Category Archives: Uncategorised

Scotland’s Place in Europe, what now?

Ignored and sidelined: Scotland’s position on a differentiated solution

“ The things we stand to lose though leaving the EU membership and the Single Market are all things that we value and we do not want to lose them, so we will look very carefully at all the options presented in order to keep as many of the benefits of EU membership as we can.”

This was the general response to our questions last January. 

Article 50 has been triggered and the UK Government is still ignoring the statements in the Scottish Government’s paper three months after its publication.

Michael Russell’s demand to have Scotland’s proposals for a differentiated solution included in the letter sent to Donald Tusk was equally ignored.

Devolved matters now under threat

The report by the Commons Committee  on Exiting the EU  concluded that the Prime Minister will attempt to use Brexit to rewrite the devolution settlement and reserve the power to legislate in future on Scottish agriculture payments, fisheries quota and renewable energy targets.

The Scottish Government’s responses to the S.I.F. ‘s  questions are therefore now rendered utterly meaningless.

Will the devolved legislatures’ views be considered ?

The  Commons Committee  on Exiting the EU recommended that the views of the Weslh, Scottish and Norther Irish Legislatures regarding their option papers should be considered as a matter of urgency.

Considering that the White Paper for the Great Repeal Bill wants to bring back all the powers vested in the EU to Westminster,  to ensure the effective functioning of the UK Single market, its effect will be to breach the founding  principles of devolution of the 1998 Scotland Act.

It thus looks increasingly unlikely that the devolved legislatures’ views will be considered to the extent wished by the Scottish Government in any case.

The Scottish government will be unlikely to  be in a position to negociate or protect the islands’ interests as it stated it would.

Island Farming and crofting, Environment, Renewable Energy,  EU cooperation?

 It is very hard to see how the Scottish Government  will now be able to negotiate with the UK Government to ensure that future financial support for initiatives that currently receive European funds is allocated on a fair and equitable basis across the UK. Looking for  more devolved powers to come to Scotland is going to be very  difficult if not impossible.

Independence? The only way forward to safeguard the Scottish islands’ economic well-being

S.I.F.’ will continue their dialogue with Michael Russell MSP  and his team  as the Brexit negotiations unfold.

But since it is very unlikely that the UK government will change its position, it does increasingly appear that the only way forward to safeguard the islands’ economy and realise their renewable energy potential is to pursue independence and stay withing the EU.

 

 

Smart Island Initiative is live

The Smart Island Initiative is live!

 

 logo

The Smart Islands Initiative advocates for a holistic development approach one that “derives from insularity, the condition that forces island authorities to focus on how to ensure the optimal use and management of their resources and infrastructures, very often within island boundaries, in order to support sustainable and equitable economic development that fully taps into islands’ local potential (geography, natural and human resources, products)”

#NEWS 1: We have a website http://www.smartislandsinitiative.eu, FB and Twitter account. Please spread the news!!!

#NEWS 2: The highlight of the Smart Island Declaration event on the 28 March in Brussels is that we expect European Commissioner for Climate and Energy Miguel Arias Cañete to open the Smart Islands Declaration and address the signing ceremony!

#VERY IMPORTANT . We now have 200 organisations and Local authorities throughout the EU who have signed up to the Initiative  and plan to attend the Brussels event. This is good news as the  European Commission is promoting a programme for sustainable energy on islands to be announced by the end of 2017. This means funds for islands!!!

In this context, the Commission sees the Smart Island Initiative in a very positive way because this is 1) European and 2) bottom-up. 1+2 are key ingredients for the Commission programme to be successful. The synergies are there, waiting to be exploited!

#SMART ISLAND INITIATIVE SCOTLAND. Most Local Authorities with islands responsibilities have signed up to the initiative: Highland, Argyll and Bute, North Ayrshire have send letters of support with Shetland Islands Council leading the way by signing the Declaration itself! Island Development trusts that have benefited from European funding for their renewable energy scheme like the Isle of Eigg Heritage Trust have also send letters of support.  Likewise,  Renewable Energy Academic bodies  Strathclyde University and NGOs like Community Energy Scotland have also given their support alongside the Scottish Islands Federation and the European Islands Federation (ESIN) . 

Islands must be at the heart of the EU Cohesion Policy

To be an island should not be a problem but a pillar of development!

This was the strong message delivered by CPMR President  Vasco Cordeiro (and President of Azores Government)  on 9 March 2017.  He also said: “we must speak very clearly and very loudly about the islands’ needs.”

The CPMR Island Commission’s AGM 2017 was hosted on Gozo, Malta’s smaller island, and brought together island regions from the North to the South of Europe to look at the future of Cohesion Policy post-2020.

Islands must think globally and act locally

As an observer member, the European Small Islands Federation, represented by its chair, Camille Dressler, also chair of the Scottish Islands Federation,  was extremely pleased to see some very strong principles being reiterated by the  minister for Gozo in particular

  • Islands must think globally and act locally
  • One size does not dictate all nor add value to a nation.
  • It is important to bridge the gap between the EU and policies
  • It is crucial to get rid of bureaucratic barriers and help micro, small and medium size enterprises through changes to State Aid rules for islands and a rise in De minimis level at least in line with inflation.
  • The Cohesion Policy, as a fundamental pillar of EU construction, must act as a forward looking policy bringing EU citizens together
  • There must be a new way to look at shipping issues
  • There should be social policies for the islands
  • There should be special funding packages for the islands
  • To serve the islands adequately, there must be a place-based approach to the EU Development and Territorial Cohesion Policy.

 

The future of the EU and the islands

Eleni Marianou, the CPMR islands Commission secretary, was very clear on what had to be done in response to Mr Juncker’s White paper:

  • The CPMR needs to make a response to the EU White Paper and respond to the key challenges of competitiveness, investment and Territorial Cohesion.
  • It needs a strong voice and think of target audiences: EU institutions, National governments, EU Regions, Citizens and Young People.
  • Response includes making the case for EU cooperation based on CPMR principles of balanced Territorial Principles, solidarity between the EU and its regions, championing the position of regions in EU policy-making.
  • CPMR needs to prepare for a strong lobbying campaign prior to and during the EU parliamentary elections in 2018- 2019

 The islands’s access to the Single Market is not  equal to that of other regions.

The presentation by Ioannis Spillanis from the University of Aegean Island and Local development laboratory made the following points:

  • 3.4 %of EU population live on islands. Their access to the Single market is NOT equal to the access enjoyed by other parts of the EU.
  • Insularity has a negative aspect on businesses and people and Brexit will make it worse by reducing the number of islands in the EU and the overall funding share.
  • EU Sectoral policies are without differentiation
  • For the islands to realise their potential, EU policies need to include insularity clauses.
  • For this reason, a new island typology is needed. Current indicators are woefully inadequate: new indicators are required to describe the islands situation as the classification used in NUTS2 and NUTS3 is not good enough. (NUTS 3 islands are drowned in the NUTS2 areas)
  • To achieve the EU’s principles of Territorial Cohesion and Sustainability, the development model needs to be changed to include Equal opportunities for the islands and Green island policies.

Entreprise on islands  needs an  innovative approach from the EU

INSULEUR president Georgios Benetos showed how islands are left behind from the business point of view:

  • No economy of scale for the islands
  • Added costs of insularity need to be taken into account
  • Access to credit and finance is more complicated on islands

Fundamental changes in the way the EU could support the islands:

  • VAT should be lower as it is already on some islands (Corsica, Heligoland) whereas there is no VAT in the Faroe islands.
  • There should be a lower level of taxation for islands to help small and medium enterprises as well as micro-enterprises.

Islands need support as well as a Can Do approach

MEP Myriam Dalli  who is involved in supporting Blue Growth projects, agreed  that  islands do need support, and the way to get it was to demonstrate a Can Do approach.

Islands at the forefront of renewable revolution

The presentation by the Western Isles Council showed how the islands could become Energy Positive Islands by investing in their potential for renewables. Bornholm ‘s vice mayor presented the island Bright Green Future.  Kostas Komninos built on that concept by presenting the Smart Island Initiative to be launched in Brussels on 28 March.

Corsica to lead on post 2020 negotiations and insularity clause

Gilles Simeoni, President of the Executive Council of Corsica, was unanimously elected as President of the CPMR Islands Commission (CPMR-IC).

Following his election, President Simeoni said: “The months and years to come will be decisive not only for our islands but also for Europe, in the context of a very marked internal and international crisis”.

He identified the need to put islands at the heart of Cohesion Policy and suggested that an insularity clause should appear in transport, tax policies, waste management and energy.

From a purely Scottish Point of view, it was gratifying to discuss with Mr Simeoni how the Corsican team had come to Scotland to meet with Cal Mac to look at the way they are structured and with a view to replicate the C-Mal and Cal Mac model!

The CPMR IC position 

The CPMR Islands Commission, which represents all of Europe’s island regions, has reiterated that islands and outermost regions are unique because of their remoteness.

The Islands Commission has called for the termination of the traditional perception that islands are too different from one another to justify policy measures at EU level.

While debate on post-2020 policies is emerging, island regions across Europe have called for the EU to develop a strong post-2020 Cohesion Policy with a robust territorial dimension which would earmark specific funding to assist island and outermost regions reach the EU objectives.

The CPMR-IC would welcome a constructive dialogue with the European Commission in 2017 ahead of the legislative proposals for post-2020 Cohesion Policy.

Furthermore, it has urged the European Institutions to correct the glaring exclusion of islands from the legal recognition of different territorial typologies that is currently being debated.

Click here to access the speeches and presentations made at the Gozo 2017 AGM.

SG response to S.I.F. Brexit questions

SG responses to our questions

“ The things we stand to lose though leaving the EU membership and the Single Market are all things that we value and we do not want to lose them, so we will look very carefully at all the options presented in order to keep as many of the benefits of EU membership as we can.”

Our questions to the Scottish Government

Policies

  • What policies if any will be put in place at UK and Scottish level to replace the Cohesion Policy framework?
  • If such policies are to be established, how would the necessary Structural Funds be established and at what level would they be administered?
  • How would Scotland feed into that process? How would the communities most affected be engaged to support development of policies behind the funds?
  • We are not convinced the UK government has an interest in developing a cohesion policy that will be comprehensive enough to take into account Scottish islands’ needs or issues facing any peripheral area in Scotland. Is there appetite within the Scottish Government to challenge the UK Government on the crucial issue of Cohesion Policy replacement?

SG Response:

The Scottish Government supports the principles and benefits that underpins EU membership it and is looking at ways to continue with it.  As expressed in the document “Scotland’s place in Europe”, the Scottish Government is committed to remain in the European Single Market, and this has been ratified by the Scottish Parliament’s vote on 17 January.

“ The things we stand to lose though leaving the EU membership and the Single Market are all things that we value and we do not want to lose them, so we will look very carefully at all the options presented in order to keep as many of the benefits of EU membership as we can.”

Structural funds

  • How can existing levels of funding be protected?
  • What will be asked of the UK Government in this respect?
  • What funding guarantees can the Scottish government ask or provide?

