West Lothian disabled veterans facing eviction 'must be offered new homes'
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info
The Conservative leader on West Lothian Council has called for disabled veterans facing eviction to be offered a home for a home.
Linburn estate at Wilkieston has been home to tenants of Sight Scotland Veterans – formerly Scottish War Blinded – for decades.
The decision to sell off large parts of the estate for housing development affects a total of 13 residential properties on the site, including seven veterans with vision impairment and six private tenants.
Conservative group leader and ex-RAF serviceman Councillor Damian Doran-Timson told the Local Democracy Reporting Service said he understood the financial problems the charity faced but was 'dismayed' at the sell-off plans, and called on it to reconsider.
'I met with Sight Scotland last week and listened to their views and whilst I believe they do need to look at revenue and income, I request they look at any other options they may have.
'As part of the sale to a developer, I ask the charity to include the clause that like for like houses are built for those that currently live at Linburn and the developer/housing association manage the properties that the current residents are in.'
The charity has told residents to find new homes within a year as it revealed plans to sell the land for development.
It comes after Sight Scotland Veterans faced losses of more than £18m over the last four years.
The charity stressed it was working with residents and no one was facing immediate eviction.
Veterans said they fear spending the rest of their lives on the housing waiting list which already has around 11,000 names.
West Lothian Council confirmed that no plans for development had been lodged.
The news earlier this week prompted the Leader of the Council Lawrence Fitzpatrick to write to the Secretary of State for Defence, John Healey, asking him to "intervene immediately and help these veterans".
Councillor Doran-Timson also called on Sight Scotland help the Military Museum Scotland, located on the estate, to relocate if it has to.
He added: 'As I have been for a number of years, I am still pressing the council to also identify land in West Lothian that can host the Military Museum.'
Founder and curator of the museum, Ian Inglis, told the LDRS that the letter from Sight Scotland had been ' a bit of a shock' but was not unexpected.
(Image: Military Museum Scotland)
And he vowed: 'Military Museum Scotland will not close and we will continue our work with veterans.'
He said: "There is no guarantee that housing will be built there, however it has been on the council's Local Development Plan for over 10 years.
'All I have been told is that we have about a year to leave as the land is being sold to help fund Sight Scotland.
'If we were to move out in a year, I think we would have to close the museum now and start packing. That is out of the question as we have bookings right up to the end of the year, and I will not disappoint anyone by cancelling their booking.'
Mr Inglis added: 'We have needed a much larger premises for years, we have been looking, but now the pressure is on. There is a place out there with our name on it, we just have to find it. We will be officially launching our campaign next week to try and find somewhere and to raise funds to help with a move.
'Sight Scotland veterans have to do what they have to do to survive as they do great work helping and supporting veterans, as we do.
' It's just a shame that they feel the need to evict veterans from their homes and to evict another Veterans Charity to do that.'
Craig Spalding, Sight Scotland Veterans Chief Executive, said: 'Selling the land will secure the financial future of the charity. However, it will mean that the existing housing on the site will need to be demolished.
'We recognise that we have a duty of care to the existing tenants and are committed to finding each tenant alternative living arrangements that are as good as, if not better than, their current accommodation.
'The proceeds from this sale will enable us to continue providing life-changing support at our Linburn Centre, as well as preserving and strengthening the essential services we provide across the country.'
Mr Spalding added: 'We recognise that this decision will unfortunately impact current estate tenants, including veterans with vision impairment, and have extended the notice period to a full year. We wish to make it clear that no one faces immediate eviction.
'The charity is committed to working closely with each tenant to help them find suitable alternative accommodation and minimise disruption by offering personalised support through our Financial Well-being service. We informed the tenants of our long-term intentions at this stage; in order to start a conversation with each tenant to understand their specific needs so we can support them effectively.'
Councillor Fitzpatrick told the LDRS: 'This must be a very worrying time for the veterans and their families and it is very upsetting to hear that they are being faced with such an uncertain future at Linburn, along with the museum and veterans centre who do a wonderful job.
'I have written to the Secretary of State for Defence and the Ministry of Defence to ask them to intervene immediately and help these veterans. It cannot be left that veterans – who have proudly served their country – are left facing eviction from a community that they belong to.'
A council spokesperson told the LDRS: ' The council has not received a planning application or granted consent for the redevelopment of the veteran's village at Wilkieston. However, we are preparing a new Local Development Plan .
