» Chapter 3: Recent history of the Trust, and Royal Charters Page 1 of 5

Home Chapter 3: Recent history of the Subpages for Chapter 3:

Trust, and Royal Charters Recent history of the
Chapter 1: Andrew Trust, and Royal Charters:
Carnegie and “The
The boom times.
Glen”
The Trust survived two World-Wars, The
Chapter 2: Early Wall Street Crash, and the Great Depression that followed, and was in a
history of the Trust,
the Deed and Royal very healthy position when it celebrated its half century in 1953. In a
Charter publication to mark the event the Chairman William Dick boasted of the
vast property portfolio owned by the Trust which included three golf
Chapter 3: Recent
history of the Trust, courses, two athletic parks, five bowling greens, and other land including
and Royal Charters the Glen, totalling over 500-acres. The Chairman’s remarks were perhaps patronising when he
Chapter 4: Harvard blamed public apathy for the lack of concerts for exquisite music and lectures by eminent
business school and specialists. The elitist tones of the past Chairman however were accompanied by his willingness to
the Second
Supplemental
foot the bill for bringing such acts to Dunfermline, which according to him the “masses are not yet
Charter willing to absorb”.

Chapter 5: Is
Pittencrieff Park The start of hard times.
safe with a Trust Somehow between 1953 and 1975 the Trust suffered something of a financial collapse, and in
that can’t spell it?
1975 they petitioned the local authority, Dunfermline Burgh Council for help. The overtures made
Chapter 6: Reflection by the Trust to the Council amounted to a plea for a bail-out of the cash-strapped Trust. The
on how the Trust has council proceeded on the basis that at the current rate of investment return of £100,000 per
failed Carnegie and
the people annum the whole of the Trust’s income would be swallowed up in park maintenance in a few years
time. This matter was discussed by the Burgh Council over a period of months and at a
Chapter 7: Future
campaigns to oppose meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee on 28th January 1976 the Burgh Council agreed
commercial that over a period of four years from 1978/79 to 1981/82 the cost and responsibility of maintaining
development in the
Glen.
the buildings and the park be gradually transferred from the Trust to the Burgh Council.

Contact Form Bailed out by the Burgh.

On 1st and 16th November 1976 a Minute of Agreement between the Trust and the Dunfermline
Recent District Council was concluded which stated that because the Trust’s income was not sufficient to
Comments meet the cost of maintaining the Glen the Council would assume responsibility for this function and
TheMill on Chapter 7: would do so to the existing standard. The Council undertook this function in accordance with their
Future campaigns to
oppose commercial
powers under the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to provide “adequate facilities for social
development in the cultural and recreative activities”. The Minute also tied the Council to the terms of the Carnegie
Glen.
Trust Deeds in relation to the Glen.
john.lynne on Welcome
to Saveourglen.com
Trust act promptly when Council changes threaten 9-councillor representation.
jlowry on Chapter 7:
Future campaigns to The reorganisation of local government in Scotland which took place in 1975 created a
oppose commercial constitutional difficulty for the Trust. It was found that the right to appoint six and three
development in the
Glen. trustees which had previously been enjoyed by Dunfermline Town Council and Fife County Council
had not been automatically transmitted to their successor authorities, Dunfermline District Council
and Fife Regional Council.

The sixteen remaining trustees, representing the successors to those whom Mr Carnegie had
originally himself appointed for life, immediately decided that representation of the local authorities
should be restored, and for the interim period while a Supplementary Royal Charter was being
obtained they invited the two councils to send representatives who would be regarded as full
trustees in all but formal matters. On 6th February 1979 The Queen—via her Privy Council Office
granted the First Supplementary Charter, and the 9-councillor representation was set in stone
once more.

http://www.saveourglen.com/?page_id=9 20/04/2008
» Chapter 3: Recent history of the Trust, and Royal Charters Page 2 of 5

First Supplemental Charter restores Carnegie’s 9 Councillor representation.

The extent of the supplemental terms was limited to replacing the original trust deed requirement
that 6 members of the Burgh Council and three members of the School Board be trustees, with a
new requirement that the Chairman and five members of the Dunfermline District Council, and
three members (of whom not fewer than two be Councillors of Dunfermline wards) of Fife Regional
Council be trustees.

So when a change in the council structure had caused an anomaly that could have severed the
council link to the Trust had arisen, the trustees acted promptly, and made reparation by way of a
Supplemental Charter, which restored the six and three elected local authority representatives that
Andrew Carnegie stipulated should be on the board of trustees.

Andrew Carnegie—shrewd man that he was—by ensuring that 9 elected representatives of the
people of Dunfermline would always be on the Board of Trustees guaranteed that the people of
Dunfermline would always be represented on the Trust. Even if at some future date the nominated
Trustees were to become—unlike the original nominees that he had appointed—a cosy club.

The Dunfermline District and Fife Regional Councils were abolished on April 1, 1996 and replaced
with the current Unitary Council called Fife Council which to this day fulfills the role of local and
regional authority. Despite this radical change to the make-up of the local authority, and unlike the
supplement to the Royal Charter which accommodated similar change in respect of local authority
representation in 1979, no change was made to the articles of the Trust in 1996.

No new charter and six less members for Fife Council.

The changes to the membership of the Trust brought about by local government reorganisation in
1996 were not the subject of a Supplemental Charter but the changes were noted in the Annual
Report and Accounts of 1996. The report stated that the 6 Dunfermline and 3 Fife councilors had
ceased to be trustees when their councils ceased to exist on 31st March 1996. It was further stated
that Fife Council had appointed 3 councillors to serve as representative trustees from that
date onwards. So the 9 local authority trustees had been reduced to 3.

Whether this reduction in numbers in 1996 was the decision of the Trust or the Fife Council is not
clear–and Fife Council have little interest in restoring their numbers on the board of trustees–but it
fell to the Trust to amend their articles to reflect the local authority changes as they had done so
promptly when by accident the local authority representation of 9 people was jeoapordised in
1979. That the Trust did not do so is diametrically opposed to the wishes of the founder, in direct
contrast to the actions of their predecessors in 1975-79, and a serious omission on their part,
which renders the composition of the Trust at odds with the terms of the Royal Charter.

Trust money for the partnership that isn’t a partnership.

In November 2002 a group entitled the “Developing Dunfermline Partnership” headed by Dr
Alexander Lawson (also a member and past-Chair of the Trust) and aided by a grant of £10,000
from the Trust commissioned a report to “enable consultants to produce a Master Plan for all future
developments and initiatives in the Park over the next 10 years”. I have tried without success to
find out the nature/constitution of the “Developing Dunfermline Partnership” but other than the
mention it received in the Trust’s 2002 Accounts, the 10-year Action Plan, and press reports it
seems to have no status as a charitable body or otherwise. The press reports of 2002 call the
“Developing Dunfermline” group a steering group, with members drawn from 4 bodies, Fife
Council, the Trust, Scottish Enterprise Fife, and Dunfermline Town Center Management. In other
words the Trust awarded the Trust £10,000 to come up with an action plan, which not surprisingly
told them what they (and Fife Council who foot the bill for the Glen) wanted to hear.

A ten-year plan for prosperity.

In December 2003 the report entitled “Pittencrieff Park Action Plan -Executive Summary” was
completed. The title of the report suggested it had been prepared for Fife Council jointly by Scott
Wilson Scotland, Civil Engineers; James F. Stephen, Architects, and Keillor Laurie Martin
Partnership, Quantity Surveyors. However given that it was funded by Dr Alexander Lawson’s
£10,000 cheque from the Trust it can be assumed that the terms of reference for the report and
the report itself is the joint property of the Trust and Fife Council in all but name.

http://www.saveourglen.com/?page_id=9 20/04/2008
» Chapter 3: Recent history of the Trust, and Royal Charters Page 3 of 5

The report included a 10-year action plan which had been developed from a SWOT (Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) assessment of Pittencrieff Park prepared by Fife Council
and their partner agencies. The partner agencies are not named in the report and 10-year plan,
but it does mention that “the Park is a fundamental strand of the aims and objectives of the
Developing Dunfermline multi-agency partnership in seeking to regenerate and revitalise the
Dunfermline town centre.” It is apparent from the document, and self-evident that the Trust as
owners of the Glen were among the main players, and the Developing Dunfermline Group included
senior members of the Trust so the Trust were pivotal in setting the terms of reference and
commissioning a report into how the Trust should conduct its business with regards to the Glen.

The main points to come from the report and 10-year plan were that if the work recommended by
Scott Wilson and Co were to be undertaken, then a considerable amount of money would be
needed. The report and 10-year plan envisaged small cash contributions from Fife Council, Historic
Scotland, Scottish Enterprise Fife, Private Sector, and of course the Trust. However the main cost
out of the £8 to £8.5 million required was to be borne by a grant from the Heritage Lottery Fund
(HLF) who were expected to contribute £5 million.

Cash shortage is the problem for the Glen.

The report identified the main problem as being a lack of cash to spend on the Glen’s upkeep and
development. In this regard it identified the fact that Fife Council were bound by the terms of its
1978 Minute of Agreement with the Trust, but were looking to develop the operational performance
of the Park—which was considered a “resource asset”—because: “the Council faces increasing
pressures and constraints on both its capital and revenue funding capacities.” In other words the
Council was short of cash.

Selling land in the Glen would solve the cash shortage problem.
The report identified a possible way of raising revenue by a “rationalisation of the resource
assets—by partial land sale”. In plain term, sell off bits of the Glen to raise money.

