A Baby Boomer's Reunion

Margo, after we were the last out

23 January 2025

We met at Margo, a Glasgow restaurant, for the 50th anniversary of the formation of Strathclyde's Regional Report team. There were ten of us at the reunion: four Davids, Kathy, Rob, Keith, Laurie, Gerhard and Sue - names straight from the post-war inventory of Christian names.

In February 1975, four of us, two from the West Central Scotland Plan, David and I and two from the Glasgow Corporation Planning Department, Sue and Linda, met for lunch in a pub across Gordon Street from Central Station. We had been recruited to produce a Regional Strategy for the shortly to be established Strathclyde Region. We were all in our mid-twenties, had four planning degrees, two geography degrees and an Oxford PPE degree, but only 15 years of work experience between us. We recruited 6 new graduates to help us, bringing the team's average age down to 24 years. We were boomer scribblers and disrupters. 

We were innocent of the planning policies that had led to the demolition of much of the urban fabric of Glasgow and its surrounding towns. Nor were we responsible for the planning of large housing schemes and new towns that had failed to provide the range of essential public and private services for these new communities. Instead, we were armed with knowledge of threshold analysis, multiple regression analysis, and demographic projection models and shared a collective vision of social justice. We had the field to ourselves; only the senior deputy director had any experience in strategic planning, and he was both our mentor and severest critic.

Tight timescales melded us into a team, and politicians who were determined to tackle the inequities arising from collapsing industries, social deprivation, unemployment, and poor-quality services from schools to child care to housing gave us encouragement. Despite, or perhaps because of, our relative ignorance of the nuances of bureaucratic behaviour, politicians eager to make changes gave us license. We were less popular with senior managers defending the past and fending off politicians with a litany of excuses based on financial regulations and legal requirements. 

We completed the Regional Report within a year. The population and household projections that we produced for Strathclyde were realistic and replaced the grossly optimistic trend projections of the Registrar General. We prepared a strategy for urban regeneration and made proposals for reallocating resources towards disadvantaged communities and groups. The investment was shifted to public transport rather than urban motorways. We recommended the cancellation of Stonehouse New Town and two new communities at Lennoxtown and Houston, and for setting up of a major project for Glasgow's Eastern Area Renewal. 

We had been an unwitting but disruptive influence in establishing a new model of local government, one that shifted resources from well-served affluent suburbs and new towns to run-down urban areas and housing schemes that lacked both public and private services and the transformation was delivered at pace. A Scottish Development Agency was created to focus on supporting indigenous industry and the clearance of derelict land, and the Housing Corporation was established, which in turn created 29 housing associations to modernise Glasgow's tenements. These happened as part of the outcome of the Regional Report during discussions with the Scottish Office.

We developed a network of contacts across all departments who shared the vision of the politicians. We also had our detractors in high places who resented a bunch of boomers disrupting long-established administrative procedures, challenging hierarchies and usurping their influence. In the next few years, we focused on developing area initiatives, providing evidence for shifting human and financial resources to needy areas and groups. We worked with colleagues in other departments to reshape policies on community development, children in care, pre-school, the elderly, disability, homelessness and addiction. We consulted with District Councils to provide housing policies responsive to the growing needs of the elderly, disabled, single parents and the single homeless. We were more active in corporate planning than physical planning, and this was recognised by the politicians who insisted that we become part of a reshaped Council management structure in 1980. By this time, with comings and goings, there had been 18 people on the team.

We were transferred in August 1980 to a new Chief Executive's department with 350 staff. The department was responsible for all administrative, policy, legal, civic and partnership functions. It may seem excessive, but Strathclyde was the largest council in the UK, providing services to 2.5 million people with 25 departments and 103,000 employees.

The Regional Report team became the Housing and Social Policy team, whilst some of us were made responsible for urban regeneration. Over the years, people drifted to other jobs in other departments and other organisations, particularly after the 1996 reorganisation of local government that disbanded Strathclyde Regional Council. The Council had been too successful in challenging the blandishments of Mrs Thatcher's neo-liberal policies and resisting the Community Charge (Poll Tax). The team's experience had prepared them for a wide range of careers. They had morphed into the Chief Statistician for Scotland, three Chief Executives, one Depute Chief Executive, two Directors of Housing, a Director of Health, a Director of Tourism, two Professors, two Depute Directors of Social Work and various other managerial positions.

It was typical of the baby boomers era that the two brightest stars, Sue and Linda, weren't on the list above. Linda died of breast cancer at the age of 31, and Sue left to have a family. After being out of the labour market for several years, she returned, initially part-time, as a planning officer in various councils in the South East, where her husband had become a Director of Planning. Her ability to sift information, write and talk with clarity and nurture those around her was diluted in the man's world of boomer Britain. Most of the old team had not seen Sue for 45 years. I collected her from Central Station. After deliberating what had happened to the pub where we had first met in 1975, I suspect it's a Sainsbury's Local, and a coffee in the Gallery of Modern Art, we wandered along to Margo.

There were many confused faces as we entered Margo. I had not told them that I had invited Sue. The other team members were sifting through their brains to recognise the secret guest.  Sue then laughed, a laugh so loud that it could shake the Humber Bridge. She was brought up in Grimsby. It was a timeless memory, the background noise of working in a happy team. Sue also fires off questions quicker than she could fillet a fish. She had worked in a fish factory before starting university and reckons that standing in a line of 30 women in a fish factory for 8-hour shifts meant that she had learnt how to work and talk at the speed of the conveyor belt. She was multi-skilled, intrigued by engaging in quirky topics, just as bizarre but probably more amusing than those in Planning.

It was a happy and successful fiftieth anniversary. Sue bought a couple of bottles of Champagne, and everyone enjoyed the stories of how their lives had unravelled. It was almost 5pm when we left. Margo was empty, David Hume had come by car, got a parking ticket, and had to drive home sober. The rest of us had come by bus on our entitlement cards; we retired to the Atlantic Bar to continue the fun. There is talk of another reunion before we are subjected to care homes. 

Gallery of Modern Art

A grand day out in Edinburgh and the Scottish Parliament.

It was a 7:15am start to catch the train to Edinburgh for a meeting in the Scottish Parliament. It is quite a long time since I last joined the throng of commuters and even longer since I had attended meetings in the Scottish Parliament. I was anxious about being invited to give evidence to the Committee examining local government finance. We had submitted a paper to the Committee that focussed more on the need for a radical reset of the governance of Scotland's public services. Finance was only part of the problem.

The reform of local government in 1996, austerity and the cumulative centralisation of public services by successive Scottish Governments have emasculated Councils. Their ability to tackle local priorities, engage with their communities, tap into local knowledge, develop networks with local businesses and nurture the energy and goodwill of communities had been steadily eroded in the 25 years since the formation of the Scottish Parliament. 

Approval ratings and voter turnout for councils have plummeted and trust in Councils is only slightly better than the Scottish Government, 38% against 32%, according to the Scottish Household Survey. Yet Councils are more likely to deliver appropriate progressive solutions and innovations in their localities than central government which is too remote and less qualified to manage services. Councils are essential players in tackling issues like social care, climate change, poverty, economic growth and generally improving the common weal. Our message is that councils should be seen as friends of the government, not as a miscreant form of local administration.

My colleague and I felt a bit like dinosaurs amidst the younger MSPs and civil servants who gave us time and respect as we peddled the experience and knowledge from our lived experience. We were younger than that then and, maybe, wiser than that now.  If you've a couple of hours to spare you can check the video of the meeting here.

Bill and I sauntered back to Waverley station and had a coffee in the Fruitmarket cafe before his train left for the dark side of Edinburgh, Livingstone. I was free and feeling easy, there was an exhibition of Ibrahim Mahama, songs about roses in the the adjoining warehouse space. I was lured in by the massive photos of the work gangs building railways in what was the Gold Coast Colonial Railway. These were two subjects close to my heart. I had always loved the stupendous engineering of railways, the sight, sound, smell and touch of steam locomotives remain evocative memories of skipping around engine sheds and watching steam locomotives when I was growing up. 

A large picture of a diesel locomotive made for the Gold Coast Railway by English Electric in Preston conjured up fond memories of my teenage years. I became friends with a Ghanaian woman who was the first black person to live on the housing estate where we lived. Her husband was a graduate engineer and he had come to the UK to work for English Electric, now British Aerospace. They had been allocated a council house in the days when companies had agreements with councils for housing key workers. She had an elegance and intelligence that were compelling but none of the other mothers in the neighbourhood would speak to her. I was chastised by neighbours for spending time talking to her, she would stop and talk to me when walking to the shops with her baby. I occasionally babysat for her and learnt not only about Ghana and her philosophy of life but also witnessed her experience of isolation as an immigrant mother to the UK in the 1960s. When I went to university she gave me the best advice of anyone, 'just be yourself and you will do well in life'. 

I love the occasions when you have time and no plan. As I left the exhibition I headed up the steps of Fleshmarket Close, a magic tuntaway (a secret passage) into the innards of Old Edinburgh. I was meandering along the High Street when it occurred to me that I could go and look at some gravel bikes that I had been encouraged to buy following a recent hillwalking event and Edinburgh has lots of bike shops. Even better, I could phone my friend Neil, who's been heavily into cycling since we used to ride to school together on his Dad's tandem. There was no reply so I set off to find the bike cooperative, Neil returned my call twenty minutes later, he had been exercising on his turbo trainer. I was given the bus numbers to catch to his house in Dalry and we could go for a late lunch. 

Princess Street was buzzing with visitors and when the number 4 hurtled past me I chased it to the next bus stop but by the time I had weaved my way through the luggage of the tourists and reached the door of the bus, I was a second too late. The next bus would be in 9 minutes said the electronic notice in the shelter. After 7 minutes the bus disappeared off the screen into Edinburgh's Bermuda Triangle of missing buses, the next one was allegedly 8 minutes away. A constant stream of empty trams sidled past more or less bereft of passengers. Edinburgh trams never go anywhere you want to go and unless you live in Edinburgh the bus pass doesn't work on them despite the whole of Scotland paying for this expensive white elephant. Meanwhile, all the buses are crammed because they have really useful routes and destinations.

Neil suggested we go to the Athletic Arms (the Diggers), his nearest pub for a couple of pints. It is one of those institutions that specialises in real beers, has over 500 whiskies on sale and provides the staples of a good pub - basic food, darts, a snug room, sport on TV and a happy and regular clientele. They also have a £3 ale of the day and today it was 'As You Like It', a hoppy pale ale. We talked about old friends and families, bikes and cycling, sheds and politics. Neil advised me against a gravel bike and before we went to the pub showed me his two oldish mountain bikes, which he thought were more robust than gravel bikes, he also has a couple of road bikes and a tandem in his excellent and sustainable uhut shed. Neil is not convinced about the need for disc brakes, they are just another unnecessary complication like electronic gear changers. Upgrading my mountain bike was his solution. Asking for advice on a new bike is perplexing.  John told me to get an electric bike, most of the friends in his cycling group have now switched to them. My original advice was to buy a gravel bike, which would be a lot lighter and more versatile for road and touring than a road or mountain bike. Three friends and three different solutions!? 

It was after 4pm and time to get back to the station for my train. I ran for a bus and made Haymarket in good time. The man who sat next to me on the train was on his phone and sounded interesting. When he finished I struck up a conversation with him, he was a manager with Forestry Enterprise and we had half an hour chatting about Scottish Forestry. We shared a love of the Caledonian Pine Forst in Glen Affric and the Torridonian Mountains. I learnt why beech and sycamore weren't planted in Scotland and why good timbers like Ash and Larch were no longer planted. Norway Spruce still dominated the market because it was whiter than Scots Pine, which was darker and mainly used in structural stud work. Almost 80% of UK timber was imported mainly from Scandinavian countries. We could not compete with France or the United States for Oak because they grew them on good quality soils, timber in Britain grew less rapidly and in poorer soils. He also explained how they acquired additional low value land to plant trees like birch and rowan to ensure that they hit their performance targets for native species. We could have kept talking all the way to Inverness. 

It had been a grand day out and I received a message from a friend upon arriving home. As well as a thank you for gifting my Tubular Bells album to his grandson there was a compliment about our evidence to the Committee. "Watched your appearance in Parliament. Both you and Bill spoke compellingly. I quite take your point about the persistent centralisation of decision-making and the imposition by one tier of governance upon another."

In full flow

Building the Gold Coast Colonial Railway

Coincidence of childhood memories

Fleshmarket Close

Diggers with pints of As You Like It

What about Local Government?

Amidst all the flotsam of policy pledges and gimmicks being thrown out by the political parties as they fill in their fake dating app details for their electorates, something is missing. There is no commitment to respond to the immense damage done to local government services since George Osborne declared austerity in 2010. The total spending power of councils in England fell by 26% between 2010/11 and 2020/21, according to the National Audit Office. In real terms, core spending has been reduced by 11% between 2010/11 and 2024/25 according to a Parliamentary report on Local government finances: impact on communities. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland receive equivalent funding from Westminster, so these figures give a measure of the massive scale of decline in locally provided public services.

After the cost of living and NHS waiting times, the most frequently heard issues from the public during the election campaign were, or are, the responsibility of local government. There are many of them - the lack of housing, shortage of community care, potholes, poor and diminishing public transport, fewer support staff for special needs children, run-down schools, the cost and shortage of nurseries, closing sports facilities and libraries, declining town centres, slow responses to planning, building and other applications, failing water and sewage services with pollution to rivers and beaches, reductions in community policing, and a woeful lack of activities for young people. 

According to the National Audit Office, the services with the greatest reduction in spending up to 2020 were cultural (-37%), planning and development (-36%), non-school education (-32%), housing (-26%), and roads and transport (-24%).  A third of all libraries closed, and 14% of bus route mileage was closed. This is a staggering decline in public service provision, exacerbated by the growing number of elderly requiring social care and the escalating costs of many outsourced services.

Who determines what councils can spend? Well, central government, whether it is Westminster or Holyrood. They have both been merciless in stripping out grant support for councils and/or freezing council tax over the past 14 years. That is how austerity works; it means that the opprobrium for reduced public services can be devolved onto councils. The increased financial support for the NHS and the government's obsession with mega projects, such as HS2, Nuclear Power, Brexit, and COVID, have been at the expense of the provision of everyday public services for communities. Levelling up has been less than 10% of the funds withdrawn from councils. The evidence is that these funds, when allocated, are more likely to go to the constituencies of government MPs so that they can claim the kudos rather than to the most needy towns and communities. 

Staffing levels in local government have been severely reduced, knowledge has been lost, innovation and renewal have been stultified, and talented staff have been replaced by consultants and outsourcing companies. It is a bleak scenario that the UK and Scottish governments have imposed on local government. Cynically, it allows them to distance themselves from culpability. The press and media are no longer interested in local issues; newspapers have been closed or regionalised under some franchise arrangements. The soap operas of Westminster and Holyrood have kept them busy with all the corruption and faux cage-fighting that exists in these bastions of our dumbed-down democracies.

Even the dozens of podcasts that invade our lives fail to focus on this narrative of despair about local democracy. They do not seem to understand that most of the life-changing innovations for people and places were designed and built by our municipalities in times when they were free from the tentacles of control and inspection, budgetary control and centralised edicts that emanate from central governments. Central governments that have never been effective in managing or delivering services, look at the defence procurement or the cost of inquiries, not to mention the cost of building or maintaining parliaments. 

Yet history tells us that most essential services were innovated and introduced by local government, not central government. Most public health measures, including the provision of water and sewage, schools, hospitals, poor houses, gas works, electricity power stations, social housing, public transport, libraries, residential homes, home care, and leisure facilities, all emerged from local municipal, church or philanthropic endeavours. They were refined and shared between municipalities, ensuring a rapid spread and refinement of best practices. 

Why would any progressive central government want to remove the ability of local government to drive improvement and innovation other than to fulfil their own sense of entitlement to power? Unlike most European countries, the UK local government is not enshrined in a written constitution; it is subject to control by the central government. It is time for this to change, and along with other top priorities, this should be a commitment for the next government.  Change is required to restore local democracy; change is not just a slogan.

A Manifesto for a Revitalised UK

Westminster: the heart of the problem

This post was drafted last summer, following the resignation of Boris Johnson as Prime Minister, as we witnessed the small caucus of Conservative Party members selecting his successor. I never posted it because my life was put on hold for many months, but on rereading it today, I thought it had as much, if not more, relevance than it did last year.

The last few weeks (August 2022) have merely confirmed all that has been going wrong in the UK since the 2008 banking crisis. Successive regressive governments under Cameron, May, and Johnson have allowed or shown a dependency on a self-serving financial sector, a disregard for public services, a London-centric approach to resource allocation, a dismissal of localism, a perpetual austerity, too much dependency on the United States, a disdain for Europe, and an unrepentant disregard for the widening gap between rich and poor.

Westminster government needs to become more in touch with the realities of the world and the growing inequalities and poverty in the UK. Brexit and COVID-19 have amplified all the other reasons for the decline of the UK outlined above. The government has trashed the UK's reputation on the world stage by retreating from collaboration and ceding the soft power that stemmed from Commonwealth connections, our membership and influence in the EU, International Aid, and the respect for trusted institutions like the BBC as well as our scientific and cultural organisations. We are in dire straits and the current Tory leadership elections have confirmed that neither of the final two candidates to be PM have the ability to lead us out of the doldrums at any time soon.

Watching or listening to Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak is an exercise in despair as they refuse to say much other than to 'tax less' as they seek to fill Boris Johnson's boots and boasts. He will no doubt be enjoying the sunlit uplands of Tuscany, or wherever he can cadge a residence from one of his cabal of donors, whilst penning articles that celebrate his achievements and undermine his successor. No doubt he will break the rules on taking on other jobs so soon after being usurped by his party and he will return to writing pulp fiction for one of the right-wing newspapers

What is needed are not more soundbite policies with no chance of ever being delivered but some clear principles and long-term policies that are not an attempt to hoodwink the electorate and safeguard a few red-wall seats. Here is a starter list of what I would welcome and vote for. I doubt that any of them are in the mindset of our next PM, whoever he/she is and the question for the opposition parties is how committed are they to fundamentally modernising the broken machinery of government and democratic deficit that we have allowed to permeate a crumbling Westminster. 

• Rejoin the EU, if they would allow us. Failing that I would certainly expect any government to seek to rejoin the EU Trade Agreement and customs union. Like the majority of the current electorate, I regret the decision and the conflicts that have been caused by leaving the EU. According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, Brexit has resulted in a 4% reduction in the UK's GDP, with Covid causing a further 2% reduction. The consequences are the loss of over a million people from the workforce, delays in the production and delivery of products, shortages and inflation of goods, as well as the loss of environmental regulations that cleaned our beaches and improved air quality. 
• Restore the Erasmus and Horizon programmes with other European countries. Travel has been stymied by the loss of the Euro Health Insurance card, as well as documentation overload and complex customs arrangements. The sense of belonging to a wider community of interest (the EU) with a collective set of standards from human rights to environmental, financial and manufactured product regulations never figured in the simplistic arguments foisted on the electorate by the Brexiteers. Despite all the suggestions from politicians that we should accept that we have left and move on, this would merely embed the mess that Brexit has created. It would be an act of political cowardice that glorifies the myths already dismissed by the majority of the electorate as well as most economists and academic studies.
• Establish a written constitution for a Federal UK. The next most important commitment must be consolidating and enhancing the powers of the four nations in the UK and embedding English Regions and Councils with devolved powers. This should involve a large-scale devolution away from Westminster but extend to the most local level of democratic control possible. Some powers should return to the EU to ensure compatibility with our neighbouring countries to ensure the consistency and safeguarding of environmental and fiscal regulations.
• Introduce a proportional voting system that reflects the voting intentions of its citizens. A government that has an 80-seat majority when only 29% of the electorate voted for it is neither democratic nor sustainable. Having no single party in power will lead to more time debating and refining legislation but it would prevent doctrinaire top-of-the-head policies such as deporting refugees to Rwanda or delaying legislation on building standards for tower blocks that resulted in the Grenfell Tower disaster. Collaboration among politicians with different perspectives is a more robust way of securing effective scrutiny. The present models that hive off scrutiny to non-executive bodies or bicameral bodies mean that effective scrutiny can often be ignored by the government or lost in action.
• Following these devolved changes, there should be opportunities (referendums) for the people of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland to determine whether they wished to remain part of a more devolved and less centralised United Kingdom that is embedded in a written constitution or become independent countries. It is clear in Scotland at least that Westminster in its present guise has lost most of its credibility. Conversely, the SNP is faced with the Scottish GDP and its spending widening considerably since the last referendum in 2014 owing to the loss of North Sea Oil revenues. The choice should be between a revised and explicit written constitution for the UK and properly specified independence proposals. 
• Legislate to remove the tax havens in UK overseas territories and crown dependencies The three most significant tax havens are the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, and Bermuda with Jersey and the former colony of Hong Kong also in the top ten. Along with Guernsey and the Isle of Man, they account for 29% of corporate tax abuse. They are used by global companies to reduce their taxable profits as well as hedge funds. The EU tax good governance is an international initiative to strengthen fair taxation and global tax transparency to tackle tax fraud, evasion, and avoidance. It was one of the less publicised arguments for Brexit. but there is an essential moral responsibility to significantly reduce tax evasion by global companies, criminal organisations, and extremely wealthy individuals.
• Support the proposals being made by the EU to ensure that tax from global companies is paid in the country where the business is conducted, not the low-tax countries that have manipulated their tax rates to acquire additional tax streams.
• Restrict foreign ownership of UK-based companies. By 2019, 66% of UK-listed shares were owned by foreign investors. The US owns a bigger share of UK companies than the UK whilst  China, India, and Middle Eastern countries are increasingly dominant in the investment and ownership of UK businesses.
• A more progressive taxation system must be introduced. This could be achieved by not uprating the tax thresholds at the higher bands. A supplementary tax could also be paid by companies on all earnings that exceed the minimum wage paid by the company by a factor of 10. In practice, this would be a company tax on anyone earning more than £150k per annum. Companies and their boards would have to decide whether these larger remunerations were really necessary. Comparison with other nations suggests that the UK pays far higher salaries to top earners than other European countries. It may have attracted senior managers to be based in the UK but this in turn has been instrumental in busting the South East housing market and made the quest for levelling up another malfeasance.
• Tax rates and benefits for the self-employed should be standardised with Pay As You Earn rates. This has become more important as companies' sub-contract work and flexible working become ever more significant
• International Aid should be reinstated at 0.7% and the UK should focus its Foreign Policy on the use of its soft power through International Aid, a more active role in the UN and its various agencies, the BBC World Service, its charitable organisations, and the use of the English Language.
• Climate Change targets should be enforced along with a comprehensive funding package to insulate the housing stock, encourage community-owned solar farms and onshore wind turbines Investment in tidal power, hydrogen fuel for heavy vehicles, plant and equipment, and for the installation of district heating schemes, air source and ground source heat pumps. 
• Air travel within the UK should be restricted to island flights and longer-distance routes. Commercial flights for distances of less than 250 miles should be eliminated.
• Taxation on aviation and marine fuel should be introduced and the duty on fuel duty for agricultural and construction vehicles should be phased in to encourage the transfer to alternate carbon-free fuels.
• Legislate for new housing to be net zero with a mechanism to enforce this for both social and private housing
• A cap on private house rents should be established and enforced whilst there would be an encouragement of locally run social housing developments including the repurchase of vacant private rental properties.
• State ownership of railways and water companies should be legislated for in the first year of a new government. The poor performance of these essential functions since complex privatisation and franchising were introduced has been inflationary and is deeply damaging to customers, and the environment. The regulators have been dilatory in their fight against profiteering and dubious practices.
• Community Care Plans should be produced by all Councils with a commitment by the government to provide additional funding. The NHS should not take responsibility for community care. It would be a low priority in competition with powerful professional groupings within the health sector.
• Regions and Councils should have the power to establish community land banks managed locally for the benefit of communities

I could go on but the most important requirement is that there is a recognition of the need for radical reshaping of our democratic institutions and engagement with citizens. Collaboration between parties is essential, but equally important is the imperative of involvement of the devolved governments, councils, and communities.

