This article appears as part of the Winds of Change newsletter.
The dramatic decision, yesterday, to reject the Lomond Banks development, frequently referred to as Flamingo Land Loch Lomond, could be seen as a statement not just on the proposal itself, but on the purpose of National Parks.
Though, in the run-up, and hearing itself, multiple issues were debated, much of the discussion and commentary from board members on the day fixed on what a National Park is for. Is it economic development, or conservation? Of course, National Park policy says they are there for both, and has an answer to the question of what happens when the two are in conflict, and that can’t be resolved, known as the Sandford Principle - and it’s that conservation wins.
MSP Jackie Baillie, and other local representatives, talked of jobs and traffic problems, as these were frequently the key issues in the Balloch and surrounding community. But the threads running through the board member comments, and the report produced by the National Park authority, which recommended refusal, was one of climate impact and biodiversity.
As board member Ronnie Erskine said: “Who is going to lead in nature restoration and biodiversity enhancement if it’s not a National Park?”
Climate resilience featured too, and the question of whether there was significant risk of flood in areas of the development was picked apart - as well as........