Scottish castle hotel where Nelson Mandela stayed for sale
Graham + Sibbald is marketing the Shieldhill Castle Hotel, Quothquan, Biggar. Mr Mandela stayed there in 1997 during the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting.
The agent said: 'A house has stood at Shieldhill on its present site overlooking the Clyde Valley and Lanarkshire hills, for over 800 years. It originally dates back to 1199, and parts of the original remain, but it is the 18th and 19th Century additions to the main property that predominate. The house has been occupied since 1560, mainly by the Chancellor family, who it was that sold the property in 1959. It was then that Shieldhill metamorphosed into hotel use.'
The hotel has spaces available for a variety of uses. (Image: Graham + Sibbald) Graham + Sibbald said: 'There is an attractive range of public areas, in the hotel, to suit a variety of uses and guests and there is a marquee for weddings and functions.
'Externally, the hotel boasts tranquil tree lined grounds of 6.5 acres with lawns and an ornamental pond; plus the 'Nelson Mandela' tree commemorating his visit in 1997.'
Alistair Letham, a hotel and leisure consultant with Graham + Sibbald, said: 'Shieldhill has been a feature in the country house hotel sector, in Southern Scotland for many years. The availability of Shieldhill Castle Hotel presents a wonderful opportunity to acquire an established country house hotel, in good order, with excellent business development prospects.'
Graham + Sibbald is inviting offers around £1.5 million.
Results are in from The Herald Scottish Golf Survey
Some surprising findings have been uncovered in the first-ever Herald Scottish Golf Survey, with custodians of the country's courses sharing their views on finances, governance, the challenges they face and the opportunities that lie ahead.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
2 hours ago
- BBC News
Spending Review: The Labour government must escape its own shadow
The strategising and multi-year planning going on ahead of this week's Spending Review is the bread and butter of any well-run economy.A Spending Review shows how resources are being allocated between departments and so indicates the government's "when-push-comes-to-shove" priorities. But this time it will be a "different sort of Spending Review", the chancellor's helpers are because with the new government nearly one year old, this Spending Review is also a one-off opportunity to show the private sector and international investors that it has a confident, deliverable having tiptoed cautiously throughout its first year in office, the question is whether this government can convince those potential investors that the economic vision is real? And will other long-term challenges, such as industrial energy prices, social care costs, and worker illness be prioritised or parked? 'Stop playing tiny domestic politics' Some chief executives tell me they cannot fathom why a government with such a huge majority can sometimes appear to be scared of its own shadow. There had been talk of Downing Street "wanting to have fights" over planning for major projects. But companies that have major investors waiting to invest in the factories that could start rolling out the mass adoption of green technologies are wondering whether Downing Street really will back them, given the polls, and possible net zero backlash."They need to stop playing tiny domestic politics," one boss of a major consumer company told me, as he awaits a convincing solid vision. It is with big investors in mind that the chancellor's focus at this spending review has been on long-term capital spending - that's where the big numbers come in. The proportion of the country's GDP that is being earmarked for capital spending, is 2.7% on a five-year average. If that doesn't strike you as eye-watering, it's worth noting it will be at its highest sustained level for nearly half a century. It will be significantly higher than under Brown-Darling in 2010. In 2000 this number was 0.5%.Of course, allocating significant sums is not a guarantee that the money will be spent effectively, or even at all. Spending on capital is often subject to the rollercoaster of short-term government priorities. In a crisis it tends to be the first thing to get hacked back, because the loss of future buildings or roads or rail lines is less politically troublesome than cutting back a public service or, say, teachers' pay in the here and why under the chancellor's new borrowing rules, the money can at least be allocated to big capital projects. Her reforms to those rules - keeping them strict on day-to-day spending, but consciously allowing more space for long-term investment - were designed for this. The main goal being future growth. Time to 'rewire the state' Long-term certainty over the capital sums that are being allocated over the next week or so, could be a gamechanger. Private investment is more likely to follow if there are long-term plans in place, especially after so many years of political part of all this, the chief secretary to the Treasury is also announcing increases in spending on research and development. That is designed to boost science-led the marquee project for this announcement will surely be the long-awaited high-speed rail line between Liverpool and Manchester. It is a piece of infrastructure forged in the fires of the UK's industrial heritage, including the world's first inter-city passenger line, and of course Stephenson's Rocket, the original steam locomotive. Now, 200 years on from its launch in 1829, it may well be time for another industrial revolution, of sorts. But make no mistake, the government has still had to make some big choices, even within a more generous capital budget. Most of the increase in defence spending announced last week is in the form of capital spending. When the documents are published on Wednesday, it is possible that some other capital projects will have been squeezed to make departments have also reassessed spending from first principles, as part of a "zero-based" review. In theory there could be entire projects axed. There will also be a lot of "investing to spend less". Using the capital budget to invest in, say, AI scanners in the health service, in a way that ultimately is supposed to save money. The aim, ambitiously put, is to "rewire the state" and "get Britain moving". It is with this in mind, that the chancellor will promise the government has learnt the lessons of capital spending debacles, such as HS2. She believes that by waiting, and carefully preparing an infrastructure strategy, she is making sure the spending will go where it will most boost growth. Freeing up supply, for example in the planning system, is supposed to help the rebuilding boom, but without provoking inflation. The long shadow of Covid-19 Those new borrowing rules that freed up spending on big projects, also mean tight settlements on day-to-day travails of Elon Musk and Donald Trump show the challenges for G7 countries in managing public finances. And Labour are operating in an environment where some opposition parties are now advocating more radical surgery to the size of the state in the when it comes to public spending there is still the long shadow from the pandemic. Demand for acute services and benefits related to ill health and care, or special needs, is eating far into budgets for councils, schools and health. The public seems to expect more from the state since the pandemic, even if it does not want to stump up the taxes to pay for it. So budgetary pressures have not gone away. It is, right now, difficult to square extra welfare spending on winter fuel payments and child benefit, extra defence spending, and sticking to the chancellor's rules without some further tax rises in the growth numbers, and an upturn in confidence after the series of trade deals, could help make the numbers add up, but there are any number of economic uncertainties out there there have been some strained moments in negotiations with Cabinet colleagues, all parties have already negotiated a mini-Spending Review for this that is not to say the chancellor doesn't have to perform a massive balancing act: juggling demands to keep the short-term budget numbers adding up, while unleashing the long-term investment that could finally get the economy growing again. BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
Britain is heading for utter oblivion. Here is why
At the moment I feel like Britain has a confluence of problems. There is no one single issue which is damaging the nation; there are several. And from demographics to immigration, family background to welfare, these huge challenges are all reinforcing each other. Disastrous demographics Even if we do nothing to restrict migration, the UK's demographic outlook threatens to make this a miserable country in multiple ways. We are a rapidly ageing society with a collapsing birth rate; births hit a record low last year. If you go back 20 years and apply today's spending and tax rates to the demographics of 2004 – changing nothing else, that would give the Chancellor an extra £84 billion a year to play with, enough to cut the basic rate of tax by about 13p in the pound. Unless something is done, every budget will feel like an austerity budget. Taxes per person will go up; public services will crumble under the load of an old population. To counteract these trends with migration without fixing the underlying problem is impossible – you would require totally implausible and ever-accelerating amounts of migration to make up for it. Ultimately, you have to fix the hole in the boat rather than just try to bail out water faster and faster. But the direct fiscal implications are only part of the story. There's every reason to think an older population will mean a less dynamic economy. Japan gets many things right – their productivity growth is not at all bad. But, nonetheless, over the last 30 years growth in GDP per capita is worse than anywhere in the G7 except Italy – and this is just because so many people are retired. Ageing and the growing birth gap will change our society. More people will grow old without kids or younger relatives. The ONS says the number of women over 80 in Britain who have never had children will triple over the next fifteen years alone. We are on course to become a very lonely country. Demographics are the driver of history. Today, South Korea and Israel are both developed countries. But at current fertility rates every 100 Israelis can expect 210 grandchildren and the Koreans just 15. South Korea has created an economic miracle in my lifetime, but unless they fix this, that's basically the end of the country. If we in the UK had kept the same fertility rate we had in 2010, then for every 100 people we would expect them to have 92 grandchildren. But the rate is dropping sharply: at current rates it would be just 55 grandchildren. Gulp. Mass migration & breakneck social change Among private renters in Greater London, around a third are white British. In greater London's schools just over one in five school children are white British. The old conversations about 'integration' and 'assimilation ' don't really even make sense any more. In many places people cannot really integrate into the traditional majority culture because it doesn't exist any more. The effects of this are non-linear. Britain's political system has held sectarianism at bay for a long time, but the last election saw sectarian MPs elected and similar candidates come close in many other places. The local elections saw the victory of Azhar Ali as an independent in Rochdale, having been suspended by Labour for anti-Semitism last year. They also saw the election of Maheen Kamran – a young woman who pledged to 'end free-mixing' between men and women. Worries about a 'two tier' society are growing, driven by various forms of unequal treatment based on skin colour. The pace of change has been astonishing – around one in 60 people in the UK arrived in the country in the last year, and around one in 25 in just the last four years. The ONS predicts that all population growth will in future come from net migration, with deaths in the UK outnumbering births. Even before the recent migration boom, the 2021 Census found over a million people could not speak English well or at all. Near where I live, English was not the main language of 30 per cent of people in Leicester back in 2021; in several London Boroughs the figure was even higher. Oikophobia and the undermining of anything we can unite around What we really badly need in the face of such unprecedented changes is a really strong, confident, unifying national culture that people can assimilate into as much as what we have got is the very opposite. Most of Britain's cultural institutions are locked into a highly self-hating mindset. On Remembrance Sunday 2021, the Imperial War Museum in London allowed a rap group to perform a piece criticising Winston Wellcome Collection in London closed its 'Medicine Man' exhibition, which displayed objects collected by Henry Wellcome, after declaring it 'racist, sexist, and ableist.' The Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford removed its display of shrunken heads and other ethnographic artefacts from public view, citing their role in perpetuating 'racist stereotypes' about indigenous cultures. The Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge updated its exhibition labels to highlight issues of 'racism, sexism, and class disparity', while the National Trust has done similarly across its properties. There's an entire industry trying to make everything about slavery. Tate Britain's 'Hogarth and Europe' exhibition included a label for a William Hogarth self-portrait that suggested the chair he sat in, possibly made from colonial timbers, could 'stand in for all those unnamed black and brown people enabling the society that supports his vigorous creativity.' Jane Austen and William Shakespeare's old houses have been 'decolonised'. The Royal Institution's Faraday Museum introduced a display examining the 'racist,' 'slave-trading,' or 'problematic' links of celebrated scientists like Sir Humphry Davy. The Church of England has agreed to pay £100 million in slavery 'reparations.' This sustained campaign of demoralisation by cultural elites is also reflected in many educational institutions – and it's working. Young people have come to dislike Britain more than they did 20 years ago, and are more likely to think it racist, disunited and shameful. Social breakdown and welfarism More than 40 per cent of children of GCSE age live in lone parent households in Southwark, Lambeth, Islington, Lewisham, Hackney, Knowsley, Blackpool, Liverpool and Greenwich. There are whole groups for whom this is the norm: 63 per cent of kids from a Caribbean background were in lone parent households in 2021. And many two adult households are re-formed. In 2023, 46 per cent of first-born children aged 14 years old did not live with both natural parents – roughly twice the rate of the 1970s. Children are much more likely to have a smartphone than live with their biological father. Sometimes people split up. Sometimes that's better than not doing. But the dramatic growth in the number of families that split is a huge change. And it has lifelong consequences that start early. Among 5–10 year olds, 6 per cent of children with married parents experienced diagnosable mental health issues compared to 12 per cent of children with cohabiting parents and 18 per cent of children raised by a lone parent. Similar trends are apparent for school attainment, interaction with the criminal justice system and so on. Social breakdown interacts with welfarism, with arrows running in both directions: lone parent households are more likely to require welfare, and the welfare state incentivises social breakdown – the benefits system creates a strong couple penalty for those in work, which creates a strong incentive to live apart. The scale of the welfare problem is breathtaking. There are nearly half a million people living in households where no one has ever worked – this has doubled since winter 2020. There are almost one million young people not in education, employment or training. Around one in ten working age adults are not in work because they are unemployed or long term sick. 4.1 million people in England and Wales are on an incapacity or disability benefit – that's one in seven adults in the North East and Wales: the big thing driving up working age claims is the growth of various forms of mental disorder and fragility. We've gone from 2 per cent of 16 year olds claiming in 2002, to 8 per cent in 2023. That's about two kids in every average classroom. Historically, people have (unsurprisingly) got sicker as they age, but 16 year olds are now as likely to be claiming to be sick as 50 year olds. An ONS breakdown found that in 2022, nearly two thirds (63 per cent) of those aged 16 to 34 cited either mental illness or 'depression, bad nerves or anxiety' as their reason for being long term sick. The cost of this is accelerating – real terms spending on sickness and disability benefits is forecast to grow to £100 bn by the end of this parliament, up from £50 billion in 2008. Despite this, the present government has abandoned plans to tighten the Work Capability Assessment, which means 400,000 more people will be signed off as unfit to work. Despite promises of reform, the OBR notes that welfare spending will continue to rise overall, and since the Spring Statement the government has also announced plans to spend a further £3.5 billion a year removing the two-child cap on benefits. The Mental Health Culture, together with the shift to a smartphone-based childhood, is likely to accelerate this. Well-meaning people have created a culture in which young people are constantly prompted to worry about their mental health. Social breakdown and welfarism have a kind of momentum too. When I was in government, DWP officials used to say claims are contagious. People copy what those around them are doing. In many parts of the UK we are now several generations into self-reinforcing cycles of deprivation and dysfunction. A beached, hollowed-out economy The OBR's forecast for growth in living standards is pretty bleak, and got worse as a result of Rachel Reeves's first budget: there are numerous reasons for these problems – the growth of welfare; an unselective migration policy; bad demographics and an ageing society; the loading up of the struggling economy with costly objectives like net zero; issues with state capacity and the furring up of the economic arteries by excessive planning processes. 1 Amazingly, public services productivity fell from 1997-2010. It then grew to 2019, but the pandemic reversed this progress, meaning the ONS measure of productivity in 2024 was at 1997 levels. That's mindblowing stagnation. As well as failing on the basics, the UK seems to be poorly placed for the future. One reason countries in Asia have so dramatically caught up with or overtaken the UK in terms of living standards since the 1970s is that they have created a successful innovation-industrial ecosystem, and consciously aimed to grow their capabilities. In contrast, the UK has deindustrialised more than many other developed countries, struggles to scale successful companies, and has steadily lost the areas of technological leadership it had. Our research budget goes on academic stuff, mainly in universities, with excruciating bureaucracy, while Asia dominates the kind of applied, industrial research that leads to economic growth. You can see that in the way the UK's share of patent applications has collapsed – the graph below needs a log scale so you can even see the UK, but we file only one patent for every 16 the South Koreans do, even though South Korea is a smaller country. Even in 2021 China filed 123 applications for every one we did – and the gap is probably bigger now. Unless something changes, the future will be made in Asia, not here. The confluence But the really worrying thing is the confluence of all this – the way all these problems reinforce one another. Arrows run between them in all directions like a Jeremy Deller mindmap. Unless things change, the demographic crisis will doom the economy, and with it drag down the public realm – lower growth, less money for public spending, worse public spaces. Unselective mass migration creates a burden on the economy. The asylum system alone costs around £7 billion a year. Migrants move to poorer places, and many of the places that have had the most migration have the greatest problems with welfarism, social breakdown and the decay of the public realm. It is harder to create a sense of shared purpose when fewer people have much history in the country. A more divided society makes it harder to solve the other problems. Why come to, or stay in, such a country? Why fight for it when the chips are down? Elite cultural self-hate and two-tier justice pour petrol on the sparks of conflict that rapid migration and social change inevitably creates. Social breakdown and welfarism cramp the economy – welfare payments drain the public funds we need for investment in the future, while scuzzy places don't attract investment. The soft-touch welfare state helps to drive the worst kinds of illegal immigration and creates a more divided society. A faltering economy, meanwhile, makes it harder to do the things we need to do to tackle the demographic crisis. Weak growth compounds welfarism and erodes the public realm – from potholed roads to the urban streets that are covered in stickers and graffiti and smell of wee or weed. In a struggling economy the dynamics of a newly hyperdiverse society become more dangerous.