West Central Scotland Plan, 1974

I have been asked by colleagues on several occasions in recent years about the West Central Scotland Plan and where copies could be found. I had been a member of the team that produced the Plan in 1974 but like so much material from that era, it is difficult to gain access to the documents that preceded the advent of the new Regional and District Councils established in 1975. There are references in some academic publications by Urlan Wannop, the Director of the Plan, but no readily accessible references. I have copied the synopsis of the final report in this post and provided a short introduction to the work of the team below.

West Central Scotland Plan (1974)

 

In 1971 the Scottish Office commissioned a planning study of West Central Scotland. It was a period of significant change with the heavy industries of the region in decline and increasing levels of emigration abroad and to other more successful parts of the UK. Until this date, both the Scottish Office and the local authorities had been planning for substantial population and employment growth with the new towns of East Kilbride, Cumbernauld and Irvine taking overspill from Glasgow and the older towns that were carrying out slum clearance programmes. A number of new communities were also planned at Erskine, Lennoxtown and Stonehouse, the latter to become the fourth New Town in the region.

 

The plan was set up with a Steering Committee chaired by Sir Kenneth Alexander, the then Professor of Economics at Strathclyde University and involving Derek Lyddon, the Chief Planner at the Scottish Office, along with several eminent businessmen such as Sir William Lithgow and Sir Hugh Fraser. Sir Robert Grieve, the former Chief Planner at the Scottish Office who had been responsible for the earlier Clyde Valley Plan, and Alan McCulloch of Colin Buchanan and Partners and former chief architect at Cumbernauld New Town were other luminaries who provided support to the team.

 

The team was led by Urlan Wannop, the Depute Director of Planning in Warwickshire County Council. He was seconded for the duration of the study following his key role in preparing the Coventry & Warwickshire sub-Regional Study that had pioneered the use of Development Potential analysis. 

 

The West Scotland Plan team was staffed by economists, planners, transport engineers and cartographers drawn from the Scottish Office and Colin Buchanan & Partners, transport and planning consultants. Several planners, including myself, and a dozen data processing operatives, were directly recruited for the duration of the plan. Along with 6 Scottish Office administrative and secretarial staff, there were 40 people working on the plan. The study ran from 1971 to 1974. A small team led by Mike Wilkinson, the then Deputy Planning Officer for Lanarkshire, was established to finalise the detailed reports and carry out consultation with the 18 existing planning authorities, the New Towns, various public bodies responsible for the infrastructure, and to brief the new Strathclyde Regional Council. I was appointed a Planning Officer in the Scottish Office and seconded to work in this team. The recommendations were largely supported by the Scottish Office and were subsequently endorsed by the new Strathclyde Regional Council when it was inaugurated in May 1975.

 

In essence, the plan revisited the growth projections and identified economic actions, environmental proposals and a development strategy for the region that was founded on more realistic expectations. Its use of Development Potential analysis to identify the optimal investment decisions resulted in a very significant shift in the planning for the region. It recommended halting the growth of New Towns and switching to the urban regeneration of existing towns and Glasgow. It suggested deferring the development of Stonehouse New Town, which was subsequently de-designated following support for this proposal from Strathclyde Regional Council.

It also argued for a greater emphasis on economic revitalisation through investment in indigenous industries rather than the heavy emphasis on the attraction of incoming industry from outwith the UK. Many of these industries from the United States and Japan had received subsidies to move to Scotland were at risk of closing. It also suggested sites for major industrial growth at Cambuslang, Hunterston provided this included steel and North Lanarkshire. It recommended a Strathclyde Development Agency that the Scottish Office accepted but extended to cover the whole of Scotland. The Scottish Development Agency (SDA) was established in December 1975 with a clear proviso to focus on Strathclyde.

The plan highlighted the imperative of tackling poverty, poor housing and unemployment with special emphasis on the areas of greatest need. It also recommended an Environmental Task Force to tackle a major drive for the removal of derelict land working in harness with the local authorities. This responsibility was passed to the SDA along with the responsibility of coordinating the Glasgow East Area Renewal (GEAR) scheme.

The Synopsis of the plan is reproduced below.

West Central Scotland Plan
Synopsis
June 1974

Preface

This is a summary version of the main report of the West Central Scotland Plan published in May 1974. The plan was commissioned by a Steering Committee composed of members of the Clyde Valley Planning Advisory Committee representing the local planning authorities of the region - together with the nominees of the Secretary of State for Scotland drawn from public life and from Departments of the Scottish Office.

The plan contains advisory, economic and physical proposals for West Central Scotland and is intended to serve as a guide to local planning authorities in preparing their development plans and as an outline framework for decisions by developers.

Based on a range of population and employment changes forecast for 1981 and 1991, the plan describes the measures necessary to implement the strategy by these dates as well as an action programme for the period up to 1978.

The main report on the Plan and seven supplementary technical volumes are also available.


A Plan for Action

This is a plan for immediate action to improve the economic, and social prospects and the physical surroundings of 2.5 million people who live in West Central Scotland. It calls for a firm commitment by central government to more effective regional economic policies, a positive drive by local authorities to create the right conditions for growth, and a determined effort by the region’s industry to improve its performance. All these are essential if the region is to overcome its present problems and make for itself a better future.

Since 1945 the development of the region has been guided by the Clyde Valley Regional Advisory Plan and a succession of central government regional development policies, and by these means, much has been done to improve peoples lives and circumstances. But not everything has turned out as intended. Many of the assumptions on which it was based no longer hold good. Regional aid policies have pumped aid into the region but have not broken the back of persistent unemployment or staunched the flow of migration to more favoured ports of Britain and abroad.

Hence the need for a new plan, which we have prepared at the behest of the West Central Scotland Plan Steering Committee “to serve as a guide for local authorities in preparing the development plans, and as an outline framework for decisions by developers.”

Much of our work has been concerned with trying to understand the economic and social life of the region in the character of its urban and rule areas. In doing this we have been able to study in some depth the potential for growth and change in the region, and its limits. This has led us to the conclusion that West Central Scotland cannot take it for granted and its full potential will be realised. We believe that the long-term prosperity of the region must be looked upon as a prize to be won, not a gift to be expected.

We have found it impossible to predict with certainty what number of people in jobs region is likely to have over the next 20 years we have only identified a possible upper and lower levels. The difference between these two extremes of 383,000 people on 172,000 jobs by 1991 is some measure of the task before the region if it is to achieve maximum growth we believe possible.

This uncertainty means we cannot be dogmatic about the pace of change and the amount of development that is likely to take place. So we have devised measures which will help the region to realise its best expectations but which will stand it in good stead whatever the outcome.

Our recommendations fall into three broad categories: a set of economic policies; a programme about environmental improvement; and a physical planning framework to guide the location and timing of development. The measures proposed under these three heads are interlocked and reinforce one another, but each programme is capable of standing on its own.


The State of the Region

West Central Scotland is a region of many assets. Set within the unparalleled natural beauty of the Highlands, the Firth of Clyde, and the Southern Uplands and Borders, all providing a wealth of opportunity for outdoor recreation on its doorstep, it is the industrial and commercial heart of the country. More than a century of industrial growth has produced people with an exceptional breadth of skills and a variety of specialised firms. Not only enjoys the facilities of the country’s most populous city and region but also shares and helps to support the financial and professional resources centred in Edinburgh.

The Achievements

Recent years have seen many changes in where and how its people live and work, as in most of Britain's older industrial regions, it has become less dependent on traditional labour-intensive industries like mining, steelmaking, shipbuilding and heavy engineering and has acquired a significant share of expanding new industries.

At the same time, people and firms have been moving out of the congested urban centres to new growth areas. In 30 years the population of central Glasgow has fallen by 300,000. About 200,000 people have been rehoused in new estates on the edges of the city; the new towns have provided 35,000 new houses, accommodating almost 120,000 people. Today, half of the region’s houses have been built since the War, but half the region’s Victorian tenements remain in Glasgow.

The planned dispersal of families from the overcrowded inner-city areas to new estates and settlements and the redevelopment of the older areas at lower housing densities were proposed in the Clyde Valley Plan.

In the event, the unplanned voluntary movement of people from the cities to the suburbs and the surrounding counties and outwith the region altogether has outstripped the planned moves by nearly three to one.

In recent years an extensive system of major new roads and river crossings has been built up, and road congestion is now mainly confined to the Clydeside conurbation. The Blue Train system has been electrified outwards as far as Wemyss Bay, Helensburgh, Airdrie and Lanark. The Green Belt around Clydeside has largely been maintained. New industrial estates have been developed. These achievements of replanning and reconstruction have been impressive by any standards. But many problems remain.

The Problems

The people of West Central Scotland had not only been moving within the region’s boundaries, they have also been moving beyond them. The population has been falling steadily from the peak of 2,525,000 in 1962 to 2,482,000 in 1972. Although the natural increase, the difference between births and deaths, has been consistently above the Scottish and British level since 1951, it is not made up for by the numbers leaving in search of work and better living conditions. This rate of loss has been proportionately much higher than in any other region in the United Kingdom.

Male unemployment has been consistently higher than in any other British region, and the number of jobs available has been failing at a rate generally higher than in other assisted regions. Incomes are persistently below the national average. The loss of jobs has been particularly severe in and around Glasgow. It and the other older industrial towns have also suffered by a proportionately higher loss amongst higher-paid professional, managerial and skilled workers, leaving behind an increased proportion of people with low and insecure incomes.

In spite of the intensive housing effort by the local authorities, the region still has one of the worst housing problems in Britain. Almost a third of the region’s houses were built before 1919, and many of these are in poor condition. In 1970 there were 106,800 below the “tolerable standard” defined by law and a further 22,400 lacked the exclusive use of an inside lavatory, a fixed bath or shower, washbasin, kitchen sink and hot-water system. In addition, less than half the houses on Clydeside have any form of garden and four out of five 4/5 lack a garage.

In many places bad housing is made worse by bad surroundings. About one house in six is in an area characterised by some or all of the following deficiencies: lack of grass and trees; shortage of space for children's play, recreation and car parking; shabby houses, vandalism and litter; noise and dirt from nearby industry; and dereliction. Life in overcrowded slums tends to be accompanied by poverty, ill-health and social problems, overcrowding and poor housing. As many as one in ten of the region's people may suffer the combination of low incomes, overcrowding and poor housing.

Over half of the region’s houses are not covered by smoke control orders. The concentration of smoke and sulphur dioxide pollution in central Glasgow, other parts of the conurbation and the centre of some other towns can, in winter, far exceed the level considered harmful to health.

Outside the towns, industrial dereliction is widespread, particularly in North Lanarkshire. The region has 2950 hectares of land officially classed as derelict and approximately 6,000 hectares more which can be described as wasted and unsightly.

The region's rivers are either grossly polluted or of poor quality for over a fifth of their total length. Less than half the mileage is unpolluted or recovering from pollution. Many sewage treatment works are overloaded, and much sewage is still discharged untreated.

An estimated 10,000 people living near Glasgow airport are exposed to excessive noise levels, and by the end of the century, the number may be several times greater. A smaller number around Prestwick are similarly affected. Getting on for 10% of the region’s built-up area probably suffers some degree of nuisance from other noise sources, mainly road traffic.


An Uncertain Future

In 1970 there were 970,000 men and women of West Central Scotland. Our examination of future prospects suggests that at worst there could be 56,000 fewer jobs in 20 years' time. This will happen if the region's industries only do as well compared to the rest of Britain, as they have done in the past ten years. At best, an extra 116,000 jobs could be available by 1991, but only if the region’s firms manage to expand at the same rate as others in the rest of Britain. Even if the best rate of growth is achieved, new jobs in manufacturing will only just replace losses in other manufacturing firms. The gains will have to come in service and other non-manufacturing industries, and the opportunities will grow faster for women than for men. Even on the most optimistic forecasts, the growth in employment will not provide work for all those born and bred in the region. Migration to other regions will continue, and unemployment will stay above the national average.

If the highest estimated employment growth is achieved, the region’s population may grow from 2,482,000 in 1972 to 2,568,000 in 1981 and 2,698,000 in 1991. On the pessimistic view of employment prospects, population may fall to 2,323,000 in 1981 and 2,315,000 in 1991, with migration rising to a level matched only in the 1920s.

The latest population forecast by the Registrar General, which allows for a lower birthrate, puts the 1981 figure at 2,421,000, that is towards the lower end of our range. If it begins to appear that population may fall below our lowest estimates, the prospects of the region will be bleak indeed. The action program for development will have to be slowed down, and our proposals as a whole will have to be reviewed. However, there is no precedent of such a sustained falling population in any industrialised region of Britain.

In spite of all these problems, we believe West Central Scotland can have more influence over its economic future than has been generally accepted. But we must sound a note of caution. The nation as a whole faces a period of economic restraint and uncertainty during which regions like this could fare less well than the more prosperous ones. Moreover, we believe much of the answer to creating more jobs in West Central Scotland lies in improving the quality of management and industrial relations, and these are not changes we can expect to see occurring overnight.


An Attack on Three Fronts

We found the West Central Scotland economy is not performing too well. It is not providing enough jobs to keep the region’s people in work. We have found that, in spite of the massive effort in redevelopment, many people are still badly housed and many more live in ugly and depressing surroundings. We have found that future prospects are uncertain. What can be done to put the regional path to a better tomorrow?

The strategy we recommend is designed to improve the quality of life in West Central Scotland and widen its opportunities so that a bigger proportion of those born, brought up and educated in the region have a chance to go on living and working there. It calls for concerted and decisive action on three fronts, through three sets of interrelated proposals:-

1. A balanced set of economic policies to (a) attract more jobs to the region and (b) improve the performance of existing industry so that it can create more jobs;

2. A comprehensive set of measures to repair and improve the environment, to make the region more attractive to its residents and to incoming industry;

3. An area by area action programme of physical planning to relate the development of housing, industry and transport to the likely changes in population and employment and to support the economic and environmental policies.

The three sets of proposals do not stand or fall together. Each forms a valid course of action on its own. But a coordinated attack on all three fronts will act faster and achieve more than any one step taken alone. Top priority must, however, be given to economic policies. If the snags which have caused the region’s poor employment record are not cleared away, there is little chance of hitting all our other targets. Nevertheless, the recommended physical planning strategy is still the best one for the region even if economic performance falls short and employment continues to fall.


The Way to Prosperity

The economic problems of West Central Scotland are virtually without equal in the United Kingdom and are very serious in comparison with other European problem regions. No other part of Britain faces such a daunting task, or such devastating consequences if past trends are not changed. For these reasons, we believe the region is justified in looking for special measures to help economic growth over and above those operating in other assisted areas.

Attracting New Industry

In recent years, the region has lost much of its former advantage over the rest of Scotland and other assisted regions in terms of the incentives available to attract new industry. We recommend that this competitive edge should be restored to help achieve a 20% increase in the number of jobs created each year by investment from outside the region. We believe this can be best done by increasing the level of Regional Development Grant from 22% to 28% of the cost of the plant, machinery and buildings, with the cut-off point of, say, £5 million to reduce the risk of paying very large grants to projects which might well come to the region in any case, or which might employ few people.

The increased grant should be coupled with the stringent operation of the Industrial Development Certificate policy in the more prosperous parts of Britain, and supported by a good supply of industrial sites and advanced factories in West Central Scotland.

Office Jobs

The grant payable to firms moving office jobs to the region should be increased to cover the entire removal costs together with a standard grant of £700 a year for the first five years for every new job created. Office work, which is one of the fastest-growing sectors of the national economy, has been growing slowly in West Central Scotland. Glasgow, in particular, has many advantages as a potential office centre and its disadvantages, particularly the distance from London, have tended to be exaggerated.

The government must take the lead in breaking down the psychological barriers, which seem to inhibit many firms considering a move to this region. We believe the Hardman Report on “The Dispersal of Government Work from London” is seriously at fault in its methods and wrong in its conclusion that only 1,200 civil service jobs might be moved. Secure, high-level decision-taking jobs in West Central Scotland, the government will be making one of its most effective contributions to achieving its regional policy aims.

Europe

Since West Central Scotland has severe economic problems even by comparison with other problem regions of Europe, it should be a priority area for aid under the EEC Regional Development Fund.

Local Industry

A better flow of jobs from outside will only go a small way towards meeting the region’s employment needs. At best, it will account for only 20% to 30% of the possible increase in jobs in the manufacturing industry. The bulk of growth must be generated within the region. Our analysis of the region’s past economic performance and our projections of future employment prospects both point to the vital role of established local industry, which has given rise to many of the current problems but which offers the best hope of solving them.

Three conditions are necessary for a better performance by established industry: a higher rate of national economic growth; a higher investment rate by established industry; and policies which directly improve industrial efficiency. The 1972 Industry Act provides measures to help meet the first two conditions but not, in the way it is being operated at the moment, to improve industrial efficiency.

Poor economic performance in a region like West Central Scotland can be blamed on a number of causes; in the nature of the industry and the region, in particular, the dominance of nationally declining industries like coal mining and shipbuilding is still a problem. Other possibilities are high costs arising from the region’s remoteness from other centres of population and industry, a poor environment and inadequate infrastructure. Some of these factors may contribute to the total picture, but they do not account for it. We believe the underlying problems are more to do with weaknesses in labour relations and the quality of industrial management.

The region has a bad record of industrial disputes, considerably worse than the United Kingdom average. Clear evidence of weaknesses in management is hard to come by, but we have gained a definite impression that much local management is conservative, inflexible and lacking in drive. Unsettled labour relations may be partly responsible for, and partly explained by, these failings. More important, these weaknesses have led to a general lack of enterprise in new ideas, and an inability to adapt to new situations and to seek out new activities and markets. The fact that there are many successful firms with good labour relations and enterprising managements only confirms our view that the region’s industry is capable of overcoming such problems.

But it needs help, and help in a form which is directly relevant to the region’s special problems. Traditional regional aid policies are not designed to cope with this kind of situation; they tend to encourage investment. The Selective Financial Aid available under the 1972 Industry Act is needed to help firms modernise and expand, but financial aid alone will not succeed where managements lack the means to take advantage of it. New measures are needed which will help firms to put themselves in better shape to play their vital role in providing jobs.

We believe these could best be provided by a semi-independent public body free to act on its own initiative within broad guidelines laid down by Parliament. We recommend the Government to set up such a body, which we call SEDCOR - the Strathclyde Economic Development Corporation.

SEDCOR should:

• Help to improve industrial efficiency by providing management with advice, at little or no cost, on marketing, staff recruitment, internal organisation, industrial relations, financial planning, diversification and exporting. The advice should, where appropriate, be backed by financial aid to help introduce the indicated changes. It would, of course, be up to firms individually to decide whether to seek SEDCOR’s services and whether to act on its advice.
• Seek out ideas and opportunities for starting new companies and become involved in such enterprises by providing financial and technical aid and organisational advice. As a last resort, it could itself start a new company where private enterprise is demonstrably not exploiting the commercial opportunity.
• Help with finance and expertise, the reorganisation of declining industries to secure long-term employment prospects and ensure that the structure of growth industries maximises their potential contribution 
• Draw up an industrial strategy to help select priorities for aid so as to achieve the main objective of promoting greater efficiency, faster economic growth, and a well-balanced increase in jobs. 

We suggest SEDCOR should be responsible to the Secretary of State for Scotland and run by a board whose members will bring in local interests, including the Regional Council, trade unions and industry. The Chief Executive must be a person of considerable ability, initiative and reputation, with a proven record of success in industry or commerce. Staff must be highly professional and experienced and should be paid in accordance with the responsibilities they will bear.

Labour Relations

Responsibility for improving labour relations lies with the employers and trade unions. We suggest that representatives of both sides should get together to discuss the evidence on disputes and the need for improvements. It will be up to them to decide what to do next, but we suggest they set up a series of working parties for the region as a whole and for each industry in the region.

We believe that progress should best be made, however, by an improvement of the collective bargaining process at the plant level and recommend that the Manpower Advisers team of the Department of Employment should be expanded to help achieve this.

SEDCOR could provide in-depth advisory consultancy and follow-up services linked to selective financial aid to encourage such improvements and help in the development of new techniques where unions and employers are willing to cooperate to show that West Central Scotland is taking an initiative to improve the quality of its industrial relations.


A Better Place to Live

West Central Scotland has a heritage of magnificent natural and man-made countryside, but much of the urban and semi-rural scene is drab and depressing. This is true of some of the new housing areas as well as the older, declining areas. Any steps taken to improve this environment will both change the region’s image and inject new confidence in its future. At a time when everyone is becoming more interested in their surroundings, other industrial regions are making better progress in removing the scars of past neglect. West Central Scotland must catch up if it is to compete effectively for new industry, and retain its native population.

Two things are necessary to quicken the pace of improvement: a much higher level of spending and simpler administrative machinery.

Local government reorganisation offers the hope of a more effective effort in the future, but in their early years the new councils may be too busy with other things to tackle the environment properly. We, therefore, propose the setting up of an Environmental Improvement Task Force, financed from public funds and employing skilled specialists and a workforce of unskilled labour.

The Task Force would indirectly benefit the economy of the whole region in two ways. Firstly, by helping to remove the squalor, which has damaged its economic performance. Secondly, by providing jobs and training both of those men, mostly over 40, who have been out of work for a long time and for those temporarily unemployed during the periodic swings in economic activity.

The Task Force will tackle a wide range of work, including the treatment of vacant derelict sites, especially in towns; the provision of permanent community facilities; general improvement of the housing environment; and the treatment of derelict land. It should be able to undertake work on its own initiative; local authorities and other bodies such as Hospital Boards and British Rail should also call upon its services. Either the Task Force or the Strathclyde Regional Council should set up a specialist derelict land unit to provide technical and other help to district councils. Wherever possible, the Task Force should use men rather than machines in its work.

By coordinating a wide range of work, the Task Force would be able to carry out an environmental improvement program for the whole region more smoothly and economically than individual councils acting alone. It would also be better able to offer continuity of work and a programme of training and industrial rehabilitation.

The programme of environmental improvement we recommend calls for an extra £20 million a year between 1973 and 1981 on top of what at the moment seems likely to be spent on this kind of work, giving a total budget over that period of £675 million instead of £500 million. This is the cost of putting right most of what is wrong with the environment of the region in the shortest possible time.

Housing areas

More than half the extra money – about £90 million - is needed to clean up and improve the environment in housing areas. Some 137,000 houses are in areas that need urgent attention, and about 71,000 of these are neither in planned improvement schemes nor scheduled for clearance before 1981.

Improvement schemes for these housing areas will cost up to £14 million given the present limit of £200 a house on which government grants are based. We recommend that the limit should be raised to at least £450 per house to help pay for play areas, fencing, car parking, paths, refuse disposal facilities, lighting, and landscaping. This would increase the total bill to perhaps £32 million, or £4.5 million a year. In addition, we recommend that between £50 million and £60 million should be spent on the surroundings of many thousands of homes whose external environment, while not needing major improvement, is far from satisfactory.

Derelict houses

Houses which stand empty for a long time waiting for demolition always become a mess and are often a risk to health and safety. Where houses are in such a bad state that there is no real hope of improving them, they should be cleared as quickly as possible. But we agree with the Scottish Housing Advisory Committee that when it is possible to give an extra lease of life to houses which fall below the “tolerable standard” but are not scheduled for early clearance they should be patched up. The cost of doing this might be as much as £20 million in 1973- 81.

Derelict Land

Progress in treating derelict land in the region has been slow. At the present rate, it will take almost 20 years to reclaim the 2950 hectares which are officially classed as derelict. On top of this, there are another 6000 hectares which we feel should be counted in a wider definition of derelict. This includes farmland so cut up by mining operations or blighted by dust, smoke or the run-off from spoil heaps that it is no longer worth farming; and urban land which is neglected or blighted because of some forthcoming development. At the present rate of progress, it would take another 100 years to deal with these areas.

A much faster attack on this problem is essential. The procedure for acquiring sites and obtaining grants should be simplified, and an extra £25 million should be allocated for treatment.

Clean air

Since the passing of the Clean Air Act in 1956, less than half the houses in the region have been brought within smoke control areas. Total coverage will bring the winter average concentrations of smoke below the danger level throughout the region. We recommend that this should be done by 1981. An estimate that the cost could be as high as £12 million may be exaggerated.

Rivers

One mile in ten of the river water in the region is grossly polluted, and other stretches run the risk of serious deterioration. More than half the sewage and over three-quarters of industrial effluents fail to meet the standards set by a Royal Commission in 1912. We recommend that sub-standard outfalls should be eliminated by 1981 and that the enforcement of standards should then be strengthened. The Government’s planned level of spending should be raised by £1 million a year in 1973 to 81.

Noise

Extensive soundproofing of houses against aircraft, traffic and other noise may become eligible for assistance before 1981. It is not yet possible to estimate the full likely cost, but if help is given to soundproof against aircraft noise in housing areas exposed to noise levels above 40 NNI, a total cost of up to £10million by 1981 would be involved. Other means of reducing the impact of noise, such as shielding houses from heavy traffic and noisy industry by office buildings, warehouses or trees should be carefully explored.

Conservation

There are nearly 4000 buildings in the region listed as being historically or architecturally valuable. 200 of them are of national importance. Glasgow alone has nearly 900 listed buildings and has been described as the finest surviving example of a great Victorian city. Yet only about 30 listed buildings in the whole region have been grand aided by the Historic Buildings Council. We recommend that public spending on protecting and conserving buildings and groups of buildings should be increased from the recent level of about £100,000 a year to £350,000 a year. We also recommend that increased spending up to £1million a year should be allocated for a programme of country parks and landscape protection and enhancement. The rural and urban conservation programmes together call for an extra £10 million in the period up to 1981.


The Pattern of Change

A physical planning strategy to guide development in the region has to take account of the existing pattern of settlements; the likely changes in population and employment; the need for new sites for housing, industry and other purposes; and the availability of land and its suitability for various uses. It has to be based on an assessment of how many people and firms are likely to want to move to new surroundings–and which places they will prefer – and which centres are most likely to create new jobs.

West Central Scotland has an immense task ahead of itself if it is to build up its population and economy and improve its environment. Great care must therefore be taken to get the best value for money out of its existing assets and the considerable volume of new investment taking place each year. There are economic and social benefits to be gained in the way redevelopment is carried out and the way new developments are sited in relation to one another and to existing development in terms of giving people a wide choice of jobs and good access to shops, schools, recreational and other facilities, for example.

Public spending in the region is currently running at about £1,400 million a year and should rise to between £1,700 million and £1,800 million by 1981. Even a small improvement in the economic and social return on this outlay would be a significant help to the region. In addition, improvements can be sought in the return on private spending, by industry and commerce, and by families on bus and rail fares, rents, mortgages, and other domestic outgoings.

Having taken these considerations into account, we see little scope for radical change in the region’s pattern of settlements. This is because (a) the level of employment and population growth is insufficient, even given the most optimistic forecasts, to sustain completely new settlements, and this gives rise to the further reasons that (b) existing commitments to housing and industrial developments are already adequate for the region’s requirements, (c) most new jobs in manufacturing industry are likely to occur in the existing built-up areas (d) office another service sector jobs are likely to be concentrated in existing towns, and (e) there are many areas which are not suitable for urban development.

These reasons, and our examination of various possible patterns of development, suggest that the best course is to associate most new development with the established economy of Clydeside. This offers the prospect of a more rapid improvement of social and economic conditions in its older residential and industrial areas.

It does not imply neglect of other areas. All the communities of the region are linked together and have a common interest in growth, both within themselves and in the region generally. This strategy, therefore, sees the whole of West Central Scotland as a growth area and does not seek to limit the prospects for growth within existing communities. In builds on existing planning policies and includes all the established growth points. It puts no restraint on their ability to attract new employment not already inherent in the local planning situation.

A strategy which involved a very large switch of emphasis onto development well outside the conurbation would carry the significant risk of extra costs and losses. A plan which directed a large part of future growth to the new towns would be least capable of adjustments to changing circumstances.

There is already enough land allocated in the new towns and other urban growth centres to meet the likely needs for housing most industry up to at least 1981, and there is a real risk of spreading new enterprise too thinly around these “greenfield” sites.

We, therefore, recommend (a) no further capacity should be planned in the new towns in and associated with West Central Scotland beyond the present population targets and (b) that the Secretary of State for Scotland should consider postponing major investment in Stonehouse New Town until at least 1975. Other projects such as Inverkip and Lennoxtown should also be held in reserve. We also recommend that from 1975 the new towns should fall within the strategic planning responsibility of the Strathclyde Regional Council.

A Two-part Programme

Because of the uncertainty about population and employment trends, our recommendations relate to the short-term period up to 1981 and are designed to keep the longer-term options open.

Our planning proposals for this period are based on our highest estimates of population and employment growth to demonstrate the potential size of the task that lies ahead. The timetable for starting construction and preparing sites and projects will need to be adjusted in the light of later evidence of population and employment trends.

The proposals fall into two parts. Any development intended for completion before 1978 will in the main have to be planned already, and the question will be whether to bring forward or put back the start of work. At the highest rate of growth of the programme for this period involves housing on new sites for 205,000 people, housing redevelopment to accommodate 204,000 people, the creation of 43,000 manufacturing jobs on new sites and 68,000 on existing sites, and the addition of 102,000 service and other non-manufacturing jobs.

All the housing schemes and a large proportion of the industrial schemes should be carried out on land already allocated in development plans. The programme involves a major housing effort in the Glasgow, Renfrew, Kirkintilloch and Cumbernauld, North Ayrshire, Motherwell and Wishaw and East Kilbride areas. The main industrial growth is in the Glasgow, North Ayrshire, Motherwell and Wishaw and Airdrie and Coatbridge areas.

In the Glasgow area, for example, there are some 355 hectares of land currently earmarked and available for industry, all of which will have to be prepared and developed in 1978. About 72,000 people have to be housed on redevelopment sites and 43,000 on new sites; another 88,000 people from the area would have to be rehoused outside the boundaries, mainly in the Renfrew and Kirkintilloch and Cumbernauld areas.

In view of the size of the task in the Glasgow area, we believe the Glasgow Corporation, and subsequently, the District Council should consider setting up development committees to record a whole programme in each scheme, including the provision of social services, shops and other facilities. A structure plan for the Glasgow area as a whole and local plans for the inner areas will be needed.

The second part of the programme involves preparing plans, specifications and tenders for development which would need to be carried out from 1978 at the earliest. First priority should be given to preparing (a) the later phases of building at Erskine, Cumbernauld and Irvine. (b) additional redevelopment in the Glasgow, North Ayrshire and Airdrie and Coatbridge areas and (c) other residential and industrial projects which could be needed by 1981 at the highest growth rate or 1991 at the lowest.

Special Industrial Areas

In general, we have not specified within the planning areas of the region where development should be carried out. This is the rightful job of the local planning authorities. We make an exception to this rule, however, in the case of certain potential industrial developments which, because of their size or special needs, can be suitably located only in a small number of places.

One of the possible areas for this kind of development is the Hunterston peninsula. We accept the conclusion that the further development of the Hunterston peninsula for industry could not be justified for less than the maximum local employment return that has been anticipated and only then for industries for which there is no satisfactory alternative location in West Central Scotland. We consider that the guarantee of major steelworks should be a prerequisite for any further permanent industrial development. The Secretary of State for Scotland has stipulated that industrial development at Hunterston must show beyond doubt that it requires deep water access and that it must confer a major and lasting net benefit to the Scottish economy, particularly in terms of employment.

Other special locations include:

the Bloak Moss area of Ayrshire– for oil refining and related industry;

the coast from Hunterston to Ayr, and Loch Long pipe terminal - shore facilities for Irish Sea gas and oil exploration;

Greenock and Longhaugh – industry needing deep water access;

Chapeldonan – power station

Ardyne and Ardgowan – temporary sites for oil platform construction;

Newhouse, the Clyde Ironworks at Cambuslang, Inchinnan and if necessary, Queenzieburn – sites for large single-industry developments.

Putting the Plan into Effect

The action program for 1971-81 points the way for building houses for 203,800 people on redeveloped sites and for 204,800 people on new sites by 1978 at the earliest and the planning and preparation of housing programs for another 226,900 people thereafter, to be built as required. It involves the creation of 110,000 600 jobs in the manufacturing industry and hundred and 1700 in the services sector by 1978 dash To offset the anticipated loss of jobs – I’m planning for the creation of a further 63,000 manufacturing jobs and 44,000 service jobs.

Local authority planning for these and associated development requires early preparation of Structure Plans from Glasgow, North Lanarkshire (which comprises the Airdrie and Coatbridge and Motherwell and Wishaw planning areas), Renfrewshire, and North Ayrshire. To allow for more spacious living conditions, the plan adopted generous housing density standards of 100 persons per hectare on redevelopment sites, and 55 persons per hectare on greenfield sites, and even at these densities found it unnecessary to impinge upon the greenbelt for new residential sites.

Housing

The main task for housing authorities is to replace or improve the region’s 129,000 unsatisfactory houses. We expect that increasingly they will want to improve rather than demolish these houses, particularly in the Glasgow area. Some 33,200 houses could be improved, to provide 25,100 new homes. Priority should be given to improving these houses, which are just above the “Tolerable Standard” to prevent them getting worse.

Local authorities will need to build between 59,000 and 104,900 new houses in 1971-81, depending on whether population changes follow the lowest or highest estimates. At the highest level, this means broadly continuing the past average rate of building, while the lowest rate involves a severely reduced rate outwith the Glasgow area. Building by the new town development corporations of the Scottish Special Housing Association will need to average between 2000 and 3500 a year, compared with the past average rate of 3,400 a year.

Although local authorities may need to build fewer houses they should be able to concentrate on meeting special needs: houses of a particular size which may be in short supply; “sheltered” housing, and accommodation to single people, the elderly and handicapped.

Private housing

Private housebuilding could rise from an average of 3200 houses a year in the 1960s to between 4000 and 6000 a year depending on the economic performance of the region, the availability of mortgages and a changing attitude towards housing in a region where owner-occupation is low in comparison with the rest of Britain. We believe the local authorities should help and encourage private house building, including the inner areas of the conurbation where the exceptionally high proportion of council housing restricts choice.

New Towns

We see no need to increase housing targets and overall capacity of the new towns. Rather we recommend a review of the long term policy with a view to bringing the building programs in line with a view to bringing their building programme in line with the prospective demands and increasing the proportion of housing built for older occupation.

Areas of Greatest Need

The redevelopment of environmental improvement programmes we are recommending will take place mainly in areas where people tend to be poor and deprived, and therefore less capable of standing up to the disruption, uncertainty and personal financial cost involved in these changes. Up to now local authorities have not found a satisfactory approach to deal with the variety of social problems that arise in these circumstances. Local government reorganisation offers them a unique opportunity to introduce new methods. We suggest they should consider setting up local committees to review the running of services in redevelopment and improvement areas, in areas of isolated public-housing where there are problems worrying the authorities and the residents, and in small settlements within districts dominated by large urban centres. They should also consider supporting Councils of Social Service to draw together voluntary social work organisations and local authority departments.

Industry

To help meet the employment targets, local authorities will have to put greater emphasis on preparing sites and allocating enough land for industry and offices in their structure and local plans. This is particularly the case in and around the Clydeside conurbation where suitable land for industry has been scarcer than in some other areas. A start should be made on preparing for the major new industrial opportunity which will arise at Cambuslang when the Clyde ironworks closes. This will be the most important industrial site to become available within the central part of Clydeside for many years.

Transport

Public transport is more important to the life of the community in West Central Scotland than in any other region except London, and its importance will continue. At the moment it is facing severe problems. Buses are losing passengers and operators have raised fares and cut services, leading to a further loss of customers. Train services have been improved and are gaining more passengers but at an increasing financial loss.

We recommend the proposed investment scheme, including the Clyderail project and improvements to the Glasgow underground, should be carried out as quickly as possible. Experiments with bus priority lanes, bus feeder services to railway stations, and park-and-ride schemes should be extended. On top of this, operational subsidies for bus and rail are essential if public transport is to play its full role. Without them, fares will have to be increased substantially, and services cut. We recommend that rail subsidies be continued and bus subsidies be introduced to keep fares at a level acceptable to passengers with low incomes and to provide unprofitable but socially justifiable services. The combined cost of investment and subsidies would be about £290 million.

The region’s current road programme involves spending some £141 million in 1973-81 on new roads which are already under construction or at an advanced stage of preparation. This will go a long way towards meeting the needs for new roads. A further £225 million spent between 1978 and 1991 should relieve most of the road congestion problems, providing the emphasis is put on routes approaching central Glasgow and crossing the conurbation from east to west. This must be complemented, however, by stronger parking controls, especially in central Glasgow where parking charges should be raised and the number of spaces restricted to around the present 22,000.

The total cost of this proposed transport programme - about £515 million - is consistent with the Government’s intentions, but it involves switching funds from capital investment to subsidies. Capital investment, especially in roadbuilding, should be reviewed regularly in the light of population and employment trends, as necessary.

A Price we can Afford?

This plan does not call for a significant change in the amount of public spending in the region. The total cost of all the proposals is not likely to be very different from the total amount which would be spent in any case. It does, however, involve changes in the way the available money is used. It also implies an increased emphasis on local government spending. Central government spending could increase at a slower rate than in the past decade, and local government spending at a faster rate. We estimate that the burden on the average ratepayer may increase by no more than 4% a year up to 1981, not allowing for inflation.

Local authorities in West Central Scotland already spend more per person than the national average. In 1971-72, the sum spent from the rates and government grants was £110.33 per person compared to £106 in Scotland as a whole and £89.30 in England and Wales. In other words, the householder in West Central Scotland pays half as much again as the average domestic ratepayer in England and Wales, while the businessman in Glasgow may have a rates bill per employee about twice as high as he would face in Birmingham. The difference is partly due to local authority policies and partly to the high cost of tackling problems in areas of special need and poor environment.

We believe the effectiveness of local authority spending programmes should be looked at. The region’s share of rate support grant should also be examined. A more radical definition of the “needs” element in the formula by which rate support grant is calculated would give West Central Scotland a fairer share of public funds