'Through the 'call for ideas' part of this process we have been made aware by Sight Scotland that they wish to dispose of this site for market and affordable homes.
' We are currently reviewing all proposals submitted to the 'call for ideas' to see if they are suitable for development. A proposed plan will be published in due course.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
an hour ago
- Scottish Sun
Shamed ex-SNP chief Derek Mackay working with firm behind controversial Flamingo Land development
Plans for the multi-million pound Flamingo Land resort have recently been put on ice SLEAZY DOES IT SLEAZY DOES IT Shamed ex-SNP chief Derek Mackay working with firm behind controversial Flamingo Land development Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) SHAMED ex-SNP minister Derek Mackay has been working with the firm behind the controversial Flamingo Land development. Mackay disappeared from Holyrood in February 2020 after The Scottish Sun revealed he had been pestering a 16-year-old schoolboy with creepy text messages. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 3 Shamed ex-SNP minister Derek Mackay is understood to be advising the firm behind Flamingo Land plans Credit: PA 3 Flamingo Land proposals include a waterpark, monorail, more than 100 lodges, and a waterpark Credit: Lomond Banks It has now been revealed by the Daily Record that the former minister had been advising on the plans for the multi-million resort on the banks of Loch Lomond. Flamingo Land proposals include a waterpark, monorail, more than 100 lodges, and a waterpark in Balloch, Dunbartonshire. The controversial project has divided opinion, and the national park authority rejected plans last year. However, last month the Scottish Government overturned a refusal decision, but the development was recently stalled over "environmental concerns". Mackay is understood to have been advising Lomond Banks. Speaking about the former politician's involvement, a spokeswoman told the Daily Record that Lomond Banks "works with a range of specialists and advisers". A Scottish Government spokesperson said: "The Scottish Government has had no contact from Derek Mackay on this." They also denied claims of any contact. Concerns have now been raised over Mackay's role - who was previously a planning minister. Labour MSP Jackie Baillie said: 'It is extraordinary that Lomond Banks appears to have employed Derek Mackay as a consultant. John Swinney defends Gray's car use after minister was 'driven to pub' 'As a former SNP planning minister, questions need to be asked about whether he used his old party contacts to influence the outcome of this planning application.' Mackay left the SNP in March 2021 after The Scottish Sun revealed he had bombarded a schoolboy with 270 online messages. In the sleazy messages Mr Mackay called the lad 'cute' and invited him out for dinner, six months after contacting him out of the blue. In February, he set up Lochan Associates Ltd, which Companies House says offers 'management consultancy activities other than financial management'. Plans for the multi-million pound Flamingo Land resort have recently been put on ice. It comes days after the Scottish Green Party claimed more than 50,000 people have written to the Nats ministers demanding that the controversial theme park be scrapped. Their MSP Ross Greer said Planning Minister Ivan McKee must "listen to the public".
South Wales Argus
4 hours ago
- South Wales Argus
Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows
The Office for Students (OfS) gave examples of how universities and colleges should respond to scenarios surrounding freedom of speech in its guidance published on Thursday, including around protests, investigating staff and student complaints and ensuring speakers are not stopped from expressing their ideas or opinions. It comes as the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act, passed under the previous Conservative government in 2023, imposes a duty on institutions to secure and promote freedom of speech so long as it is lawful – a duty which comes into force in August. In its guidance, the OfS said: 'Higher education providers and constituent institutions should have a high tolerance for all kinds of lawful speech. 'There should be a very strong presumption in favour of permitting lawful speech.' The guidance stated: – Academic staff should not be constrained or pressured in their teaching to endorse or reject particular value judgements. – Policies that regulate protests and demonstrations should not restrict these activities because they express or support a particular viewpoint so long as it is legal. – Institutions should not encourage students or staff to report others over lawful expression of a particular point of view. – The starting point of investigating any complaint relating to speech should be that lawful speech will not be punished because of a viewpoint that it expresses. – Providers must take steps to secure freedom of speech for visiting speakers. A speaker who has been invited to speak should not be stopped from doing so on the grounds of their ideas or opinions. The OfS made clear that it 'will not protect Holocaust denial'. The guidance was published alongside a survey, conducted on behalf of the watchdog by YouGov, which revealed a fifth of academics (21%) feel 'not very free' or 'not at all free' to discuss challenging or controversial topics in their teaching, with almost a quarter (24%) of those citing fear of physical attack. The percentage of those who do not feel free to teach controversial topics rises to a third for academics from ethnic minority backgrounds while female academics are more likely than their male counterparts to say they do not feel free discussing