Tensions rise on future engagement over Nairn Common Good Fund
Register for free to read more of the latest local news. It's easy and will only take a moment.
The creation of a group aimed at engaging the community in Nairn in the management of the area's common good assets is progressing – despite a recent consultation sparking a row over its role.
In October last year, proposals for a Nairn Common Good Fund Engagement Group were presented to Highland Council's Nairnshire area committee, after which a consultation was carried out.
With the appointment of a Common Good Fund officer – the role being a first for the council – the group aims to set a new model to bring communities on board, after community councils expressed the need for the community to have a stronger role in the Common Good Fund in Nairn.
However the results of the consultation over the proposed draft framework revealed strong discontent from those who replied.
Among the main concerns highlighted were the membership of the group – which for most should be exclusive to inhabitants of the Royal burgh – as well as the number of times the group would meet (currently set at twice a year) plus the effectiveness of the group when it comes to the decision-making process.
One of the responses to the consultation stated: "The group should be community-led and not driven by Highland Council officers.
"Whatever the agreed decision of the group, ward members are obligated, as elected representatives of the Nairn community, to carry out the agreed decisions of the group, including ensuring that all questions and concerns raised either verbally or through correspondence with Highland Council are answered in a timeous, open, transparent and meaningful manner."
In their response, a Nairn West and Suburban Community Council spokesperson said they were "considerably disappointed" by the proposal.
They continued: "We have been promised a community common good engagement/management group for over a decade. Now in December we have been asked, with no meeting to the end of January, and three weeks response time to get together and formulate a response. This is absolutely inappropriate and disrespectful."
But according to Highland Council the forming of the group would be on a consultation-basis only and not acting as a decision-making body – with the final say remaining with the four councillors in their role of trustees for the common good.
The results of the consultation – which were released only a few hours ahead of the Nairnshire Area Committee meeting last Monday – sparked concerns among councillors present at the meeting.
Councillor Paul Oldham said he had found some of the comments "depressing" – including statements which he said were "incorrect, misguided and even defamatory".
He said: "I think this group could have been a valuable resource to help us, as legal custodians of the common good, make the best decisions for Nairn and indeed we already have some issues which we would have liked to discuss with the group before we made a decision, but I suspect we will instead spend hours going over old ground rather than looking forward.
"I still fear that the negativity of some and overwhelming desire to continually revisit the past again and again and again will result in the group being a waste of time for all concerned."
Nairn Provost Laurie Fraser agreed and shared his fears that the group might find itself in a "mighty bun fight" during initial meetings.
Councillors agreed the group would go ahead for a period of two years – with a review after the first 12 months to assess whether to continue.
