
How a theme park became the most unpopular project in Scottish history
From the station at Balloch where the train from Glasgow terminates, it's a short stroll through delightful woodland to the famous 'bonnie banks' of Loch Lomond, Scotland. Yet during the walk, Lynne Somerville becomes more and more agitated.
'This,' she points out as a family walks past with a toddler in a pushchair, 'is where the monorail would run.'
'Here,' she says as two dog walkers amble by, 'are the trees that would be cut down to make room for the lodges.'
Where the woods end abruptly, a beach overlooks one of Scotland's finest and most recognisable panoramas: the vast expanse of the loch, stretching northwards to the towering peak of Ben Lomond. Fringed with hills as far as the eye can see, the water is dotted with kayakers, paddle-boarders, yachts berthed at a distant marina and cruise boats carrying tourists.
'And this,' Somerville explains, 'is where they want to build the hotel and water park.
'This place, this view... It's a national treasure. What they're planning here is just an act of vandalism.'
Her anger is directed at a divisive proposal by theme park operator Flamingo Land to build a holiday resort on the southern shores of Loch Lomond.
Known as Lomond Banks, the project has been described as 'the most unpopular planning application in Scottish history', after a petition against it gathered more than 155,000 signatures.
While it is only the latest attempt by business to capitalise on Loch Lomond's enduring appeal – the area has drawn mass tourism for more than 200 years – it is certainly the most controversial.
Planning permission was denied last year after the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park authority ruled the resort was incompatible with environmental and conservation policies.
But last month, a planning official appointed by the Scottish Government overruled that decision and granted the resort provisional approval.
Objectors – including Somerville, who lives nearby and sits on the local community council – are outraged, and are stepping up their campaign to block the development through political pressure and even the threat of legal action.
Inevitably, though, Lomond Banks also has supporters – who believe the £40 million project will deliver a much-needed boost to tourism, create jobs and attract investment.
With a final decision expected later this year, both sides have shared with The Telegraph their strong views on the subject – sparking a debate not only about Loch Lomond but also about the role of national parks and, more broadly, about how to manage development in Britain's scenic areas in a way that balances the often-competing aims of conservation and economic growth, the needs of local residents and the demands of visitors.
Billed as a 'world-class family tourism destination', Lomond Banks is being proposed by Flamingo Land, which also runs a theme park and zoo in North Yorkshire named after the brightly coloured birds that were introduced to the site when it opened in the 1950s.
After initial plans in 2018 were met with strong opposition, the company submitted new proposals in 2020 for a 'resort village' featuring a 60-room hotel, budget hostel with 32 beds and 100 self-catering holiday lodges.
The proposed resort would include a swimming pool, water park and spa, along with restaurants, a café, craft brewery and beer hall, plus picnic and barbecue areas – all connected by a monorail. It is set to be built in the village of Balloch, long regarded as the gateway to Loch Lomond.
Tourists first began flocking to the area in the 18th century, drawn by the romantic allure of Highland scenery. By the 19th and 20th centuries, it had become a popular escape for Glaswegians seeking respite from the city's industrial smog – just 25 miles away.
Fittingly, the proposed development would sit beside a striking symbol of tourism's evolution: the Maid of the Loch paddle steamer. In its 1950s heyday, the vessel carried up to 1,000 visitors at a time across the loch. Now retired and resting at the water's edge, it awaits long-promised restoration.
At present, the main draw in Balloch is the Loch Lomond Shores visitor centre, opened in 2002. It features a viewing platform, aquarium, shopping mall with cafés, outdoor clothing stores, gift shops and a small branch of Frasers – all set beside a sprawling car park.
The new resort would straddle this existing hub, with one half built in the wooded West Riverside area between the train station and the loch, and the other in the grounds of the ruined Woodbank House. The mansion would be restored to provide self-catering accommodation, surrounded by a cluster of holiday lodges.
Flamingo Land insists the resort would 'reflect its beautiful natural surroundings' and 'complement the scenic landscape'.
But the Balloch and Haldane community council argues the development would undermine the very qualities that draw visitors to the area.
Somerville explains: 'The company is trying to profit from selling Bonnie Scotland to the tourists. People have always come here for the scenery, to get away from the city and to enjoy nature and fresh air. But these plans would mean losing the essence of the place, destroying its character.
'Loch Lomond has a national identity – but that would be lost for ever, for the sake of a development that won't create value for local people and would buckle the area's infrastructure.'
The community council has warned the resort would make life a 'living hell' for locals, citing a dramatic rise in traffic and fears it would siphon trade away from existing hotels and restaurants.
Somerville adds: 'The resort is just too big. If it went ahead, it would completely swamp the village.'
Not all residents are firmly opposed. Some, like Debbie Savage – who runs a fitness business and walks her dog, Ruby, in the woods – remain undecided.
She says: 'There's a danger the area could be ruined if the development is too commercial or done in a way that isn't sensitive. I understand the need for investment, but it has to be done in a way that is mindful of local residents.'
Some, however, are firmly in favour – including Neil Mayles, who runs a business selling boats and marine equipment. He says: 'The national park authority hasn't always been the friend of business and enterprise, so something is desperately needed in the area to bring employment and investment. The planned resort would bring nothing but benefits.'
The developers are keen to emphasise that Lomond Banks would create hundreds of local jobs during construction, followed by 200 full-time, part-time and seasonal roles once the resort opens.
In overturning the national park authority's decision to reject the plans, the Scottish Government's planning reporter also concluded that the project could deliver 'locally significant' benefits in terms of employment and economic growth.
The company argues that those opposed to the development represent only a 'vocal minority'.
Jim Paterson, the project's development director, says: 'Our vision to bring about plans that create economic growth, investment, jobs and an infrastructure that will benefit the local community and beyond, is unwavering.
'The reality is that Lomond Banks has undergone extensive scrutiny. Following an independent and detailed review, the Government's planning reporter has issued a notice of intention to recommend our proposals for approval, recognising that they align with planning policy and will deliver significant public benefits. These include the restoration of the historic Woodbank House ruin, enhancements to biodiversity, and much-needed economic regeneration.'
Paterson insists the resort would encroach on just 280 metres of Loch Lomond's 153km shoreline, and says it would be 'sympathetically designed to reflect the scale, character and natural beauty of the area'.
Even so, fallout from the reporter's provisional approval continues. The National Park authority has described the decision as 'deeply disappointing' and says it stands by its original reasons for rejecting the plan. The Scottish Government, meanwhile, has declined to comment, stating only that the decision was made on its behalf by an independent planning expert.
Opponents have been far more outspoken. The Scottish Green Party has urged the SNP Government to 'put the natural environment ahead of corporate profit' and reconsider the ruling, while the local community council remains resolute in its campaign to block Lomond Banks.
Somerville adds: 'What's happened is grossly undemocratic. What's the point of having a national park authority with planning powers if the Government simply overrules it? As far as we're concerned, the future of one of Scotland's most beautiful places is at stake. This resort mustn't be allowed to go ahead.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
SNP ‘running down the clock' before losing power, claims Anas Sarwar
The SNP's 'balloon has burst' and John Swinney is 'running down the clock', Anas Sarwar, Scotland's First Minister, has said after Labour won a shock by-election victory. The Scottish Labour leader said his party's knife-edge win in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse contest showed voters wanted to oust the SNP from power in next year's Holyrood election. Labour's Davy Russell won the Scottish Parliament seat by 602 votes from the SNP's Katy Loudon, with Reform's Ross Lambie only 887 votes behind her. The Tories finished a distant fourth, barely saving their deposit, after their support collapsed. Mr Swinney was left humiliated by the loss of the SNP seat after repeatedly claiming the by-election was a straight fight between his party and Reform. Alex Neil, the former SNP minister, said the First Minister should resign. Speaking the morning after the victory, Ms Sarwar accused Mr Swinney of running a 'disgraceful campaign' that 'deliberately' encouraged people to vote for Reform. Mr Sarwar said the result demonstrated that next year's Holyrood election would really be a 'straight choice' between the SNP and Labour, with Reform merely a 'spoiler' who could not win power. But Prof Sir John Curtice, the country's most eminent psephologist, said Reform had achieved a 'highly creditable' third place by attracting a slew of former Labour voters. Writing in the Telegraph, he warned Nigel Farage's party risked 'severely denting' Mr Sarwar's hopes of being First Minister. Sir John also said Labour's performance, its vote share in the constituency declined, was 'well short of what is needed to demonstrate it is currently on course to win next year's Holyrood election.' He said Labour still managed to scrape victory thanks to a 17-point drop in support for the Nationalists, with independence supporters 'less forgiving than they once were of what many perceive as the SNP's poor record in government.' The contest was called following the death of Christina McKelvie, the Scottish Government minister, who won the seat for the SNP with a 4,582 majority in the 2021 Holyrood election. 'An outsider' in the contest Although Labour won the equivalent seat at Westminster by almost 10,000 votes in last year's general election, the party's collapse in support during the early months of Sir Keir Starmer's government meant it was viewed as an outsider in the contest. However, Labour insiders attributed their victory to Mr Russell's popularity locally and a strong get-out-the-vote operation that saw more than 200 activists travel to the constituency on polling day. Speaking at a press call in Hamilton town centre with Mr Russell, Mr Sarwar said he was 'confident' that he could replace Mr Swinney as First Minister in 2025. The Scottish Labour leader said: 'I think what we're seeing now is the running down of the clock. This is an SNP government that's lost its way, the balloon is burst, they are out of ideas, they are out of steam. 'They have no positive offer for the people of Scotland, they've got no positive record to put in front of the people of Scotland and they're running down the clock.' He said there was a 'lesson' for pollsters and commentators who believed Mr Swinney's claim that the by-election was a straight fight between the SNP and Reform, arguing they should stop listening to the First Minister's 'nonsense.' Pressed on Sir John's view that Reform's strong performance would make it difficult for Labour to win power next year at Holyrood, he said the psephologist was only looking at a 'snapshot' of a particular by-election. Mr Sarwar argued this approach ignored 'the general mood music and the general momentum of a campaign going into next year'. He added: 'On the ground, people believe the SNP are done. They are sick to the back teeth of think they're a busted flush. They want them out.' Sir Keir sent his congratulations to Mr Russell on his 'fantastic victory.' In a post on social media, the Prime Minister said: 'People in Scotland have once again voted for change. 'Next year, there is a chance to turbo-charge delivery by putting Labour in power on both sides of the border. I look forward to working with you.' Speaking in Edinburgh, Mr Swinney said: 'Clearly, we're disappointed that we didn't win last night, but we made progress in the election compared to the general election last summer, and we've got to build on that and make sure that we strengthen our support in advance of 2026. 'So the SNP made progress last night, but it's not nearly enough and we've got to build on that.' Asked if it was a mistake to call the by-election a 'two-horse race' between the SNP and Reform, he said: 'I called it the way I saw it.' The First Minister argued the Labour vote had collapsed compared to last year's general election and 'we saw the Reform vote surging, which it has.' But Mr Neil, who served in Alex Salmond's and Nicola Sturgeon's Cabinets, tweeted: 'Poor by-election result for the SNP despite having the best candidate 'It shows that the opinion polls appear wide of the mark. Most importantly, it shows the current SNP leadership needs to be replaced urgently.' The SNP under Mr Swinney was also routed in last year's general election. Labour won the by-election with 8,559 votes (31.6 per cent), despite its vote share declining by two percentage points compared to the 2021 Holyrood election result in the seat. The SNP finished second with 7,957 votes (29.4 per cent), a huge drop in support compared to 2021, when Ms McKelvie won 46.2 per cent of the popular vote. Reform finished third with 7,088 votes (26.1 per cent), which Sir John noted was 'well above' the 19 per cent support recorded in Scotland-wide opinion polls, despite the seat not being 'particularly fertile ground for Nigel Farage's party.' Richard Tice, Reform's deputy leader, attended the count and insisted he was 'delighted' with the result. He said it was 'truly remarkable', adding: 'We've come from nowhere to being in a three-way marginal.' But the result was disastrous for the Scottish Tories, who won only 1,621 votes. Their vote share declined from 17.5 per cent in the 2021 election to only six per cent. 'A very competitive political environment' Speaking ahead of next week's Scottish Tory conference in Edinburgh, UK leader Kemi Badenoch said: 'Larkhall is not the place where the Conservative Party fightback starts'. She said it was 'interesting' that Reform was 'causing problems for all parties' and noted that 'we live in a very competitive political environment.' Miles Briggs, the shadow education secretary for the Scottish Tories, said the party knew it would be a 'difficult' by-election and blamed 'protest voting' for Reform and Labour. He told BBC Radio's Good Morning Scotland programme: 'We know what that challenge is and we have no doubt of the fight that we have to take forward into the election next year.'