such topics in their teaching, research, speaking engagements or on social media. The survey, undertaken by 1,234 respondents between March 15 and April 19 last year, also showed that the most common topic academics feel restricted in discussing is sex and gender, followed by race and racism. Twenty-eight per cent of participants said their university has become less tolerant of a range of viewpoints during their tenure. Just under half (46%) think their university would prioritise freedom of speech over not causing offence, while two-thirds (67%) believe their university would prioritise staff and/or students feeling safe over freedom of speech. Arif Ahmed, director for freedom of speech and academic freedom at the OfS, said: 'The core mission of universities and colleges is the pursuit of knowledge. Free speech and academic freedom are fundamental to this purpose. 'Students need to know that they can freely share lawful views and opinions, and be prepared to hear a range of views as part of their studies. This includes things that they may find uncomfortable or shocking. 'By being exposed to a diversity of academic thought, students will develop their analytical and critical thinking skills.' OfS chairman Professor Edward Peck, told MPs earlier this year that the watchdog's role in defending freedom of speech on campuses is 'absolutely crucial'. 'Universities, colleges and other providers should be places where ideas can be explored, examined, challenged, or disagreement can be facilitated. Where new viewpoints can be discovered,' he said. 'It's crucial – without that I don't think we'd have a university sector which would be the envy of the world as it is now. So that's my starting point.'
Leader Live
8 hours ago
- Leader Live
Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows
The Office for Students (OfS) gave examples of how universities and colleges should respond to scenarios surrounding freedom of speech in its guidance published on Thursday, including around protests, investigating staff and student complaints and ensuring speakers are not stopped from expressing their ideas or opinions. It comes as the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act, passed under the previous Conservative government in 2023, imposes a duty on institutions to secure and promote freedom of speech so long as it is lawful – a duty which comes into force in August. In its guidance, the OfS said: 'Higher education providers and constituent institutions should have a high tolerance for all kinds of lawful speech. 'There should be a very strong presumption in favour of permitting lawful speech.' The guidance stated: – Academic staff should not be constrained or pressured in their teaching to endorse or reject particular value judgements.– Policies that regulate protests and demonstrations should not restrict these activities because they express or support a particular viewpoint so long as it is legal.– Institutions should not encourage students or staff to report others over lawful expression of a particular point of view.– The starting point of investigating any complaint relating to speech should be that lawful speech will not be punished because of a viewpoint that it expresses.– Providers must take steps to secure freedom of speech for visiting speakers. A speaker who has been invited to speak should not be stopped from doing so on the grounds of their ideas or opinions. The OfS made clear that it 'will not protect Holocaust denial'. The guidance was published alongside a survey, conducted on behalf of the watchdog by YouGov, which revealed a fifth of academics (21%) feel 'not very free' or 'not at all free' to discuss challenging or controversial topics in their teaching, with almost a quarter (24%) of those citing fear of physical attack. The percentage of those who do not feel free to teach controversial topics rises to a third for academics from ethnic minority backgrounds while female academics are more likely than their male counterparts to say they do not feel free discussing such topics in their teaching, research, speaking engagements or on social media. The survey, undertaken by 1,234 respondents between March 15 and April 19 last year, also showed that the most common topic academics feel restricted in discussing is sex and gender, followed by race and racism. Twenty-eight per cent of participants said their university has become less tolerant of a range of viewpoints during their tenure. Just under half (46%) think their university would prioritise freedom of speech over not causing offence, while two-thirds (67%) believe their university would prioritise staff and/or students feeling safe over freedom of speech. Arif Ahmed, director for freedom of speech and academic freedom at the OfS, said: 'The core mission of universities and colleges is the pursuit of knowledge. Free speech and academic freedom are fundamental to this purpose. 'Students need to know that they can freely share lawful views and opinions, and be prepared to hear a range of views as part of their studies. This includes things that they may find uncomfortable or shocking. 'By being exposed to a diversity of academic thought, students will develop their analytical and critical thinking skills.' OfS chairman Professor Edward Peck, told MPs earlier this year that the watchdog's role in defending freedom of speech on campuses is 'absolutely crucial'. 'Universities, colleges and other providers should be places where ideas can be explored, examined, challenged, or disagreement can be facilitated. Where new viewpoints can be discovered,' he said. 'It's crucial – without that I don't think we'd have a university sector which would be the envy of the world as it is now. So that's my starting point.'
