A TORY-led council has been criticised after voting to permanently close a third of public toilets in the region – a plan some elected members apparently heard about via social media.
Scottish Borders Council (SBC) voted 23 to nine not to reopen 14 facilities closed at the start of the Covid pandemic despite calls for a public consultation and more explanation to justify the move.
The SNP’s Fay Sinclair proposed an amendment calling for more information, pointing out that some councillors learned of the plans through Facebook.
She said difficult financial decisions are having to be made by the council but still feels disappointed with the way it was handled by the Tory administration.
READ MORE: Andy Murray faces battle with wildlife campaigners over Cromlix plans
“It beggars belief that the executive member, Councillor [Simon] Mountford, described the permanent closure of 14 public toilets as ‘good news’,” said Sinclair.
“I don’t deny there’s a need to take difficult decisions in the current financial climate, but I’m really disappointed that my request for community consultation and a detailed rationale for each closure was voted down.
“I welcome an exercise to map both council-operated and other public access toilets, but feel this information should have been provided in advance of councillors being asked to make the difficult decision to close a third of facilities previously provided by SBC.”
The Tory-led administration is backed up by three independent councillors.
SNP councillor Aileen Orr spoke of the need for a new facility at Burnmouth after the previous toilet was taken out of commission by a land slip, saying it had created a problem with human waste in the popular tourist spot.
There was public opposition to the closure of the toilet at another busy tourist destination, St Marys Loch, with the council clarifying via social media that negotiations were ongoing with Wemyss and Marches Estates which owns the building to take over its running.
Earlier this year the council was slated for deciding to spend £50,000 on coronation celebrations for King Charles instead of helping foodbanks.
The council has been approached for comment.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel