Stuart McMillan SNP MSP for Scotland West, has today (Wednesday) raised the issue of the future of the Navy Buildings in Greenock with the UK Government.
In a letter to the Ministry of Defence, Mr McMillan has asked the Secretary of State for Defence, Philip Hammond MP, what plans are being discussed or in-place for the future of the the buildings.
Stuart McMillan, who campaigned persistently to save Clyde Coastguard from closure – this service was based in the navy building – says: ‘It is apparent to me that since the May 2007 document was published, ‘Study into the Future of the Navy Buildings Greenock Site’, under the previous UK Labour Government, the future of the Navy Buildings was in doubt as were the various services, including the Coastguard within it.
‘I have campaigned strongly against the closure of Clyde coastguard as I believe the decision to close the base is both reckless and potentially dangerous.
‘Nevertheless, the decision has been taken to close the centre and I am writing to the UK Government to ascertain what plans the Ministry of Defence has for future use of the building.
‘Therefore, I believe it’s vital the building has a future, and steps must be taken to secure the facility with the hope of creating employment opportunities for the people of Inverclyde and the West of Scotland.’
The navy building is not only large, but, on its own headland with a lovely, sloping shingle beach below it, dominates the coastline between Gourock and Greenock.
It is a dominant and substantial building.
Whatever happens to this building – and its site – will be important for the economic regeneration of Inverclyde – and while this is particularly the case for Greenock and Gourock, it is possible that, depending on the specific nature of its future, it could have a bearing on relationships with Dunoon in Argyll. The Argyll Ferries passenger ferry between the two town centres of Dunoon and Gourock creates good mutual access.
Mr McMillan’s intervention on this issue is a timely one.
Yes, what plans do the MOD have for this building, and what good do they intend to deliver for the area.
Hopefully, their plans are not a secret, and hopefully their plans will be something that will help the area.
Stuart McMillan as a local MSP is right in raising this issue.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I have always suspected that the site was one of the reasons for the closure. It must be very valuable building land, Other users could just move any empty office building.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The national spatial strategy of the Scottish Government on Independence would suggest that these buildings will house one of the state agencies which will be repatriated to Scotland the cost of which we already pay for through our taxes.
However given the Unionist scorched earth policy to destroy as much of Scotland’s public
Assets such as our defence forces in Scotland I would think the UK government will try and sell the facility as soon as possible to ward of the UK sequestration for a month or so
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
‘Unionist scorched earth policy’ – paranoia or what?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yes, why the rush by the MOD to do something now with a building that has been under utilized for some time now. The MOD must declare what they intend to do with this asset, which should be used for the benefit of the area and Scotland. Stuart McMillan is bang on the money asking for answers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
From the UKBA post – “Mr McMillan’s intervention is timely and constructive. ”
From this post – “Mr McMillan’s intervention on this issue is a timely one.”
Has FA changed hands?!
Willie – may I correct your post – this building should be used to the benefit of the British people- it’s not the property of ‘Scotland’. Do you not realise that? Worth remembering those in England, Wales and Northern Ireland own this building as much as anyone else.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Quite right Jamie.
These SNP sycophants with their constant brown-nosing of the SNP MSPs SNP/policy is blantantly rehearsed political propaganda and is somewhat vomit-inducing.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
jb/s/rw. Well boys wot would you like to happen to the buildng. Constructive comment if we could with nae frothing at the mouth in an explosion of yoonyinist indignation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It’s a solidly built and well maintained office block of the 1940s/50s War Office style; it’s no great masterpiece but I’d miss it if the bulldozers were allowed in, so continued use as an office would be best, or conversion to flats if that’s not viable. Its preservation is definitely preferable to anything any developer is likely to build in its place.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
As things stand, i have no preference, why would i? If they use it for government or MOD offices, great. If they sell and convert to flats, lovely. Short of a powerstation, supermarket or another sewage works, i’m not bothered. There, managed it without frothing!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It would be interesting to have the boating fraternities point of view as to what is now accepted practice but as closure has taken place I wonder if any entrepreneur would consider conversion of the building into a hotel. It is a magnifiscent site with many attributes to please the senses. It would help to stimulate the tourism industry and bring employment. Anyone with a wad of cash looking for an investment?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0