“Alarm bells will be ringing” over village hall transfer concerns

A row erupted at Renfrewshire Council after councillors were presented with a list of community buildings that had attracted interest under community asset transfer rules which included village halls, pavilions and community centres across the area.

The heated debate took place during the Infrastructure, Land and Environment Policy Board on 27th May as councillors discussed a new £1 million council fund designed to support community facilities and potential community asset transfer (CAT) projects.

Community asset transfer legislation allows community organisations to apply to take over council-owned buildings or land, either through ownership or long-term lease arrangements, where they believe they can deliver community benefit.

The report included an indicative list of properties where enquiries or interest had previously been expressed. Among those listed were Foxbar Community Centre, Glenburn Community Centre, Elderslie Village Hall, Viewfield Park Pavilion in Lochwinnoch and several sports pavilions and community buildings across Renfrewshire.

The inclusion of some of the buildings immediately sparked concern among councillors, who warned residents could interpret the report as meaning valued local facilities were being prepared for transfer out of council control.

Councillor Chris Gilmour said: “When we look at the long list on page 134, it looks like Renfrewshire is up for sale.”

He added that people would want reassurance there was “a full process going through” before any decisions were made on local facilities.

Councillor Iain McMillan raised concerns after seeing Elderslie Village Hall listed in the report.

He said: “When people see the list and Elderslie village hall on it, the alarm bells will be ringing.

“They will say, for example, that it is a very busy hall and that there is a lot going on in it.

“The village is very proud of having that.”

Councillor Ben Smith said he was uncomfortable with some council-owned community facilities appearing on the list.

He said: “Some of them are clearly municipal assets that I would be more comfortable with remaining in council control.”

Councillor Eddie Devine added: “I find it disturbing that we might be getting rid of community centres, which are at the heart of most of our communities.”

Labour councillors argued the report lacked clarity over how the proposed £1 million fund would operate and exactly what stage buildings had reached in the CAT process.

Councillor Smith called for the report to be delayed for further explanation.

He said: “There are some grey areas.”

The discussion then escalated into a political clash between Labour and SNP councillors over the wider principle of community asset transfers.

Councillor Iain Nicolson defended the policy and accused opponents of misunderstanding the legislation behind it.

He said: “If Labour Party members suddenly decide that they do not like CAT transfers, that is their issue.

“We are dealing with the law here.”

Councillor Nicolson said the purpose of the funding was to help community groups overcome barriers preventing them from taking over buildings.

He pointed to examples where groups may struggle with repair costs, leaking roofs or accessibility problems before a transfer can proceed.

He said the funding could help make buildings suitable for transfer and support communities wanting to run facilities themselves.

Council officers repeatedly stressed the report did not mean buildings were automatically being sold, closed or handed over.

Chris Stark, the council’s facilities manager, told councillors the list was only an “indicative” record of properties where some form of enquiry or discussion had taken place.

He said: “In no way are we saying that every one of them is up for grabs.”

Mr Stark acknowledged the wording and inclusion of the list had caused confusion during the debate.

He said: “Clearly, from this discussion, I have not quite got it right, and I apologise for that.”

Officers explained that under community empowerment legislation, virtually any council-owned property can potentially become the subject of a community asset transfer enquiry.

The debate also highlighted wider tensions around balancing community ownership opportunities with concerns about losing publicly controlled assets.

Councillor James MacLaren questioned whether there were sufficient safeguards to protect facilities heavily used by the wider public.

He said: “The concern is to do with the legislation.

“For instance, the loss of community centres.

“As councillors, we need to know that the protection is there to stop the loss of a much-needed property.”

The disagreement eventually led to a formal vote after Labour councillors proposed continuing the report for further clarification.

The SNP administration’s motion to approve the report passed by eight votes to seven.

Full list: