Latest news with #ScottishGreens
Scotsman
17 hours ago
- General
- Scotsman
Readers' letters: Protect our farmers from sea eagles slaughtering lambs
The Scottish Government is paying out £970,000 to farmers this year under the Sea Eagle Management Scheme (Picture:) A reader says action must be taken to stop sea eagles killing livestock with impunity Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox 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... It is the time of year, with the lambing season, when ghastly photos are appearing in the media of defenceless, bloodied lambs being flown to their doom by an eagle. It is a wake-up call to so many of we urban dwellers, unaware of this daily slaughter, going on, under the radar, in our name. Some farmers and crofters in Inverness-shire confirm they lose an average two lambs a other predator causes losses on this scale. The Scottish Government is paying out £970,000 to farmers this year under the Sea Eagle Management Scheme, but that does not mitigate the barbarity of the white-tailed sea eagles. Farmers are being put out of business. Many talk of the devastating impact on their mental heath. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The eagles have a wing span of 2.5 metres and were introduced to Scotland from Norway in can be fined £40,000 if your dog kills livestock but the ghastly sea eagles, which also kill puffins and other small birds, kill with impunity and are protected. It will be of no surprise to anyone the Scottish Greens regard this slaughter as a big conservation success story. Both BBC TV and Radio Scotland this week, inexplicably, adopted this slant, proudly proclaiming that there are, perhaps, 220 breeding pairs in Scotland. Indeed, how commendable it is these predators are moving into north England, a conservationist argued. I don't think the Scottish public were ever consulted on this chilling barbarity nor did we MSPs must be told, in no uncertain terms, this abhorrent slaughter must stop. John V Lloyd, Inverkeithing, Fife Ban shooting More than 40 million pheasants and partridges, many of them factory farmed, are released each year in the UK, to be shot out of the sky for fun – most of the birds do not end up being eaten. Of course this is cruel to the birds, but it also damages the environment. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The scale of the problem is enormous: in fact, in late summer, the weight of all the birds released is greater than that of all the wild birds in Britain. The mass release therefore has a devastating impact upon wildlife and ecosystems. In addition, wildlife is poisoned by the more than 7,000 tonnes of lead ammunition that is discharged into the UK countryside by shooters each year. There is also the danger of bird flu spreading from game farms to wild birds once the farmed birds are released. And finally, there is the issue of gamekeepers illegally killing protected birds of prey. For the sake of our environment – and for the birds themselves – surely it is now time to ban shooting. Fiona Pereira, Campaigns Manager, Animal Aid Numbers game Rural Affairs Secretary Mairi Gougeon states that 54 per cent of respondents were against the setting up of a national park in Dumfries and Galloway and Ayrshire (your report, 30 May). So this 54 per cent are to be respected – but not the 55 per cent that rejected the pie-in-the-sky independence referendum? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I would dearly love to be able to cherry pick my choices on a whim. However, life being difficult as it is, this would lead to absolute carnage – in exactly the same fashion as we are governed in Scotland. This really sums up the hypocrisy of the SNP. The truth of the matter is they couldn't have put it into practice – like all the other policies they spout and never see through. David Millar, Lauder, Scottish Borders Wasted money In 2015, Derek Mackay, Transport Minister and John Swinney, Deputy First Minister, signed a fixed-price contract for two ferries at a cost of £97 million, it has now been reported that the total outlay to the shipyard is now just under £1 billion. Mackay is long gone but Swinney is still hanging around, seemingly totally unconcerned about this national scandal. What have the taxpayers got for this outlay? One ferry with much reduced capacity and another which may or may not enter service. Imagine, for a moment, if the SNP had stuck to the original fixed price. Imagine if the SNP had used the difference between that price and the latest, (but not final) price. Imagine how much state-of-the-art equipment could have been purchased for our hospitals, thereby saving lives and cutting waiting times. Think how many people could be back at work instead of waiting for an NHS Scotland appointment. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Or maybe, it could have been used to build a super highway (let's call it the A9), all the way from Perth to John o' Groats, thereby opening up half the land mass of Scotland to much needed inward investment and perhaps allow the sick and elderly in half of Scotland easy access to hospitals. Ever since Nicola Sturgeon launched the Glen Sannox, for political gain, with painted-on windows and cardboard funnels, this has been nothing short of a vanity project for a party which has long since lost touch with the people who voted them in and demonstrates a complete lack of financial responsibility on the part of the SNP. Bruce Proctor. Stonehaven, Aberdeenshire Markets in charge 'TACO' ('Trump Always Chickens Out') has become the policymakers' acronym of choice for the disruptive on-off policies that are coming to define President Trump's second term. Furthermore, imposition of blanket reciprocal tariffs by the White House has now been deemed unconstitutional by a US federal court. This ruling faces immediate challenge in the US Supreme Court. The balance of expectation, however, is that the Court's decision will be upheld. Consequently, 'tariff' may be losing its lustre as 'the most beautiful word in the dictionary' for the Donald. This looks like good news, especially for trade negotiators. But every silver lining has its own cloud: selective high tariffs on steel, aluminium, cars, semiconductors and pharmaceuticals etc can/will still be legally imposed by Presidential executive order under the US Constitution; and the main overriding concern remains the heightened uncertainty, instability and risk for international businesses and government policymakers engendered by Trumpenomics. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Stock exchange reaction to current developments has been relatively sanguine. The reaction of bond markets is more concerning with yields staying high on long-term government bonds (both US Treasuries and UK Gilts). As a result, the cost of government borrowing remains worryingly high. If future tax hikes prove politically too damaging, more swingeing cuts will be forced on Rachel Reeves. The bond markets, it seems, hold the ultimate trump card! Ewen Peters, Newton Mearns, East Renfrewshire Big bills Can somebody please explain how the NHS arrives at the costings of their procedures, as quoted by Alan Hinnrichs (Letters, 30 May)? To the uninitiated some of the figures seem simply incredible! Chris Forrest, Polmont, Falkirk Remember seamen It is of enormous credit to the Norwegian people that the D/S Hestmanden has been preserved and maintained as a museum and tribute to the 30,000 Norwegian war sailors who served with the Allies during World War Two (your report, 28 May). The large Norwegian fleet and, in particular, their fast modern tankers proved to be invaluable in the transport of oil and oil products to every theatre of the war. Following on so closely behind the commemoration of VE Day it is of importance to note that, in the last attack carried out by a U-boat in World War Two, the Norwegian ship Sneland 1 was torpedoed near the May Island, with the loss seven lives. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad How tragic it is that these Norwegian sailors, who must have known that the war in Europe was almost over and they would soon be able to return to their beloved country after five long years, had their lives and futures snatched away. Amongst those lost was the ship's master Johannes Bernhart Laegland, aged 46. Also lost was a 17-year-old British Mess Room Boy, William Ellis from Hull. Young William and two members of the crew of the Avondale Park, which was torpedoed in the same attack, added to the huge number of almost 32,000 casualties suffered by the British Merchant Navy in the Second World War. I found it somewhat strange that in the various commemorations for VE Day I did not hear one mention of the Merchant Navy or see a 'veteran" from the Merchant Service being interviewed. Perhaps we, like our seafaring cousins the Norwegians, should pay more attention to the enormous sacrifice made by our merchant seamen. I wish Captan Klungtveit and the D/S Hestmanden a pleasant return voyage to Norway. James Simpson, Lower Largo, Fife Scots words The translator of Danish books into English, Barbara J Haveland, confessed in an article that she likes to 'sneak' Scots words into her translations. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad As examples she offered 'outwith', 'swither' and 'forenoon'. My dictionary acknowledges the Scottish origins of the former two. However, there is no such comment about 'forenoon'. This word is designated as a 'modifier' with the example offered 'a forenoon meeting'. Totally unrelated is the recollection that the word 'outwith' always reminds me how, from childhood, I used to sing 'There is a green hill far away, without a city wall' and I actually pitied this poor hill that lacked a boundary wall. The third edition of the Church of Scotland hymnary clarifies the situation and reads 'outside a city wall'. We live and learn. Bill Greenock, Netherlee, East Renfrewshire Write to The Scotsman
Daily Record
a day ago
- Business
- Daily Record
Call made to stop rich "hoarding" Stirling properties
An MSP has claimed too many young people are forced to leave the communities they have grown up in due to housing shortages and high house prices - caused by second homes and holiday lets. Reducing the number of second homes in Stirling could help to tackle the housing crisis says a local MSP. Mark Ruskell, Scottish Green MSP for Mid Scotland and Fife, says making it harder for the wealthy to 'hoard' homes by increasing their tax is crucial to tackle the issue in Stirlingshire. The most recent data from the Scottish Government shows that second homes and short-term lets make up 2.5 per cent of all housing in Stirling. This is higher than the national average (1.8 per cent). At the same time, a housing emergency has been declared across Scotland and over 10,000 children are in temporary accommodation. Second homes are more common in areas of natural beauty, including Callander, Aberfoyle and Bridge of Allan. In many cases young people are forced to leave the communities they have grown up in due to housing shortages and high house prices caused by second homes and holiday lets. Mr Ruskell says the Scottish Greens have already taken action to reduce the spread of holiday homes and short term lets, doubling the tax paid when buying a home for these purposes and giving councils the power to double council tax on these properties. This reduced the number of second homes by 2455 in Scotland last year compared to 2023 and raised tens of millions of pounds for public services like the NHS and schools. Speaking in Parliament last week, Mr Ruskell raised concerns about the expansion of second home ownership, and called for action to protect communities and help first time house buyers by reducing the number of holiday homes. He said: 'Scotland is in a housing crisis. Everyone in Parliament agrees on this, but it's only the Scottish Greens delivering the changes needed to tackle it. 