Amid the decline in road maintenance and the gradual loss of many of the nation’s libraries, the closure of public toilets has been one of the most remarkable symptoms of the financial travails of Scotland’s councils.
In North Ayrshire only a fifth of those open five years ago remain so. Clackmannanshire, which had one and has closed it and South Lanarkshire which has closed its 19 are more extreme, in percentage terms. On average 20 per cent of public loos have been lost and a third of the remainder across the country are under review.
That such an obvious necessity should be deemed expendable is startling. Campaigners at the British Toilet Association say it is a scandal, and a violation of human rights. That may seem extreme, and perhaps it is. After all, there are toilets in many cafes and fast food outlets, not to mention shopping centres and public transport hubs.
But the latter tend to require payment, while restaurants and cafes understandably try to restrict access to paying customers and shopping mall toilets are useless when the shops are closed.
While it may seem trivial to the young and able bodied, the lack of a public toilet can be anything from a hindrance to an insurmountable barrier to a trip for parents with babies, and the old or disabled. The lack of them exacerbates the nuisance of public urination and makes life difficult for the tourists who make a significant contribution to our economy.
Schemes encouraging shops businesses to make their loos publicly available, and Network Rail’s plans to drop charges in stations are both helpful developments.
But the obvious benefits to the wider health of our communities and the cleanliness of our public spaces make it inexplicable that unlike schools, roads or waste disposal, public toilets have historically always been an optional extra for councils. It is clear local authorities face difficult choices. But like an increasing number of forced council cuts this seems like a false economy.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel