Latest news with #IvanMcKee
Press and Journal
a day ago
- Politics
- Press and Journal
P&J and Courier unite for the first time to help families Trapped by Raac
The Press and Journal has taken a landmark step in our fight for those Trapped by Raac in Aberdeen, and across Scotland. In a first for both titles, we join with our sister paper The Courier to share a joint front page highlighting those devastated by the defective block crisis. That is a testament to how serious an issue it has become in our communities. Together, alongside the thousands of those affected, we are united against Raac. We are also asking for your help – we are asking our readers to sign this petition and give homeowners and tenants a voice in the corridors of power. That is where their plight must be heard. For this special edition of these newspapers, both editors of these publications have said why they have taken this important step in highlighting the issue blighting our communities. Editor of The Press and Journal, Craig Walker, said that we'll continue to champion the people of Balnagask, but more needs to be done. 'More than 500 houses, thousands of people displaced, hundreds more in limbo and 18 months of misery for all. This is the scale and the cost of Aberdeen City Council discovering risky Raac in the roofs of Balnagask homes,' he said. 'Yet this week in Holyrood, weeks into our Trapped by Raac campaign, finance minister Ivan McKee claimed MSPs were 'scaremongering' with comments about residents losing their homes or being stuck in worthless properties. 'He even said Raac does not have to be a 'problem' if it is 'properly maintained'. 'What chance do the good people of Balnagask have – and almost a thousand more in Dundee and Angus – if their government ministers can't comprehend the scale of this disaster? 'This is why we launched our campaign. And it's why we are standing shoulder to shoulder with our sister title The Courier, today. 'Time has run out for buck-passing, and for ignorance. It's time to face reality, stand united, and help those suffering through no fault of our own. ''A complete injustice' is how Tory MSP Meghan Gallagher described the situation in Aberdeen, to which Mr McKee told her to 'tone down her language and focus on the facts.' 'Well, the facts are these: Hundreds of homes are going to be demolished unless funding can be found to provide alternative solutions. Hundreds more are living with the threat of Raac literally over their heads. And thousands of signatures are needed to get governments of all levels to come together to find a way forward. 'We have championed the Balnagask people on the pages of The Press and Journal. We've told the stories of families, pensioners, war veterans, babies, first-time buyers and long-standing members of the community. 'With no way forward, Trapped by Raac, they need our help.' David Clegg, editor for The Courier, says: 'In Dundee alone, nearly 900 homes are caught in the RAAC crisis. Dozens more are affected in nearby Monifieth – and across Scotland, the total runs into the thousands, including in cities like Aberdeen. 'This isn't just about buildings. It's about people. 'It's families raising children in homes that may no longer be safe. Elderly couples unable to downsize for health reasons. 'It's young first-time buyers trapped in negative equity. It's grieving daughters who, after the loss of a loved one, now face the burden of inheriting a crumbling flat that could financially devastate them. 'Both tenants and homeowners are affected, but it is the homeowners who face the sharpest edge of this crisis. 'They are living in properties no longer worth the value of their mortgage. 'Many cannot sell, cannot move, and cannot see a way forward. 'They are Trapped by Raac. 'That's why The Courier and The Press and Journal have taken the landmark decision to share our front pages. 'This is more than a campaign – it's a call for urgent action. 'Each level of government is passing the buck. 'Councils will support their own tenants but are leaving private homeowners to face this alone. 'Holyrood looks to Westminster. Westminster looks the other way. 'Homeowners feel abandoned – and with good reason. No one is offering them a way out. No one even appears to be trying. 'Our petition aims to change that. It gives these people a voice and demands those in power finally listen. 'They need your support. We're proud to stand with them. We hope you will too.' hub spot raac: Read more from the Trapped by Raac Campaign here:
The National
5 days ago
- Politics
- The National
John Swinney urged to intervene and scrap Flamingo Land plans
During a fiery First Minister's Questions (FMQs), in which ex-Scottish Tory leader Douglas Ross was expelled, the SNP leader was questioned over the controversial Flamingo Land plans. In September 2024, Flamingo Land Ltd had its planning permission in principle for the multi-million-pound water park rejected by all 14 board members of the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs Planning Authority. But after the Scottish Government reporter's decision earlier this month, Flamingo Land will be allowed to proceed to the next stage of planning and scrutiny and reach an agreement with the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority. READ MORE: Labour officials 'fighting like rats in a sack' over Keir Starmer succession, MP says Ivan McKee, minister for public finance, has since said the Scottish Government has 'no intention' of stepping in. The Scottish Greens have long opposed the plans, with co-leader Patrick Harvie condemning the lack of action from ministers. 'Outside Parliament today, people gathered to express their anger at the Scottish Government's intention to approve a resort development by Flamingo Land on the shores of Loch Lomond,' Harvie (below) said. 'It's been opposed by the National Trust for Scotland, by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, by over 155,000 people, and it was rejected unanimously by the National Park.' He added: 'It's the most unpopular development in the history of the Scottish planning system. 'Now, I know the First Minister is about to tell us that he can't comment on a specific appeal. But his minister has already made a political decision. It took Ivan McKee just 2 working days to announce his refusal to act in the public interest and recall the appeal, so he and the First Minister have to be accountable for that now. 'There is still a chance we can save Loch Lomond. This decision isn't set in stone, so will the First Minister listen to all those who have been objecting for years and put the natural environment ahead of corporate profit and recall this decision? 'As Mr Harvie has indicated, as the appeal remains live, members have to understand that it would not be appropriate for me to comment in detail on the proposal. 'I am aware that the reporter has issued a notice of intention to allow the appeal and to grant planning permission in principle, subject to 49 planning conditions and the reaching of a legal agreement, including the Lomond Promise, with a commitment to community benefits and fair work. 'The reporter is required to make his decision on the planning merits of the case and to take full account of all submissions made by the parties involved in this case, including representations from members of the local community.' The First Minister was also scrutinised by Anas Sarwar (below) over NHS waiting lists. (Image: PA) The Scottish Labour leader was speaking days after figures showed the number of people waiting two years for outpatient treatment was at the highest level on record. Statistics released on Tuesday showed 5262 people were waiting for more than two years for a procedure at the end of March this year. They also showed 63,406 people were waiting more than 12 months. Responding to Sarwar when pressed on the issue, John Swinney said: 'I recognise the significant impact of long waits on individual patients, and I apologise to everybody who's affected by those long waits. 'It's why the tackling of long waits is central to the Government's plans to deliver the improvements in the National Health Service that are required.' But he also took aim at the UK Government's new approach to immigration. 'Anyone looking at the details of what's been set out by the UK Government and turning off the ability of us being able to attract international workers will realise that that's a very damaging blow to our health service,' he told MSPs. 'Because our health service, and I saw data from Scottish Care, for example, about social care, is heavily dependent on international workers. And if the UK Government decides to turn off the ability of the Scottish Health Service to attract international workers, it will make our challenge to address the waiting time ever more difficult as a consequence.'
The Herald Scotland
7 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
The SNP has a park problem. Both Flamingoland and Galloway
The Scottish Government is looking like a flamingo with its ostrichy head in the sand when it comes to issues that involve National Parks – whether they're on the banks of Loch Lomond, or potentially in the rolling hills of Galloway. Those blushing feathers of panic tell us that the SNP don't really know what to do over nature, or indeed the increasingly thorny issue of National Parks. Last week, following the news that the Scottish Government's Reporter had announced intention to approve the planning application for Flamingo Land's Lomond Banks development, the SNP knocked back demands that Scottish Ministers call the decision in. Public finance minister Ivan McKee said: 'Given the very technical planning issues raised in this case and the high level of public interest, I consider it appropriate that objective planning judgement is applied in this case, and for that reason I do not intend to recall this appeal.' But the pressure to call the decision in on a development that was only last year rejected by Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority after eight years of controversy is still growing. And behind that call are over 40,000 signatures on a petition by the Scottish Greens which says, "Tell Scottish Ministers to Save Loch Lomond". Then, in other news, this week, reports emerged that Mairi Gougeon is set to make an announcement on Thursday regarding the Galloway National Park proposal for a third National Park following a recent consultation. A Scottish Greens press release said: 'On Thursday, the SNP's Rural Affairs minister is expected to scrap plans to establish a National Park in Galloway, a core commitment of the Bute House Agreement. Land-owning lobbyists have demanded investment in the area without any protections of the local environment.' A movement against the Galloway National Park proposal has grown rapidly and vocally since last summer – much to the surprise of those who originally drove the bid and believed it to be widely supported – and by now it feels like the loudest voice. I've spoken to people on both sides, and both speak passionately, though often it seems the pro-parkers are quieter. I'm reluctant, as some have done, to caricature the No campaign as driven chiefly by lobbyists or those with business interests. People like Denise Brownlee and Liz Hitschmann, grandmothers, neighbours and founders of the No Galloway National Park, are genuine and heartfelt. But there are also the National Farmers Union of Scotland, landowners and foresters, a high-profile PR firm and some vocal MSPs which make it seem more like an interests campaign. Those that argue against the National Park, often come from different angles, sometimes contradictory – fearful of 'overtourism', fighting off bureaucracy, defending the renewables industry - as happens with any anti campaign. It includes farmers fearful of red tape, renewables industry, foresters of conifer plantations. Meanwhile some support a 'park-lite' plan. Versions of this – a possible smaller plan including the geographical areas most in favour of the park and most standing to benefit - were suggested to me by locals when I visited the area this year. But my fear is that for some park-lite may mean ditching nature, and those elements that give it extra protections. It may mean saying that a National Park isn't about biodiversity - though it is about, according to its principles - conserving natural and cultural heritage. That concerns me because, like many, I take seriously the biodiversity crisis - especially given what Professor Johan Rockstrom, the scientist behind the planetary boundary frameworks told me of how his biggest concern is what is happening with nature. Scottish Green MSP Mark Ruskell has stood up for the Galloway National Park proposal, saying : 'I hope the SNP ignore a small number of voices who want to stop any kind of change, anywhere. A Galloway National Park would have a positive impact for nature and communities and would be managed and controlled by local people themselves. 'Scottish communities were competing against each other last year to secure a new National Park, it would be an embarrassment if SNP Ministers now blocked every community in Scotland from hosting a new park.' But this wasn't always just about the Scottish Greens. Both the SNP and the Conservatives advocated for another park, and the Tories even, in their manifesto, called specifically for a park in Dumfries and Galloway. Part of the problem, I suspect, resides in the confusion around what National Parks are really for, in spite of there being an act which defined them as, in part, about conserving "natural and cultural heritage" - and which of different principles should carry more weight. Does, for instance, a Lomond Banks resort containing monorail, water park, hotel and restaurants, represent conserving the natural heritage? Certainly, the board of the LLTNPA appeared to think it wasn't an adequate response to a nature crisis, which is one of the reasons the application was rejected last September. (Image: NQ Archive) Campaigner Nick Kempe, in a detailed piece of analysis in his Parkswatch Scotland blog, has pointed out that the Reporter's recent announcement is no big surprise, since the arguments pitched against by LLTNPA were not that strong. 'Under pressure from the public and from their Board," Kempe wrote, "some of whom want to be seen to be doing something to tackle the nature crisis, LLTNPA senior management had little choice but to recommend rejection of Flamingo Land's application last September. The grounds they provided for doing so, however, were very weak.' This he notes, paved the way for the Reporter overturning the rejection. On Lomond Banks nothing is yet set in stone. There is still the possibility of Ministers calling it in, and even of a judicial review. There is also, crucially, time. The Reporter, after all, has given Flamingo Land and the LLTNPA six months to come up with a legally binding 'planning obligation that secures the employment issues and environment issues that are set out in the Lomond Promise'. The fight is certainly not over. This Friday will see an emergency meeting of Balloch and Haldane Community Council 'to discuss the next steps in fighting this ludicrous development'. READ MORE: At the same time, the Galloway National Park raises its own questions about what a National Park means for nature, given is potential siting in an area of high agriculture productivity, dairy farming and wind farm density. It could, of course, mean striving harder to make that work alongside nature protection – but we may never know how that looks if the plan is dropped. What's often confusing in the middle of all this, whether Galloway or Loch Lomond, is working out who really is advocating for nature? And on what grounds? Who is doing the deep thinking about what works for both biodiversity and community? No Galloway National Park campaigner Denise Brownlee, for instance, describes herself as a 'tree-hugging, lentil-munching veggie" and says she doesn't want all those tourists partly because of some of the damage they do to nature. But Rob Lucas, chairman of the Galloway National Park Association is also a long-term nature lover, and has spoken about how 'National Parks can support communities and nature for the long-run'. 'This is the forgotten corner of Scotland,' he has said. 'We need a national park to put Galloway on the map to attract people to live, work and visit, and help prevent it becoming the dumping ground for inappropriate windfarms and insensitive afforestation.' There are no easy answers and no doubt the SNP Government would like all this to disappear. But with Reform UK already picking up votes in Dumfries & Galloway in last year's general election, and the incumbent Conservatives strong in the area, it's unlikely the words 'National Park' will vanish from the debate, even if the plan is shelved till after the election.