'The fact that we have hundreds of second homes and short term lets across Stirlingshire, outstripping the national average, is a major reason why this crisis is so much worse locally. Wealthy people buying up properties they won't live in are pushing out young families in particular. 'These houses either lie empty for most of the year as holiday homes, or they are hoarded by landlords making a fortune from Airbnb-style short term lets. Either way, its first-time buyers who are pushed out by those with much more financial muscle. 'There are 10,000 children stuck in temporary accommodation, but 49,000 second homes and short term lets. This is a crisis which can clearly be solved. We'll only do that by taking on the wealthy few, those who pay very little tax while hoovering up the houses which other people need. 'The current Housing Bill is a watershed moment in the Scottish Parliament. Thanks to the Scottish Greens it will deliver controls on rent increases and new rights and protections for renters. 'However, it must go further to tackle the vast inequality gap that we see between the rich and the vulnerable in Stirlingshire. 'The Scottish Government must listen to us and act boldly to stop the hollowing out of our communities.' In his speech, Mr Ruskell said his area's communities welcomed people who come to make their lives in permanent homes, but that more second homes were artificially inflating the housing market and pricing out locals, particularly families taking their first steps in the housing market. 'Adult children often have to stay in the family home while saving for a deposit or even to move out of their community, away from friends and family, at a stage in life when support networks are incredibly important. 'I also see older people struggling. They can become trapped in unsuitable housing because there are few properties available to downsize into and they sometimes end up in precarious tenancies in poorly serviced park homes. There are few options for people in many rural communities. 'It is in those hotspots that we can most clearly see the impact of second home ownership. Shops close because of a lack of regular custom, schools have dwindling numbers of young people, leading to their eventual closure, and residents no longer have neighbours.'
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
How did the SNP-Green relationship go so wrong?
The Scottish government has dropped plans for a new national park in Dumfries and Galloway - the latest in a series of policies driven by the Scottish Greens to have been scrapped by the SNP. The idea was originally taken forward by Lorna Slater, when she was a government minister under the Bute House Agreement between the two parties. But since she and Green co-leader Patrick Harvie were kicked out of their ministerial offices by Humza Yousaf, the majority of policies included in the pact have been binned. From marine protection areas to climate targets, changes how homes are heated and a ban on conversion therapy, the agreed programme has mostly been torn up. Was the partnership worth it, looking back? And where does it leave the SNP and Greens heading into next year's Holyrood election? Things have changed enormously in Scottish politics since Nicola Sturgeon brought the Greens into government in 2021. She departed Bute House the following year, and her successor Humza Yousaf barely lasted a year as first minister. Ultimately, it was his decision to end the Bute House Agreement (BHA) which ended his tenure. A big motivation for the SNP in going into the pact was that it would provide stability against votes of no confidence, so it was somewhat fitting that the threat of such a vote forced Mr Yousaf out of office days after he ended the deal. John Swinney has since taken the administration off in a different direction with Kate Forbes as his deputy. The decision on the Galloway national park is just the latest in a procession of policies which underpinned the partnership to have been consigned to history. Let's take a look through the original agreement documents to check on the fate of some others. Cracks had started to appear in the pact prior to Mr Yousaf's decision to end it, particularly when the government announced it was dropping its climate targets. The BHA had called for a "credible pathway" to hitting the admittedly ambitious 2030 interim target for cutting carbon emissions. But after watchdogs underlined that this was looking increasingly unlikely, the government decided to do away with the interim goals and move to a system of carbon budgets. That wasn't the last climate measure to be scrapped either, with ministers also conceding that a target of reducing car use by 20% by 2030 wasn't going to happen. Another bone of contention at the time was Mr Yousaf's abrupt announcement of a council tax freeze - something the Greens opposed. Indeed the original agreement was that there would be a citizen's assembly on council tax reform. This has never materialised, and the longstanding promises to change how local taxation works have been kicked off into the next parliamentary term (again). One of the biggest pieces of work the Greens undertook in government was Patrick Harvie's heat in buildings bill, which aimed to move more homes to greener systems like heat pumps rather than boilers. The bill was shelved earlier this year after acting net zero secretary Gillian Martin said it would "make people poorer", voicing concerns that it could increase fuel poverty. A revised version of the bill has since been published, but it stops short of a legal requirement to replace heating systems by 2045. Mr Harvie was also the minister for tenant's rights, with the Greens central to plans to cap rents and ban evictions during the cost of living crisis. But the party takes a fairly dim view of the "watered down" system of rent controls currently being considered in the