SG response: The Scottish Government is very well aware of the issues and aware of the islands’ concerns. “We will do what we can to protect the islands’ interests and we intend to ask all these questions to the UK Government.”

EU Cooperation

  • What measures are the Scottish Government prepared to take to ensure that cooperation with other EU island regions can continue?

SG response: Re EU cooperation, the Scottish Government has shared concerns and intends to do what it can for this to continue.

Island Farming and crofting

  • 
 How can the Scottish government protect unique geographical origins and protected names, such as Scotch Beef and Scotch Lamb? What about Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) and Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), which are of such importance for the islands?
  • How can free access to the European Single Market as proposed in “Scotland’s place in Europe” ensure agricultural goods and products are included?
  • What assurance can the Scottish Government give that any new policy framework for Scottish farmers and crofters (direct payments and rural development measures) will be adequately funded and will take into consideration the special situation of island agriculture?

SG response: Post-2020, the UK withdrawal from the EU will have implications for projects currently funded by the EU, and that will impact Scotland.

 The Scottish Government indicated it will negotiate with the UK Government to ensure that future financial support for initiatives that currently receive European funds is allocated on a fair and equitable basis across the UK.

Environment

  • How is the Scottish Government planning to ensure that environmental protection which is crucial to the sensitive and fragile environment of Scotland’s islands will be continued?
  • What about the 2020 goals and commitments to lowering carbon consumption, notably through production of renewable energy? Scotland has already exceeded its targets and has positioned it self as a model of innovative technology in Europe. But we are concerned that the Scottish islands lead in renewable energy production may be further eroded and hampered as shown already by the lack of support for the shovel ready projects of Remote Island Wind in the Northern and Western Isles. It is difficult to see how island communities will be able to maintain our lead in innovation and carbon reduction and invest in further renewable energy schemes in the future, if access to EU funds is blocked and the UK government continues to take retrograde steps on renewables.

Local authorities

  • EU laws and regulations impact on many Council services, such as waste, employment, health and safety, consumer protection and trading and environmental standards, all of which affect the islands.
  • How will the Scottish government ensure that regulatory power over such services will not be simply transferred from Brussels to an indifferent Westminster regime?

SG response: re Social policies and environment standards, our concern for Scotland is that these can be maintained, and for these reasons we will look for more devolved powers to come to Scotland.

It is more than likely that constitutional arrangements in the UK post-Brexit will have to change.

See SG paper, Scotland’s place in Europe

As Article 50 is triggered, see S.I.F. ‘s further thoughts on this here.

S.I.F. Briefing: Scottish islands and the impact of Brexit

Scottish Islands and the impact of Brexit

A briefing paper by the Scottish Islands Federation

On 18 January 2017, Camille Dressler S.I.F. chair met with members of the Scotland’s Place in Europe team at Victoria Quay.  This is what she said: ‘The main concern for the Scottish Islands Federation is how the move away from CAP and the EU Cohesion Policy with its associated structural funds will be managed to safeguard the fragile economies of the islands and avoid real risks of depopulation.  ‘

Importance of the EU Cohesion Policy for the islands

  1. The EU Cohesion Policy’s stated aim is to improve the economic well-being of regions in the EU and also to moderate regional disparities. The policy is geared towards making regions more competitive, fostering economic growth and creating new jobs. It also has a role to play addressing important wider challenges such as climate change, sustainable energy supply and globalisation.
  1. More than one third of the EU budget is devoted to this policy, which aims to remove economic, social and territorial disparities across the EU. Crucially, through Article 174 of the Lisbon Treaty, the policy recognizes inherent geographical challenges faced by islands.
  1. In the current 2014–2020 funding period, Cohesion Funds have been allocated between regions that are deemed to be a) “more developed” (with GDP per capita over 90% of the EU average), b) “transition” (between 75% and 90%), and c)”less developed” (less than 75%).
  1. With a GDP of 75 to 90% of the EU average, the Highlands and Islands have ‘transitional region’ status. This has enabled the area to benefit from a whole suite of European funds targeted at social and community projects, infrastructure, businesses, partnerships and future proofing measures, including investment in renewable energy projects.

The European Structural Funds

  1. Through European Structural Funds, the EU Cohesion policy has provided vital funding for Scottish island communities and our neighbouring regions.
  1. In the programming period, 2007-13, Scotland received approximately £680m in Structural funds. About 800 national and local projects were supported. Major strategic projects funded include the Shetland Fibre optic broadband cable, the Lerwick District heating scheme, the Scalpay and Eriskay bridges, and the Loch Carnan wind farm in the Outer Hebrides, as well as harbours and other key infrastructure developments. In Highland, the piers and ferry for the Small Isles were built with the help of EU funds, whilst the electrification of Eigg would not have been possible without £764 000 of ERDF. Flagship cultural projects supported include the Mareel Cultural Centre in Lerwick, the Orkney Theatre, the Scapa Flow Trail, Scotland’s Islands Cultural Programme, Garrenin Museum and Village and improvements to the Callanish Visitor Centre. Structural funds supported training at Calanas Wool Mill in Uist, social enterprise and leadership training throughout the islands, and have delivered benefits for many islanders. Islands have benefited from strategic investment in the University of the Highlands and Islands and the Scottish Investment Bank Loan Fund has helped SMEs across the area.
  1. For the 2014-2020 programming period, increased levels of investment were secured. The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund (ESF) are investing €476m and €464m respectively, including support for a Low Carbon Infrastructure Transition Programme. Some community infrastructure projects on islands have already benefited, notably including Luing’s award-winning Atlantic Islands Centre.
  1. European structural funds have had a positive and progressive impact on small businesses and local communities across Scotland, but can deliver special benefits to islands through their inclusiveness, helping to maintain and enhance the quality of island life.

The Scottish Rural Development Programme:

  1. The Scottish Rural Development Programme (SRDP) channels millions of Euros into the rural economy to help create vibrant rural communities, protect and enhance the environment, encourage rural businesses and support the farming industry to grow and modernise.
  1. Funding for a diverse range of projects may be accessed by individuals, businesses and groups, through grant schemes. A number of these are specifically directed at crofters and farmers, such as the Croft House Grant Scheme, the Crofting Agricultural Grant Scheme, the Small Farms Grant Scheme, the Less Favoured Area Support Scheme, The Scottish Suckler Beef Support Scheme, the Food Processing, Marketing and Co-operation Fund, Young Entrants Scheme and Young Farmers start up funds.
  1. LEADER funding has also been invaluable for the islands, providing a ‘bottom up’ partnership-based approach to rural development.LEADER has supported multi-sectoral, community-based development and helped individuals, communities and businesses come together to design and implement Local Development Strategies. In doing so, LEADER has helped build social as well as economic capital on many Scottish islands.
  1. From 2008, in Argyll and Bute alone, LEADER has funded over £6m to 200 projects, levering over £15m to the area in match funding, thus providing a substantial cash injection to communities in the region including the islands of Mull, Arran & Cumbrae.
  1. There has been real uncertainty over the latest round of LEADER funding (2014-2020). The programme got off the ground very late and is now at risk of being devalued during Brexit negotiations.

Common Agriculture Policy

  1. Support payments derived from the CAP are hugely significant to the viability of Scottish agriculture as the vast majority of farms and crofts remain highly dependent on ‘Pillar 1 direct support payments’. (63% of farmers’ income). Agri-developments are jointly funded by the EU and the Scottish Government under ‘Pillar 2’ schemes.
  1. Maintaining communities through farming and crofting is more significant in Scotland than it is in other parts of the UK and especially so on most Scottish islands.
  2. A small island farm on the Isle of Muck, with 630 ewes and 50 breeding cows on approximately 400 HA, faces challenges typical of other islands in terms of high costs of importing feed (£475 for a lorry’s ferry ticket) and an additional £600 payable for exporting a lorry load of livestock, compared to mainland farmers.
  1. With only a limited number of large agricultural units in Scotland able to show a net profit without agricultural support mechanisms, the fear is that additional costs facing islands could be disastrous in their absence.
  1. The EU’s convergence target of minimum payments of €196 per hectare by 2020 would need to be Scotland’s minimum allocation of direct support funding to deliver parity for equivalent enterprises on similar land types – and so establish a more even playing field, as stated by NFU Scotland. In the context of the UK government’s apparent lack of commitment to agriculture and food security, the fight to retain minimum payments is vital if agriculture in the islands is to remain viable.
  1. Most agricultural activity in the West Highland and Islands centres around production of sheep and cattle. The UK sheep industry is substantially dependent on exports, with something like 60% of UK lamb consumed in mainland Europe.
  2. The nightmare scenario for Scottish beef and lamb producers is that they may have to compete with subsidised European producers, with diminished access to markets and less support. (possible imposed tariff of 20% depending on options). Brexit could potentially decimate Scottish agriculture, and especially island producers, in the absence of other means of financial support coming on stream.

    Local Authorities serving the islands

  3. In spite of budgetary and policy restrictions imposed by central government, some local authorities have managed to pursue economic development strategies using European structural funds. It is difficult to see how they can continue managing economic expansion without access to such fundMuch legislation affecting local government and requiring local government implementation originates in Brussels. Social and environmental protection, health and consumer protection, working time directives, the transfer of undertakings, procurement and state aid, transport policies, and rural and maritime policies are among the many areas affected by the EU.

 

  1. The high quality of the natural environment is of particular importance to islands, in terms of food production, tourism and the local quality of life. Scottish and European sustainability agendas generally accord well with island interests whereas the UK government’s approach to environmental priorities can tend to be at odds with insular perspectives.
  1. Many islanders fear that Brexit will reduce investment of resources in environmental concerns and bring adverse consequences for Scotland’s islands, especially with diminishing resources available to local authorities. Because of their fragile natural and social environment, the islands will be more vulnerable to a potential hollowing out of environmental and social protection.

EU wide collaboration

  1. The Scottish Islands collaborate with their European counterparts in policy development at various levels. The larger islands are involved in the Island Commission through the Committee for Peripheral and Maritime Regions with local authorities also benefiting from INTERREG cooperation and other opportunities to exchange knowledge and cross-fertilize ideas and actions. Smaller islands are involved too, through existing networks such as the European Small Islands Federation (ESIN). Together they have succeeded in pushing for better recognition of the island situation at European level, culminating in the Island Declaration of February 2016. Years of collaboration between European islands through Islenet, IslePact, and more recently SMILEGOV (Smart Island Governance) have demonstrated that islands can usefully host projects and share valuable transferable knowledge on smart and efficient resource and infrastructure management. The Smart Islands Declaration, scheduled to be launched in spring 2017, is asking for the evident potential of islands as leaders in innovation and renewable energy production to be recognized and resourced by the EU.
  1. There is a real concern about loss of knowledge exchange and collaboration opportunities for islands across Europe on issues of common concern, notably including better management of energy and resources. Scotland’s own Zero Waste island flagship project on Bute would not have been possible without European support and inspiration. Over many years Bute has addressed key themes of waste management and recycling, composting and local food production, community energy, low carbon transport and more. Much of this work has been supported by European funding and in turn, inspired other European islands, creating employment and learning opportunities in the process.

What will happen to the islands post-Brexit?

  1. Leaving the EU means that Scotland’s islands will no longer benefit from established funding avenues and exciting collaboration opportunities. European money has supported rural development on Scottish Islands to a far greater extent than UK government in recent years. Risks to islands’ agriculture and other key sectors are of real concern, with fears urban priorities may now overshadow the needs of Scotland’s more pristine periphery.
  1. Our island economies will need continuing support if our primary industries are to fulfill their potential in the global market place for high quality, value added food & drink. Crucially, Social Enterprise will also require support to plug gaps left in island services by dispassionate market forces.
  1. The overarching danger is that de-population will resume or worsen, leaving populations on islands less able to sustain viable livelihoods.
  1. Some EU funds – such as Horizon 2020 – may be available through partnership and ‘buying in’ either as the UK or Scotland. However, there are no guarantees that islanders will continue to benefit from Europe in the ways we have in recent decades.

31.The proposal published by the Scottish Government in “Scotland’s place in Europe” presents options which are solutions to many issues – in terms of trade, freedom of movement, protections for workers, and environmental standards. It makes an eloquent case for Scotland’s continuing access to the Single Market. However it does not address in full the replacement of those EU funds, which have been so fundamental to sustaining so many of our island communities.

Some islanders’ comments

32.”Islanders are now fearful of their prospects if access to EU structural funds is removed.” Harris

“We would like to ask if there is anything to replace LEADER funding in the future.” Unst

“My job as island development officer is part funded by the EU, how will this continue?” Rum

“The depopulation that’s happened out in these islands – and it’s happened worst in Harris than anywhere in the Outer Hebrides – will just continue to increase.” Harris

“What continued direct support for active farmers and crofters will there be, as this will remain vital to sustain communities?” Eigg

“How will we continue to work with our EU island colleagues on common themes and projects?”

“We will lose out and be left behind.” Tiree

“A substantial number of schemes would never have taken place without EU funding, especially the infrastructure projects which have been completed throughout the Western Isles over the past twenty years or more. Objective One and LEADER funding have financed a large variety of projects, including small renewable schemes.” Carloway, Lewis

“Mull is very dependent on the farming industry, what will happen now?” Mull

“What will happen to replace the current level of EU funding following Brexit? We have concerns about disparities between different regions following BrexitWhat will happen to farming subsidies, fishing quotas, transport/boat service?” Orkney

“The age and condition of the boats (Orkney Ferries) is a source of great concern. The cost of taking a vehicle on the ferry is prohibitive for many. Without EU funding to support improvements, what will happen? Without pressure and funding from the EU, the outer isles of Orkney and elsewhere in Scotland will be left to decline, with the rate of depopulation increasing on all but the largest isles.” Sanday, Orkney.

Our questions to the Scottish Government

  1. “EU funding has got to be replaced to look after these peripheral areas by either the Scottish Government or Westminster”, says Angus Campbell, Leader of Comhairle nan Eileanan Siar. Our questions for the Scottish Government in their current negotiations echo the sentiments of this statement.
  • Policies

34.What policies if any will be put in place at UK and Scottish level to replace the Cohesion Policy framework?

  1. If such policies are to be established, how would the necessary Structural Funds be established and at what level would they be administered?
  1. How would Scotland feed into that process? How would the communities most affected be engaged to support development of policies behind the funds?
  1. We are not convinced the UK government has an interest in developing a cohesion policy that will be comprehensive enough to take into account Scottish islands’ needs or issues facing any peripheral area in Scotland. Is there appetite within the Scottish Government to challenge the UK Government on the crucial issue of Cohesion Policy replacement?
  • Structural funds
  1. How can existing levels of funding be protected?
  1. What will be asked of the UK Government in this respect?
  1. What funding guarantees can the Scottish government ask or provide?
  • EU Cooperation
  1. What measures are the Scottish Government prepared to take to ensure that cooperation with other EU island regions can continue?
  • Island Farming and crofting

42. How can the Scottish government protect unique geographical origins and protected names, such as Scotch Beef and Scotch Lamb? What about Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) and Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), which are of such importance for the islands?

  1. How can free access to the European Single Market as proposed in “Scotland’s place in Europe” ensure agricultural goods and products are included?
  2. What assurance can the Scottish Government give that any new policy framework for Scottish farmers and crofters (direct payments and rural development measures) will be adequately funded and will take into consideration the special situation of island agriculture?
  • Environment
  1. How is the Scottish Government planning to ensure that environmental protection which is crucial to the sensitive and fragile environment of Scotland’s islands will be continued?
  1. What about the 2020 goals and commitments to lowering carbon consumption, notably through production of renewable energy? Scotland has already exceeded its targets and has positioned it self as a model of innovative technology in Europe. But we are concerned that the Scottish islands lead in renewable energy production may be further eroded and hampered as shown already by the lack of support for the shovel ready projects of Remote Island Wind in the Northern and Western Isles. It is difficult to see how island communities will be able to maintain our lead in innovation and carbon reduction and invest in further renewable energy schemes in the future, if access to EU funds is blocked and the UK government continues to take retrograde steps on renewables.
  • Local authorities
  1. EU laws and regulations impact on many Council services, such as waste, employment, health and safety, consumer protection and trading and environmental standards, all of which affect the islands.
  1. How will the Scottish government ensure that regulatory power over such services will not be simply transferred from Brussels to an indifferent Westminster regime?
  • Conclusion
  1. The prospect of Scotland being forced to leave the EU against its will is one which will starve the islands of a crucial economic and social support and potentially jeopardize our fragile and precious environments. This has the potential to hamper the islands’ development and aspirations for decades to come.
  1. On behalf of island communities, the Scottish Islands Federation urges the Scottish Government to consider the particularly serious risks to the economies of islands and our future development prospects posed by this perilous situation. We exhort the Scottish Government to explore all possible avenues, including access to the Single Market, to ensure that these risks are minimized.
  1. In particular, we would like to ask the Scottish Government to consider initiating negotiations on the possibility of setting an Island Convention on the model of the Alpine Convention. Should such a cooperation mechanism be set up before Article 50 negotiations are concluded, this might make it easier for the Scottish Islands to continue their involvement in the move to reduce island carbon emissions and also to benefit from any EU funding streams dedicated to such a programme across all EU island regions. This possibility was strongly suggested by DG Energy at the COP22 in Marrakech in November 2016 and is tabled to be discussed in the spring of 2017 during the Malta presidency of the EU.

Scottish Islands are famously blessed with relatively easy access to a high proportion of Europe’s natural energy resource potential, in trms of summer sunshine hours, winter wind and waves, and year round tides and currents. It is well recognised also that islands may serve as valuable proving grounds and test beds for emergent energy technologies, and also, modes of governance, with our vibrant, visionary and resilient island communities. In this light, S.I.F. remains hopeful that appropriately targeted investment in renewable energy and research and development will yet enable Scottish Islands to prosper as real assets to the Scottish nation, and we like to think, to Europe. Meanwhile, many islanders seriously fear that the UK government may recognise us only as peripheral liabilities post Brexit. We trust the Scottish Government will not let this happen.

 

Future of the Crown Estate Consultation

Future of the Crown Estate: Consultation for shaping the Crown Estate in Scotland.

A 12 week consultation on the long term framework for the devolved management of the Crown Estate in Scotland was announced today during a visit to Rhu Marina, Helensburgh.

Devolution of the management and revenue of the Crown Estate in Scotland through the Scotland Act 2016 provides an opportunity to increase the benefits to Scotland and local communities.

Cabinet Secretary for Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Roseanna Cunningham said:

“Control over the management and resources of the Crown Estate in Scotland should rest with the people of Scotland and this is a genuine opportunity to change the fabric of Scottish Society.

“This consultation is a once in a lifetime opportunity to help shape the future management of The Crown Estate in Scotland. Good Management of our land, marine environment and other natural resources is essential for Scotland’s future prosperity.

“I would encourage all those interested to respond to the consultation and help us to assume our new powers in a way which creates solutions which meet Scotland’s needs and interests.”

Amanda Bryan, Shadow Chairing Member of Crown Estate Scotland said:

“From the 1st of April decisions about both the day to day management and the future of the estate will be taken in Scotland which is a huge step forward. I along with the staff of the new interim management body will seek to manage the estate responsibly, delivering benefits to our partners, tenants and communities and ensuring that it remains in good order for the next phase.”

Background

The Scottish Government is taking a phased approach on devolution of the management of the Crown Estate. The consultation launched today will inform the second phase of devolution.

The consultation on the proposals will run until 29 March Details can be found on the Scottish Government website at: https://consult.scotland.gov.uk/crown-estate-strategy-unit/long-term-management-of-the-crown-estate

The Scotland Act 2016 introduced a new era for the management of Crown assets in Scotland. The Crown Estate in Scotland includes a diverse portfolio of property, rights and interests that influence many aspects of rural and coastal life in Scotland. The value of Crown Estate property in Scotland was £271.8 million and gross annual revenue was £14 million in 2015/16.

Crown Estate Scotland (Interim Management) is being established as a Public Corporation. It will take on its asset management role from 1 April 2017 subject to the completion of transfer of powers at Westminster. The Scottish Government is working to safeguard a smooth transfer for staff and ensure that the interim body provides stability and continuity of service to those who rely on existing Crown Estate leases or services as the management responsibilities are devolved to Scotland, particularly during the time needed for establishing a new permanent framework.

Rhu Marina is owned by The Crown Estate and leased to Quay Marinas, who operate the facility 24 hours a day.

info from http://news.gov.scot/news/future-of-the-crown-estate

Cost of living on islands still 40% higher

New HIE study updates rural cost of living in Scotland.

In 2013, Highlands and Islands Enterprise in partnership with a range of other public agencies commissioned the Centre for Research in Social Policy (CRSP) to establish a minimum income standard for remote rural Scotland including highlands and islands.

Discussions were centered on what was common and what was different in a minimum household ‘basket’ of goods and services in these communities, compared with other parts of the UK.

In 2016, HIE commissioned the CRSP to update the research.

Original study showed costs were up by 10-40%

The 2013 study found that the budgets required by households to achieve a minimum acceptable standard of living in remote rural Scotland were typically 10- 40% higher than elsewhere in the UK. For households in more remote island locations, these additional costs could exceed 40%.

The premiums were most modest for pensioners and greatest for single people and families with dependent children, and were driven by:

  • The higher prices that households were required to pay for food, clothes and household goods.
  • Considerably higher household fuel bills, influenced by climate and fuel sources.
  • The longer distances that people have to routinely travel, particularly to work.

Update shows no improvements in costs for rural areas.

