Welcome to Flamingoland
The desultory nature of Scottish and UK politics seems at a new low ebb. In a land where everything is for sale, all of Scotland feels like a Flamingoland.
In Balloch, on the shores of Loch Lomond, the community has stood up against the developer to oppose plans for a gigantic theme park that has been proven again and again to be completely inappropriate. The plans will mean an increase in traffic in an already congested area, undermine ancient woodlands, and turn public green space into a private holiday park.
The board of Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park unanimously rejected Flamingo Land’s application at a public hearing back in September 2024. But now Scottish Government officials have granted that appeal, overturning a democratic decision and dismissing the objections of over 174,000 people. It was most the objected to planning application in Scottish history.
Dr Heather Reid, convener of Loch Lomond and The Trossachs National Park authority board, said: “We stand by the reasons for the Board’s unanimous decision to refuse this planning application and it is deeply disappointing that the Reporter has taken a different view.”
The Balloch and Haldane Community Council said it was “deeply disappointed” in the Scottish government’s decision which it said “contradicts the expressed will of the community”.
A spokesperson added: “This is not just a bad planning decision, it is a fundamental failure of democracy and policy. This decision rides roughshod over the principles of community empowerment, environmental protection, and democratic accountability.”
The issue speaks to a wider malaise in democracy.
Elsewhere in Flamingoland, of the candidates for the upcoming Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, only the SNP and Reform are putting up their people for the television debate. What does this tell you about the moribund nature of Scottish politics?
The establishment parties at Holyrood have created such a widespread disaffection that a party like Reform UK, with no discernible Scottish policies at all is poised to make a breakthrough. A recent YouGov poll last week predicted that Reform UK would win three Westminster seats – Dumfries and Galloway; Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale, and Aberdeenshire North and Moray East.
The feeling of suffocating consensus that surrounds Holyrood is fertile ground for a party that postures as ‘insurgent’ while representing the interests of the very wealthy. Reform is afloat on the cash of the rich who have simply transferred their funds from the Tory party. Their entire brand is a myth and a lie.
As Gerry Hassan writes in The National: “UK society increasingly feels fractured and fragile, and Scotland is no exception. It should not be a surprise that politics increasingly mirrors this. A political earthquake of dissatisfaction and anger is shaking the West. And Scotland is not immune from this. Reform UK are on the march and the mainstream and unimaginative way that politics is done here, as well as at Westminster, is aiding its appeal.”
I think it is more than the “unimaginative” way that politics is done, as much as an inability for mainstream politics to respond to systemic problems that are intrinsic to the economic system we endure. We are facing systemic failure and collapse and the political parties have no coherent answers. This goes far beyond individual policy failures.
Now, many of the mainstream political parties are in a doom loop. Scottish Labour is failing because it has to stand up for policies foisted on it by the party leadership, which are indefensible. Now, according to some reports its coming failure will lead to Starmer’s removal, with the Scotsman reporting: “Reports suggest that Labour falling short of replacing the SNP at Holyrood next year and losing power in Wales could be a trigger for backbenchers to find a way to turf the Prime Minister from office.”
The Scottish Conservatives are in freefall, hemorrhaging support to Reform, their UK leader is a genocide-denying, dangerous laughing stock. Now, there is even talk of Boris Johnson returning to replace the beleaguered Badenoch. A poll earlier this week had them on 16% in fourth place, the lowest-ever vote share YouGov has recorded for the Tories.
Amid this atmosphere of toxicity and failure, ‘Flamingoland’ is a metaphor for Scotland’s predicament. We have an incredible, precious asset within the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park, for which Scotland is known the world over, but we are to throw that away for the approval of a theme park that the community doesn’t want. The incessant one-dimensional urge for tourism and growth trumps everything including: local democracy, expertise and the ‘planning process.’ This is, at least, consistent, with the capital already designated as a theme park, with the castle reduced to being an advertising hording [Edinburgh Disneyland].
Robin McAlpine explains the system of broken Scottish governance here: “The deal is simple; Ministers protect quangos and in return quangos protect Ministers. The politicians rubber-stamp all the deals that keep officials in post no matter how incompetent they are or how badly they’ve failed. In turn, the officials do everything they can to cover up the failures of the politicians.”
That the government should sacrifice the iconic beauty of Loch Lomond is a tragic testimony to the broken potential of Scotland and the corporate capture that has overtaken the public realm. How is it possible to be so short-sighted?
Not everyone has given up. Protest here to Save Loch Lomond – Take Action Now
We are supported only by our readers. We don't have corporate backers and we don't take advertising, so we rely entirely on your support.
Help to support independent Scottish journalism
the democratic issue either Flamingoland is that contrary to what you and others assume there has been no properly constituted referendum of local residents. No one knows the answer to that question.
Legally the proposed development is on all fours with the zoning which was established in a local plan in the 1980s and at every subsequent revision of that plan and the National Park Plan that zoning has not changed. As I understand it the zoning has never been challenged so why now?
To some extent nature or lack of stewardship has restored some of the area to a green spot. Previous politically convenient commercial developments have corrupted the general ambience. It’s looking tired but no one is proposing its demolition.
The decision should be left to the local residents.
The site is in a national park. That the plan zoning continued in the interests of Scottish Enterprise after the national park had been created is itself problematic.
From the perspective that the point of good government is the promotion and maintenance of Health (in the broadest sense), then we should call unhealthy proposals by their true names: maldevelopments. And not continue to use ‘developers’ and ‘development’ uncritically. The (majority, expressed) Will of human locals should not be a decisive factor (and they are far from the only inhabitants, now and in future), and neither should any other human interest.
#biocracynow
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation. Why will nobody stand up for us? Why are we apparently unable to stand up for ourselves?
Yet again, another decision that mocks and ignores due process. More wringing of hands and pointless petitions. It’s not just Loch Lomond – this is how it is right across Scotland (and across the UK) now. The so-called Scottish Government sit on their hands and do and dare to say nothing, and Scotland’s people are treated with utter contempt. But somehow, they get away with it. Just like Starmer. Like Trump. Like Putin.
It seems to me that Scotland is an absolute monarchy, a mere crown colony, where no public body or individual can be held to account at all. There is no actual democracy, no rule of law, or sovereignty of the people. And it’s entirely our own fault for letting it continue. perhaps we really are too wee too poor too stupid after all.
The only reason Reform will get votes next year is because – as in England -people will have been manipulated into voting for them as a kind of
protest. It is how fascism gets ‘legitimised’. Forget all human rights. The weakest go to the wall, the wealthiest laugh all the way to their offshore banks. And then the Reichstag catches fire. God help us all.
Who will stand for election in 2024 with the platform of (1) all must be equal before the law: i.e. abolishing crown immunity altogether (2) commitment to the Claim of Right – Scotland has an absolute right to self-determination. (3) Full incorporation of the ECHR into Scots law, legislation that states public interest always comes before private profit. (4) creation of a free and genuinely independent legal service and system that actually works and can successfully challenge authority?
There really is no end to this slippery slope.
Or do we just go on tut-tutting?
Elitist Scottish Nationalists bang on about self-determination, yet only do so because they want to submerge themselves into a globalist citizenship.
Instead of being decent sized fish in medium sized sea, they crave to be microscopic ones in an ocean.
The games up. Reform has awoken the sleeping giant. (OK, Big Yin maybe).
The SNP had years to prove itself, yet ultimately couldn’t decide what a woman was or get ferries built. No wonder they want the comforting apron of Nanny EU.
Elitist British Nationalists bang on about self-determination but they are the globalists. What is wrong with self determination? Like Norway? Like Iceland? Like Ireland? I’m no nationalist but self determination to me means just that. Genuine democracy and the rule of law are worth having. .
I couldn’t care less about the size of fish or the ocean.
The SNP have utterly betrayed Scotland. They are mere collaborators. Anyone who equates SNP with the Independence movement has been had for a fool,
Self- determination means the sovereign people of Scotland will decide their own future and not the SNP or anyone else
You could always ask Soros and the rest of his “Break up Britain” movement pals to stomp up the cash. After all, when it comes to rich influential friends, Reform can’t compete with the globalist Soros’s or Fink’s of this world. (NB Elon doesn’t back Farage anymore).
@SteveH, or the Sandhurst graduate, Rolls Royce enthusiast and patron of mercenaries Sultan of Brunei?
https://www.declassifieduk.org/brunei-britains-neo-colonial-oil-hub-near-china/
Farage is a Thatcherite, former stockbroker, English nationalist who supported Liz Truss’s budget. He offers the vast majority of Scotland absolutely nothing.
Regardless of how timid the SNP are, how disappointing Labour are, how woke the Greens are, how irrelevant the Lib Dem’s are they are still far less dangerous to Scots voters prospects and democracy in Scotland than Farage and his personal party/company.
Forgot to add that without Farage Brexit would never have happened. Brexit has cost Scottish voters financially and was supported by 1/3rd of Scottish voters and is even less popular now.
Farage certainly helped but there were others involved too. But Brexit, portrayed as English nationalism was really all about ‘Making America Great Again’ by dividing and ruling Europe – and the UK. The whole thing, all the flag waving and the rest was and still is completely American.
Farage is not a Thatcherite or an English nationalist. He is a fully signed up MAGA supporter and fascist who is paid for by American corporate money. Like all the others he will promise anything to get elected and then ignore everything he said. Of course he supported Liz Truss’s budget – she too was just another paid-for globalist puppet.
I agree that he offers Scotland absolutely nothing. He has nothing to offer anyone.
So what if the SNP, Greens, Lib Dems, Labour and even the Tories are far less dangerous to Scots voters prospects? Why does the choice have to be limited to them? Least worst is not good enough – in fact Farage is trying to capture the ‘least worst’ vote. It’s what fascists do.
Democracy and the rule of law , in my direct experience, is already dead in Scotland. And no-one will do anything about it.
As I have said many times before, we urgently need a new political movement – I won’t say a ‘party’ because I have become deeply cynical about the whole political party model. WE need someone we can vote for who has some credibility and is not ‘Neoliberal’. At the present rate we will soon find ourselves steered into the arms of fascism. Maybe not Farage himself, if his paymasters don’t think he’ll deliver for them, but whoever it will be – like Johnson, truss, Sunak, and Starmer – and apparently all the party leaders – a mere figurehead, a distraction, a pawn in their game.
Fascism is what this is about. I don’t want to live in a fascist country – whether that’s the UK or any other configuration. Is Iceland accepting political refugees?
Farage was a self confessed supporter of Thatcher and his philosophy originated out of the neoliberalism of Thatchet era.
He was banging on about Brexit when UKiP started up more than 20 years ago which predates MAGA.
He is an English nationalist and I would recommend reading Finland O’Toole’s article in today’s Irish Times about English nationalism.
Brexit was not only supported by MAGA in USA but by Russia as both intensely dislike EU for economic and geopolitical reasons.
Farage is at heart a populist who feeds of public discontent who will sway in the wind to attract votes. To understand any basic philosophy you must look at who his financial backers are and what their political outlook is id follow the money. They tend to be radical free market supporters who dislike any legislation which restrict their freedom to make as much money as possible.
I agree that we shouldn’t give other politicians a free pass because of Farage but we need a sense of perspective when criticising each party or you end up with they are all equally shite and the same and this only helps Farage.
Maybe I’m alone in this but this decision appears to have followed a pretty standard planning process, whether I like the outcome or not. The system is not a plebiscite, it allows for some control by councillors and that can be appealed, and in reading the Reporter’s decision I can’t see anything that meets the orbit it’s thrown some into.
But maybe I’m wrong, but the discretionary planning system is a legal process not a democratic process.
@Eoghandl, a legal process to what end? Democratic processes are often legal, although democracy is means-focused form of decision-making. All kinds of land-grabs have been legitimised in law, yet been hotly contested and widely viewed as theft.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure#Parliamentary_inclosure_acts
A legal process that delivers a plan led system.
But imo that plan is so broad it’s easy to do anything within it and Flamingo Land is a good example of it. Overturning local councillors, not agreeing with local residents are all in keeping with the design of the system. That 92% of planning applications are given permission is evidence either that we get great quality applications or the plans set a very low bar.
I find the planning system hard to respect but find it hard to see corruption in this case.
Agreed. Overruling democracy may be legal but that doesn’t make it acceptable.
And a lot of blatantly illegal things happen anyway – like refusing to accept objections to certain planning applications based on public / environmental health. And to certain favoured people and bodies the law clearly doesn’t apply at all.
The role of senior civil servants in manipulating the public appointments process to the advantage of chums, establishment interests, elite discourses and a neoliberal agenda is insufficiently appreciated.
Do you detect something anomalous in the reporter’s decision?
If only it were that simple…