BBC News
3 hours ago
- BBC News
What will Spending Review mean for NI public services?
Next week the Chancellor Rachel Reeves will reveal the outcome of her Spending will allocate money to day-to-day public services for the next three will also set infrastructure budgets for the next four review will directly impact on what Stormont Ministers have to spend on public services in Northern Ireland. What do we already know? Last year Reeves set what is known as the "spending envelope" – the amount by which total government spending will change in a given spending is planned to grow by an average of 1.2% above the rate of inflation each year for the next three spending is planned to grow by 1.3% above inflation a year over the next four are much lower growth rates than this year and last year, reflecting the new government's "emergency" injection of cash into the health service and public sector pay Wednesday the Chancellor will break it down further, making allocations to each central government precise allocation of this money matters for Stormont's spending plans. Health vs Defence: Why it matters? More than 90% of what Stormont ministers have to spend comes from the Treasury through what is known as "the block grant."The increase in the block grant is worked out using a calculation known as the Barnett formula, which is based on the annual changes in UK central government departmental gives Stormont an equivalent spending increase for the size of the NI population, adjusted for the extent to which each service is services, like health, are almost entirely devolved but defence is not the government decides it is going to spend more on defence at the expense of other services that will have an impact on the amount of extra money in the Stormont simple terms: If the UK Department of Health sees its budget increase by £100m, then Northern Ireland would get approximately £3m the Ministry of Defence budget increases by £100m Stormont does not get anything extra. A bigger Stormont top-up? When devolution was restored in 2024 the government agreed a financial package which included an automatic top-up of any money awarded by the Barnett government was persuaded that the level of need in Northern Ireland means it requires spending of £124 per head for every £100 per head spent in Northern Ireland was funded below that level, the government said that in future every £1 that comes through the Barnett formula will now come with an extra will apply until the overall level of funding need is independent Fiscal Council has estimated that will be worth £815m over five government said the size of the top up could be reviewed if "independent and credible sources" provide that end the Executive commissioned a study from the economist Prof Gerry Holtham, an expert in the devolution of public BBC understands that his work has come back with a range of possible funding central estimates are £123 per head, for every £100 spent in England, if agricultural spending is excluded and £128 per head if agriculture forms part of the the Treasury is persuaded to accept the higher end of the range it will be worth tens of millions of pounds extra over the next five years. Softening the cliff edge? The devolution financial package also brought a large dollop of one-off UK government funding, largely to pay for public sector pay that creates a cliff-edge drop in Stormont funding of about £500m in 2026/27 when that short term money runs government committed to review "concerns about 2026-27 funding" at the Spending Fiscal Council has suggested options to tackle the cliff edge could include more one-off funding or setting a new, higher baseline for Stormont's it is also possible that the normal operation of Spending Review will allocate enough money to largely remove the cliff edge. Casement Park breakthrough? The Chancellor will be allocating trillions of pounds in the Spending Review but it is a tiny fraction of that which may have most political impact in Northern is a growing expectation that the UK government will come up with additional money for the construction of a new GAA stadium at Casement Park in project has been bogged down in labyrinthine planning and funding GAA official leading the project has told the BBC he is cautiously optimistic that the Spending Review will include a new financial contribution for the redevelopment project.
