Scotland: National Rural NetworkI am exasperated! disappointed! and disillusioned! with the RP programme. I have (and many others) have found the entire RP system to be fraught with difficulty for Communities seeking to draw down resources to fulfill their aspirations. The scheme is not community user friendly, overly bureaucratic, not consistent and lacks transparency which has all lead to the scheme and those who deliver it losing credibility within Scottish rural communities.
We are continually bombarded with Scottish government blurb and cyclical press releases extolling the virtues of how well the money is spent. Those agencies tasked (and paid) to deliver, asses, support communities to deliver, own and manage their slice of rural scotland are (in my opinion) failing rural communities in Scotland.
Why are so many communities not connecting nor collecting with the RP programme? In my opinion, SAC, SNH, and the Forestry Commission are experts in their respective field but (in my experience) having an understanding about community engagement out with the Natural, conservation and rural built environment is not a comfortable place to be for many of these case officers. Their degree may be in marine biology not community development and too often they have little understanding of the local agenda. SCVO staff try, but they are not based locally and are usually swamped with requests for help as they usually cover two or three Local Authority areas.
If we are serious about supporting rural communities, I think
A Manifesto for Rural Communities- Inspiring Community Innovation says it all
"We have recognised that the most important elements driving regeneration are people-based: ideas, attitudes, culture and narratives. This is a hopeful message in some ways because investing in people is cheaper than huge infrastructure projects – but it is much harder to do and to justify. Our research points to the need to redress the balance of regeneration programmes, away from expensive capital projects to investment in locally inspired action."
and yet we still dont grow and nurture these communities to deliver their sustainable future.
There is also (to my mind) something overly cosy in terms of the RP process, a community group pays someone from these Quangos as someone who will support the development of a professional application. A Case Officer from the same organisation (although not the same Office) is appointed to rate the submission. My understanding is a fee is given to the case officers parent organisatios when they reach amber light and this fee is paid pass or fail. I know of no other grant awarding organisation that operates in this way.
For some you may say that it is the operation of the scheme and the pay days this results in that is important and not the scheme and the prioroties themselves.
I think it is time the SG revisited SRDP and had a far wider ranging review than delivered by Peter Cook. Hmmm Turkeys and Christmas comes to mind.
Stewart McKenzie
Join the Network Now!