The main findings of the updated report are as follows:

  •  In 2016, a minimum acceptable standard of living in remote rural Scotland typically requires between a tenth and a third more household spending than in urban parts of the UK.
  •  This picture is similar to 2013, although the lower price of petrol and diesel has significantly reduced the additional cost for people having to travel long distances, particularly regular travel for work.
  •   The additional costs come from a range of sources. In particular, the costs of travelling, heating one’s home and paying for goods and their delivery are much higher for many residents of the areas under review, especially those in the remotest areas.

    Conclusions

The update was asked to consider these costs are being and could addressed through national and regional policy:

  • Despite some easing of costs, the continuing high cost of living in remote rural Scotland, and its exposure to any renewed rise of energy costs, makes their mitigation as urgent as ever. A framework for addressing these costs needs to consider issues around energy costs, shopping costs and travel costs in a joined up way, which takes account of the influence of local infrastructure and the development of jobs and communities.
  • There is scope for some reduction on home energy costs, but mainstream energy efficiency measures have limited effect in the particular circumstances of remote rural Scotland. The Scottish Rural Fuel Poverty Task Force needs to identify particular ways in which energy efficiency improvements and better functioning markets and charging structures can be designed to meet the unique circumstances of remote rural Scotland.
  •   Retail costs could potentially go down if delivery networks are improved and charges reduced. Imaginative solutions are needed that use technology to join up delivery networks, and aim to reduce charges that are higher than they need to be.
  •  The best way to get travel costs down is for people to reduce the need to travel long distances for work. This requires a focus on developing more jobs that are both local and reasonably paid, which in turn requires the fostering of new skills in the workforce and the development of external markets.
  •  An improved infrastructure is needed to support these developments. In particular, the roll-out of high speed broadband is crucial, both for work and other purposes. Since a reliable network reaching all households is likely to be elusive in the medium term, the potential for having community hubs with good broadband and other amenities needs to be explored.
  •   All these improvements will work better to the extent that the population of the area can be maintained and boosted, especially among young adults. This requires in particular a focus on developing young people’s skills and opportunities, and on improving amenities such as mobile signal which are particularly important to them.

How will Brexit impact Britain’s waste management practices?

Brexit: a bad choice is no excuse for not moving towards zero waste

Joan Marc Simon of Zero Waste Europe says that it doesn’t have to mean the end of the path to a zero-waste future for Britain.

“Brexit means Brexit”. This is the most concise explanation we have received so far from the British authorities about how are they planning to implement the results of the referendum held in the UK in June 2016.

Not surprisingly, the immediate impacts of the referendum boosted the support for EU membership around the EU. However, one could think that after the first critical moments, things went back to normal; the economy continued to run, etc. And, after a few months, all seems ok.

Well, this is the result for Britain of continuing to live within the EU; in the Customs Union, in the Single Market and implementing the acquis communautaire. For as long as Article 50 is not invoked, the UK might be able to protect its economy, albeit hampering future investments in the country which will instead look for a place where there is more legal security.

But even when Brexit happens – if it ends up happening – there is agreement that the path to leave the EU will be long and tortuous with great potential to harm economy and negatively affect social and environmental standards in the UK.

With this article, I intend to analyse how the different scenarios of a Brexit might impact the waste sector in the UK.

But before that, let’s make one thing clear: from a democratic legitimacy standpoint, there is no reason why EU legislation implemented so far should stop being British law, for the simple reason that they were laws that were approved with the active participation of the British Government in the council negotiations and the British members of parliament in the European Parliament (EP). The European legislation is as British as it is Italian or German. Nevertheless, when contemplating the different types of European laws, one can make a difference about the legitimacy between EU Directives and EU Regulations.

Directives such as the Waste Framework Directive or the Industrial Emissions Directive were jointly approved by co-decision procedure by the Council and the EP, but they need to go through the national parliaments in order to be transposed into EU law into national law. Hence all directives have gone through the Westminster Parliament and they are fully legitimised to continue to be applicable.

Even more so, considering that normally, with transposition of an EU directive into national law, each Member State (MS) has a certain amount of leeway as to the exact rules to be adopted. Indeed, directives require Member States to achieve a particular result without dictating the means of achieving that result. So, there is nothing to prevent MSs from fixing higher national standards.

Regulations are something else: the European Commission and the Council can produce regulations which have the main characteristic that they need to be applied in MS and they don’t go through national parliaments, being directly applicable in its entirety and enforceable by law. The British legislators might feel legitimated to remove the regulations but this has the risk of creating loopholes or legal lacunae; for instance the waste shipment regulation rules the move of waste for recovery and disposal within EU borders and to the outside. If the Shipment Regulation was repealed, it would mean that the UK needs to create a new law that is compatible with the Waste Framework Directive and the Basel Convention. It makes more to just keep the regulation as it is.

This is an important point because if the UK leadership manages to convince the brexit supporters that in fact the UK participated in the making of the EU law and the British Parliament has transposed them into British law, it will be easier to convince them to keep the laws as they are, thereby saving time and efforts to everybody. Definitely, it would be a measure that should be supported by the local authorities, the industry and the NGOs for it provides legal certainty about what is going to happen in the coming years.

Besides the democratic legitimacy perspective, keeping the acquis communautaire can be observed from the position of the advantages of staying in the single market, which would involve accepting free movement of people. This is where we find at least three possible scenarios for the UK.

Firstly, there is the “out is out” option, with the UK not having access to the EU internal market. This would mean increase in tariffs and controls, less access to European and foreign markets which according to calculations from UK treasury would total a 7,5% loss of GDP over 15 years. The catastrophic consequences for Britain speak in favour of ruling out this option.