Snag to selling land in the Glen.

Having identified a potential means of raising cash, the report also identified a snag in selling of
parts of the Glen. Namely: “under the terms of the current Royal Charter bequeathing the Park to
the people of Dunfermline, the Carnegie Dunfermline Trust is precluded from selling off any of the
Park land within the boundary walls.”

Possible solution to the snag—change the charter.

Having identified the problem, a possible solution and a snag which prevented money being raised
by selling parts of the Glen, the report then suggested a way round the snag and stated that the
Trust had explored the possibility of changing the Royal Charter to “allow a partial land sale or
lease to raise capital directly related to achieving new ways of utilising the asset (e.g. commercial
development activity)”.

The report stated that the Trust had sought Senior Counsel’s opinion on this course of action and
Counsel was of the view that as long as the commercial development was for the “enhancement of
the Dunfermline residents quality of life [it] would have a reasonable prospect of success”.

To qualify for HLF cash there is a need for Friends?

The 10-year Action Plan that was financed by a £10,000 grant from the Trust to Dr Alexander
Lawson (Trustee and ex-Chair of the Trust) wearing his Developing Dunfermline hat also came to
the conclusion that a group entitled “Pittencrieff Park Management” should be set up. The Action
Plan concluded that this group would draw its membership from Fife Council, Developing
Dunfermline, and the Trust. The Action Plan also stated that the Pittencrieff Park Management
Group would have (in line with HLF requirements) community assistance from a “Friends”
organisation. Coincidentally such a group, called Friends of Pittencrieff Park was formed at about
this time with Dr Alexander Lawson as Chairman and having other Trust board members including
Angus Hogg, on the board! Just to round it off the Friends of Pittencrieff had their office address as
the Trust HQ in Park Avenue, and have as their Secretary, Nora Rundell who also works in this
office as the CEO of the Trust.

Trust members dominate the Friends.

http://www.saveourglen.com/?page_id=9 20/04/2008
» Chapter 3: Recent history of the Trust, and Royal Charters Page 4 of 5

In late August 2005 the inaugural meeting of the Friends of Pittencrieff Park took place. The
meeting elected Dr Alexander Lawson as Chairman and four other Trust members were elected
to the board. This meant that of the ten person board five were members of the Trust and with
the Chairman’s casting vote would always have a majority. Perhaps not surprisingly the Friends
were glad to receive a grant of £8,000 from the Trust. Whatever else the Friends are they are
hardly the independent community representation that the HLF desires in their Parks for People
guidelines.

10-Year Action Plan and Report is for Executives and not the public.
All of the comments and recommendations in the Scott Wilson Report and 10-year plan were of
course confidential. This was a report prepared for the Executive of Fife Council and their “partner
agencies” and was not made available to the public. As a result the public did not know of the
pressures engendered by the 10-year report which resulted in the urgent need for the Trust to
change their remit to allow them to raise money from the Glen.

Secret moves to change the charter.

On Friday 29th July 2005 application was made to HM The Queen—via her Privy Council Office—by
the Trust for a Second Supplemental Charter. The people of Dunfermline were not told by the
Trustees that a drastic change to the nature of the original charter was being sought. Changes that
would allow the Glen to be considered as two separate entities, a core that could not be developed
and fringes that could be sold or leased for development—and a change to the requirement that
the local authority and school board appoint 6 and 3 members respectively or in fact any members
at all.

At the time of their application The Trustees had advertised their intention to seek the change as
the law requires in the July 2005 edition of The Edinburgh Gazette. This obscure publication is
solely concerned with legal notices and in the case of the Second Supplemental Charter did not
give any detail or hint as to the nature of the changes that were being sought. So even if some
eagle-eyed anorak had spotted the notice it would have told them nothing of the changes that
were being sought.

The Trustees in flagrant disregard for their duties as specified in the original and subsequent Deeds
and their obligation to carry the people with them had had not repeated this advert in the local
press. This is the norm with such matters and the Trustees were morally—and arguably legally—
obliged to do so.

Secret charter changes approved.

The Second Supplemental Charter sought by the Trust was approved on the advice of H. M. Privy
Counsellors and signed by the Queen on 24th August 2006. On 22nd September 2006 the Trust’s
2nd Supplemental Charter received the Great Seal of Scotland in Edinburgh, became law, and was
published.

Home Chapter 2 Chapter 4

Share This

Edit this page

Write a comment
Name:

E-mail:

Website:

Your comment:

http://www.saveourglen.com/?page_id=9 20/04/2008
» Chapter 3: Recent history of the Trust, and Royal Charters Page 5 of 5

Submit

© 2008 | Powered by WordPress | Contact Form | Logout

Theme design by Andreas Viklund and web hosting sources

http://www.saveourglen.com/?page_id=9 20/04/2008