The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Liberty loses bid to bring legal action against equalities body
Human rights group Liberty has lost a bid to bring legal action against the equalities watchdog over its consultation in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling on gender. The UK's highest court ruled in April that the words 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex, after a challenge against the Scottish Government by campaign group For Women Scotland. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is consulting on proposed amendments to part of its guidance, after interim guidance was published last month related to trans people's use of certain spaces including toilets and participation in sports following the judgment. The commission increased the length of time for feedback from an original proposal of two weeks to six weeks, but campaign group Liberty said that it should be at least 12 weeks, claiming the current period would be 'wholly insufficient' and unlawful. Liberty made a bid to bring a legal challenge over the length of the consultation, but in a decision on Friday afternoon Mr Justice Swift said it was not arguable. In his ruling, Mr Justice Swift said: 'There is no 12-week rule. The requirements of fairness are measured in specifics and context is important.' 'I am not satisfied that it is arguable that the six-week consultation period that the EHRC has chosen to use is unfair,' he added. At the hearing on Friday, Sarah Hannett KC, for Liberty, said in written submissions that the Supreme Court's decision 'has altered the landscape radically and suddenly' and potentially changes the way trans people access single-sex spaces and services. The barrister said this included some businesses preventing trans women from using female toilets and trans men from using male toilets, as well as British Transport Police updating its policy on strip searches, which have caused 'understandable distress to trans people'. Ms Hannett said a six-week consultation period would be unlawful because the EHRC has not given 'sufficient time' for consultees to give 'intelligent consideration and an intelligent response'. She told the London court: 'There is a desire amongst the bigger trans organisations to assist the smaller trans organisations in responding… That is something that is going to take some time.' Later in her written submissions, the barrister described the trans community as 'particularly vulnerable and currently subject to intense scrutiny and frequent harassment'. Ms Hannett added: 'There is evidence of distrust of both consultation processes and the commission within the community.' Lawyers for the EHRC said the legal challenge should not go ahead and that six weeks was 'adequate'. James Goudie KC, for the commission, told the hearing there is 'no magic at all in 12 weeks'. He said in written submissions: 'Guidance consistent with the Supreme Court's decision has become urgently needed. The law as declared by the Supreme Court is not to come in at some future point. 'It applies now, and has been applying for some time.' The barrister later said that misinformation had been spreading about the judgment, adding that it was 'stoking what was already an often heated and divisive debate about gender in society'. He continued: 'The longer it takes for EHRC to issue final guidance in the form of the code, the greater the opportunity for misinformation and disinformation to take hold, to the detriment of persons with different protected characteristics.' Mr Goudie also said that there was a previous 12-week consultation on the guidance at large starting in October 2024. Following the ruling, EHRC chairwoman Baroness Kishwer Falkner said the commission's approach 'has been fair and appropriate throughout'. She continued: 'Our six-week consultation period represents a balance between gathering comprehensive stakeholder input and addressing the urgent need for clarity. We're particularly encouraged by the thousands of consultation responses already received and look forward to further meaningful engagement through the rest of the process. 'The current climate of legal uncertainty and widespread misinformation serves nobody – particularly those with protected characteristics who rightly expect clarity about their rights. A swift resolution to this uncertainty will benefit everyone, including trans people.'


The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on Scottish politics: Labour wins the seat but not – yet – the argument
Labour's victory in the Holyrood byelection offers the UK government a rare political comfort but not, perhaps, the strategic breakthrough it might like to imagine. A late flurry of welfare signalling, a dogged ground campaign and a carefully staged visit to a Govan shipyard by Sir Keir Starmer helped shore up Labour's appeal to its traditional voters in Scotland's industrial belt. Yet as Prof John Curtice has noted, Labour's share of the vote actually declined compared with the last time voters cast ballots here in 2021 – a year in which the party was placed a distant third and was polling at the same dismal level of public support, 20%, it has today. The prime minister will gladly pocket Davy Russell's win in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse. But it is a foothold. There is still a steep climb to the summit. More telling is who lost. The Scottish National party's poor showing reflects dissatisfaction with its record of governance and the diminishing appeal of independence in areas where Labour has deep roots. The real surprise was Reform UK, taking over a quarter of the vote and leapfrogging the Conservatives into third place. It drew from both main parties, fuelled by protest and unionist anger that flattened the Tories. If these trends continue, the Holyrood elections, scheduled for next year, will not be good news for anyone but Reform despite the party losing its chair Zia Yusuf this week. Labour is not yet credible as a government-in-waiting at Holyrood. But for the SNP the crisis is more acute. If its vote remains around 30% and opposition is split at the next election, the SNP would probably remain the largest party, but would be unlikely to bestride the Scottish parliament. The pro‑independence movement would be institutionally endangered, not by Westminster suppression, but by electoral mathematics. Scottish politicians have long held the belief that Nigel Farage has less sway in a pro-EU, pro‑immigration nation. That is now harder to sustain. On the campaign trail, Mr Farage defended a race‑baiting Reform advert that twisted Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar's words to suggest he had divided loyalties – a textbook use of identity politics to inflame division and resentment. It was a toxic, racist and dishonest dog‑whistle but that did not stop Reform's rise. The Tories face an existential crisis. In 2021 they became the official opposition as the strongest anti‑SNP, pro-unionist option, a strategy that paid off on the regional list. But if Reform keeps eating into that base, Thursday's result suggests the Conservatives could ignominiously fall behind not just Reform, but also the Lib Dems and Greens. With the constitutional question fading and Holyrood designed to favour horse-trading, 2026 looks like yielding a more divided chamber. Coalitions – Labour with the Lib Dems, or even across the divide – could yet emerge to focus on bread-and-butter issues and govern without Reform. Labour won the seat, not the argument. The SNP may still top the poll in 2026 – but as a weaker force in a far less predictable landscape.