The second option is to try to emulate the Swiss option. Switzerland is not a member of the EU nor the EEA. Instead, it has negotiated a series of bilateral treaties governing its relations with the EU. Usually, each treaty provides for Switzerland to participate in a particular EU policy or programme. Adopting the Swiss model following Brexit could be appealing if the UK is looking for an ‘à la carte’ approach to European integration. But this depends also on the EU approach, indeed Commission and key Member States will be concerned about creating precedents for similarly complex and à la carte arrangements in the event of other Member States choosing to leave the EU in future. This option is therefore to be ruled out because of the bad predisposition of the EU to concede such an agreement.

Finally, there is the option of following the “Norwegian model”; that is implementing the EU acquis and being able to participate in the single market whilst allowing the UK to strike its own trade deals outside the EU. This is likely to be a more acceptable option despite implying new bureaucratic burdens for British exporters who will have to comply with complex “rules of origin” and which includes some contributions to the European budget too.

Obviously, if/when Brexit happens, the UK will end up developing a model of its own but it wouldn’t make legal, economic or environmental sense to scrap current Environmental legislation in order to create a completely new set of disparate laws which are not compatible with the definitions, procedures or targets set by its immediate trade partners.

It is indeed a paradox that the result of Brexit would mean that the UK will end up having to implement laws that they didn’t make, hence being in a “worst situation” than before the Brexit. This is not necessarily bad news for the EU environmental policies for it has been because of the UK filibustering that most environmental policies have been delayed or lacked ambition over the last years. As a result of UK’s departure from the negotiating table one could expect faster moves towards a circular economy.

In either case one should not forget that what the EU legislation does is provide the baseline for member states but those are always free to be more ambitious than what the directives say I.e. member states are obliged to achieve 50% recycling by 2020 but they can aim for more –not less – if they want. Examples from the network of zero waste municipalities show very well how in those municipalities where there is political will moving towards zero waste is possible. The UK history, England in particular, is not one of success or vision when it comes to resource and waste management. Countries that joined the EU 30 years later than the UK are performing substantially better; Slovenia and Ljubljana in particular have implemented ambitious and efficient waste collection systems and Estonia and Lithuania already have deposit and refund schemes operating for packaging.

Why can’t we envisage the UK implementing deposit and refund schemes, widespread separate collection at the kerbside and moving away from incinerators, landfills and waste exports? The recent microbeads ban in the UK shows that where there is a will there is a way. If the Brits are so brave to break away from the EU they will surely dare to provide a more resilient future for their new generations, won’t they?

Joan Marc Simon

Director,

Zero Waste Europe

 

Post Brexit Island access to single market?

“Single Market must work for the islands “said Conservative  MEP Ian Duncan last August.

Last year (30.09.15), Dr Ian Duncan, Conservative MEP for Scotland, and chair of the ECR, welcomed small businessmen from across Europe to the European Parliament to discuss the challenges facing Islands and peripheral communities.

Speaking from the European Parliament in Brussels, Dr Duncan said

‘When I campaigned to be elected to the European Parliament I was struck by the challenges facing Island communities right across Scotland. The small businesses based on these Islands produce goods and services of incredibly high quality, but encounter barriers such as distance from market, transport challenges, intermittent Internet, and attracting and retaining staff. We heard today from speakers from Scotland, Denmark, Croatia and Finland, all of whom face common challenges.

‘The key message is that the Single Market must work for you regardless of where you live and work. If you are in Stornoway, or Stirling, Arran or Aberdeen you should be able to do business. The islands don’t need special treatment, they need equal treatment. So when we talk about a Digital Single Market it should be a market for every islander as well as every mainlander. The same when we talk about an Energy Union; it should connect every household, not just those in the middle. And of course, you should be able to access the single market without let or hindrance, regardless of whether you are selling whisky on Islay or gin in Edinburgh.

‘I am delighted to have been able to bring together experts from across Europe and look forward to publishing a report of our findings in due course.’

The group heard from speakers including Gerald Michaluk, the owner of the Arran Brewery, and Donald MacInnes, crofter and former Chief Executive of Scotland Europa.

Gerald Michaluk commented,

‘As one of our potentially biggest trading partners Europe is essential, and if Scotland wants to maintain jobs and vitality on its Islands it needs to support Dr Ian Duncan’s initiative.

‘Islands need to have full access to Europe and be able to operate on a level playing field with mainland locations. Only in this way can we sustain the beauty and natural environment of Island communities across the EU.’

Donald MacInnes commented:

‘Islanders don’t feel remote. For the single market to work for everyone, disparities between peripheral regions/islands must be minimised. Equally important is to focus on eliminating differences within these regions and islands. An understanding of this fine grain is crucial in seeking strategies and solutions.’

Jamie McGrigor, Conservative MSP for the Highlands and Islands added:

‘As someone who lives in and has represented remote and island communities in the Scottish Parliament for many years, I know the unique challenges they face. Geography, transportation and logistical challenges often mean it is particularly difficult to do business in remote communities such as those up and down the west coast of Scotland.

“However, their produce, skills and expertise are often second to none, and I am delighted that my colleague Ian Duncan MEP is raising this issue in the European Parliament.”

What is Dr Ian Duncan’s position now?

Currently there are no new post from Dr Duncan’s blog on the need for the islands to engage with the single market.

Is he towing the party line on a hard Brexit, or he is standing by his word on the Single Market s advantage for the island?

If you are concerned about this issue,  contact Andrew Johnston, Head of Office for Ian Duncan, Ian Duncan MEP as he stated his position as always putting Scotland’s interests’ first and the current discussion does not look as if Scotland’s interests – and never mind the islands – are being fully considered in the discussion.  

 

 

THE VOICE OF COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS ON SCOTTISH ISLANDS