The National
26-05-2025
- Politics
- The National
Scotland's planning system is a open door to gold-diggers
Flamingo Land appealed at the end of last year and rather than a public inquiry being held, we have a government 'reporter' who makes decisions on behalf of the Scottish administration, disregarding local democracy. Where do the views of the parks authority, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, the transport authorities, the local council and the general public – currently 178,000 of them – come in? READ MORE: Woodland Trust calls on Government to reject Flamingo Land plans This isn't the first time this has happened. Remember Trump's golf course, or the nine fish farm refusals which were overturned? We have a corrupt system. It allows decisions to be made outwith public or parliamentary scrutiny and is an open door for unscrupulous gold-diggers. Writing to planning minister Ivan McKee doesn't address the local democracy deficit nor does it prevent another Flamingo Land. There's another option. The Referendums (Scotland) Act 2020 allows for a vote to take place on any controversial content – like this one. The Scottish administration should use it. But if it won't consult the people, Scotland Decides can do it for them. It has a platform for verifiable voting that accords with national and international standards. Concerned citizens just need to register on the Scotland Decides website, as well as sign public petition PE2135 to enact the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which would give the people direct political rights and the right to self-determination. The minister for the constitution, Angus Robertson, has failed to support the petition, which speaks volumes about the seriousness of this administration when it comes to protecting our rights. David Younger Tighnabruaich IT'S reported a city congestion charge in Edinburgh is to be revisited, mooted by Green Councillor Chas Booth as needed for the council to meet its climate emergency commitments. Don't we recognise this to be an outright lie? Were this true then private vehicles could be prohibited – that would impact all equally and help meet climate commitments – rather than a charging scheme that reserves city driving space for the wealthier, driving their large, gas-guzzling SUVs which are the very last vehicles that should be allowed access. READ MORE: Edinburgh residents urge Hearts to do more to stop illegal parking And isn't the move towards electric vehicles – along with the LEZ scheme that was foisted on us – supposed to address climate matters? How many times are we to drink from this poisoned climate chalice? High parking charges, increased licensing fees, LEZ fines, bus lane fines, the iniquitous greed-inspired tourist tax and the whopping savage increase in Council Tax – there's no relief for those subsisting on even just the bare state pension. Isn't congestion charging just another way this city council can dip its greedy fingers into our pockets? Over many years of the larceny perpetrated by Edinburgh's council, citizenship has been rebranded, with us becoming individual cash-generation centres. The galling thing is, where are the improvements to city life that can be laid directly at the door of this cash-guzzling council that cleans the city centre for tourists but fails in so many areas of responsibility like emptying overflowing street bins, clearing weeds, cleaning drains and replacing the unnecessary street furniture and decrepit speed bumps they have inflicted on us? Pedestrianise the city centre, keep private vehicles out, yes. But no discrimination in favour of the wealthy against ordinary folks. NO to any congestion charge. Jim Taylor Edinburgh IN his recent article, Tommy Sheppard states: 'We're all going to die. And we all hope it will be quick and painless ... what if the last months of your life become an endurance test of agonising pain without respite? Wouldn't you want the right to end it? I know I would. And I'd want public health professionals to help me' (Plenty of those with disabilities want to see assisted dying law changes, May 19). I think he will find, if he cares to look at the definition of palliative care as defined by the International Association for Hospice and Palliative Care, that it covers all the points he raises. The important difference is, however, that the 'assisted dying' provided by palliative care does not seek to help you kill yourself by means of suicide, but seeks to provide adequate pain relief for the mental, physical and spiritual pain felt by the patient and their family. What we need is more palliative care to be made more widely available so that we can each, along with our relatives, be afforded the opportunity to participate in a truly dignified death free from the 'agonising pain without respite' that Tommy Sheppard and others like to reference. Only palliative care at the end of our life can supply that; there is no dignity in suicide. Margaret Tuckerman Buckie
Scotsman
20-05-2025
- Business
- Scotsman
SNP ministers refuse plea to block controversial Flamingo Land application for Loch Lomond
A Scottish Government minister has refused to intervene and refuse permission for the controversial development. Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... SNP ministers have rejected calls to step in and block the controversial Flamingo Land proposals amid concerns 'overwhelming expert evidence' is being ignored. A Scottish Government planning reporter has upheld an appeal from Yorkshire-based theme park operator Flamingo Land for the plans, but placed 49 conditions on the application. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad An illustration showing what Flamingo Land at Loch Lomond would look like | contributed The applicant will have to reach a legal agreement with the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority, which rejected the proposals last year, before the application can progress. The land, which is proposed to be built on, is owned by the Scottish Government's commercial wing Scottish Enterprise, which has agreed to sell to Flamingo Land if planning permission for the development is granted. READ MORE: Campaigners fury Government overrules Loch Lomond national park to approve Flamingo Land development Under the £43.5 million proposals, Lomond Banks would involve two hotels, more than 100 lodges, a waterpark and monorail built on the site at Balloch. A campaign against the project spearheaded by Scottish Green MSP Ross Greer garnered more than 150,000 signatures. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Mr Greer asked SNP public finance minister Ivan McKee whether ministers would use powers under the Country Planning Act to step in and block the application from receiving permission. Speaking in Holyrood on Tuesday, Mr McKee pointed to the permission being 'subject to 49 different planning conditions and a legal agreement being reached and put in place'. Business minister Ivan McKee during a Ministerial update on the Dalzell Historical Industrial sale at the Scottish Parliament in December last year. But he claimed that because the application technically 'remains live', it would 'not be appropriate for me to comment' on the specifics of the case. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Mr McKee said: 'Given the very technical planning issues raised in this case and the high level of public interest, I consider it is appropriate that objective planning judgement is applied in this case. For that reason, I do not intend to recall this appeal.' In response, Mr Greer told MSPs he was 'incredibly disappointed' by the Scottish Government refusing to step in and block the plans. The West of Scotland MSP said legislation 'specifically gives ministers that power, not officials'. He said: 'In 2008, this Scottish Government intervened to overturn Aberdeenshire Council's rejection of Donald Trump's golf course at Menie. That was ministers, not officials, overturning local democracy to help an American millionaire trash a sensitive natural environment. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'In this case, the Government's own environment watchdog Sepa said the application clearly breaches flood protection rules and does not meet the exceptions set out in the national planning framework. Green MSP Ross Greer | PA 'That's not to mention the extra 250 cars an hour it would bring at peak times on already-congested roads like the A82. 'Does the minister accept that the law clearly gives him the power to intervene and will he do so and reject this mega-resort on the basis of the overwhelming expert evidence of the damage it would do to a world-famous location?' Scottish Labour deputy leader Dame Jackie Baillie | PA Labour deputy leader and Dumbarton MSP Jackie Baillie called for Mr McKee to visit the site, listen to local concerns and 'review all of the decision-making and call the planning application in'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad She said: 'The minister will know the reporter's decision does fly in the face of expert evidence, the unanimous decision of the national park, the view of Sepa and indeed, the overwhelming majority of local people.
