only be a good thing.
The bill will also revitalise the Surplus Fire Fund, which had become dormant. The changes to the purposes for which the fund can be applied will improve its use by encouraging more applications from individuals who have been affected by fire. [Interruption.]
Is it okay to continue, Presiding Officer?
Please do. If you could continue to five o’clock, I would be most grateful.
Thank you very much. I just wondered whether it was all right to continue. I am not one for complaining, but I could not hear myself speak.
It is really important that people realise that the bill will open up the Surplus Fire Fund to so many more people—which is why I want to encourage members to listen to these points.
As I said, the changes will encourage more applications from individuals who have been affected by fire, because their injuries will no longer have to be deemed to be serious. They will also allow people to claim for damage to domestic premises and household contents; in many cases—this is really important—those applying will not be insured, so that is a very helpful change. They will expressly allow the provision of grants to burns units that care for people who are resident in the City of Edinburgh Council area. Those three points are very important.
The transfer of the fund will enable EVOC to refer organisations that it works with in its large network. EVOC believes that that will have a
“cumulative impact on other charitable organisations and ... individuals.”——[Official Report, City of Edinburgh Council (Leith Links and Surplus Fire Fund) Bill Committee, 14 November 2013; c 32.]
That is also an important point. The transfer will also make use of the trustees’ wide experience to ensure that the fund is used to best effect.
I believe that both the bill’s purposes will provide benefits to the community. On behalf of the committee, I recommend to Parliament that the general principles of the bill be agreed to.
Will the member give way?
Presiding Officer?
Certainly.
I know that the member is a visitor to Leith Links because I remember bumping into her at the funfair at the Leith festival last year. The statue will obviously be a very welcome development for people who live in Leith, but does the member think that people from Glasgow, like her, or from further afield will now visit Leith Links to see the statue as well as attend the funfair?
That was a very welcome intervention. I met Mr Chisholm at the funfair on Leith Links, when I was with my granddaughter and Mr Chisholm was with his. Certainly, lots of things take place on the links. As someone who comes from Glasgow to visit Edinburgh, I will certainly make my way down to Leith Links because I know exactly where the statue will be. One of the great things about the statue is that it will be quite iconic but not out of place on the links. It will certainly encourage people to go down there.
I hope that people who are encouraged to do that—perhaps people like me, or even younger people—might take up golf. Who knows? People will read about the statue and will be able to see the historic connections in the links area. I think that the statue is a great idea and I look forward to bumping into Mr Chisholm and his granddaughter again on Leith Links and perhaps having a chat and a game of golf as well.
Thank you, Presiding Officer.
Our thanks are due to you, Ms White.
Previous
Suicide PreventionNext
Business Motion