Housing (Scotland) Bill, saying they are not nearly strong enough. Another proposed bill was the ban on conversion therapy, which the Greens remain keen on - but which SNP ministers would really rather the UK government deal with. The decision to kick that into the next parliamentary term compounded the rift over gender reforms, which the two parties had cooperated over while passing the Gender Recognition Reform Bill in 2022. But Mr Yousaf decided to drop legal challenges to defend the legislation after it was blocked by the UK government, and Mr Swinney's administration have been clear that they will not be bringing it back. These policies follow a pattern of the Swinney government being happy to drop particularly controversial policies. The same thing happened with a plan to designate 10% of Scotland's waters as highly protected marine areas, which sparked opposition in coastal communities. In fairness, a few things had been delivered before the Greens left government. The new National Planning Framework had been finalised, including the BHA requirements for 20 minute neighbourhoods and greater priority for onshore wind developments. However, it should be noted that Green hopes for an energy strategy which would support offshore wind and marine renewables remain unrealised, given Mr Swinney's government still hasn't published its long-awaited energy strategy. The Scottish government also boosted the Scottish Child Payment, something enshrined in the agreement - although given it is a flagship policy for the SNP, it is likely that would have happened anyway. The same could probably be said of the £500m just transition fund for the North East and Moray, given it was in the SNP manifesto. Other successes included the Fair Work First guidance, which requires public sector bodies which get government grants to pay the real living wage, and a pledge to replace the Scottish Qualifications Authority. A National Register of Ancient Woodlands is being produced, with a target date of 2027, and the promised Natural Environment Bill – aimed at improving biodiversity - has been tabled. These do feel like relatively small wins, though, compared to what was promised and ultimately abandoned. The decision to end the partnership agreement couldn't have been much more damaging for Humza Yousaf, given he ended up quitting. It has had consequences for the party's broader policy platform too though. The SNP had also been relying on Green support for one of its flagship policies for the term, the National Care Service. The BHA committed the parties to driving forward what it called a "totemic policy", but the Greens eventually joined other opposition parties in rallying against the proposal put down on paper by ministers. A vote at the party's conference went overwhelmingly against the proposal, underlining that it could not make it through parliament - although it was already clear by then that it would be undeliverable in any case, given opposition from key partners like unions, councils and health boards. Looking back over the wreckage of the Bute House Agreement may be instructive when we think ahead to the next Holyrood election. John Swinney has sought to build bridges now, with a view to operating in a fractured parliament of minorities next term. But would the Greens work with the SNP again in future? For all that they ultimately got out of the agreement, the smaller party may reflect that they may be able to deliver more by remaining in opposition and driving hard bargains when budget votes are needed. It was a budget deal which secured one of their favourite policies which still remains – free bus travel for under-22s. The Greens may also be happy to have more clear water between the parties on policy when voters go to the polls, given they are competing with the SNP for a similar slice of the electorate. But there is one topic we know the parties do still agree on, which may remain of outsize influence. The Bute House Agreement included a pledge to secure a referendum on Scottish independence. Obviously that didn't happen this term - but depending on the result of the election, building a "pro independence majority" may well be something which puts the SNP and Greens back on similar ground next May. Scottish government scraps plan for new national park SNP's power-sharing deal with Greens collapses Why do the SNP and Greens want to do a deal?
BBC News
2 days ago
- Business
- BBC News
Bute House Agreement: How did the SNP-Green partnership go wrong?
The Scottish government has dropped plans for a new national park in Dumfries and Galloway - the latest in a series of policies driven by the Scottish Greens to have been scrapped by the idea was originally taken forward by Lorna Slater, when she was a government minister under the Bute House Agreement between the two since she and Green co-leader Patrick Harvie were kicked out of their ministerial offices by Humza Yousaf, the majority of policies included in the pact have been marine protection areas to climate targets, changes how homes are heated and a ban on conversion therapy, the agreed programme has mostly been torn the partnership worth it, looking back? And where does it leave the SNP and Greens heading into next year's Holyrood election? Things have changed enormously in Scottish politics since Nicola Sturgeon brought the Greens into government in departed Bute House the following year, and her successor Humza Yousaf barely lasted a year as first it was his decision to end the Bute House Agreement (BHA) which ended his tenure.A big motivation for the SNP in going into the pact was that it would provide stability against votes of no confidence, so it was somewhat fitting that the threat of such a vote forced Mr Yousaf out of office days after he ended the Swinney has since taken the administration off in a different direction with Kate Forbes as his decision on the Galloway national park is just the latest in a procession of policies which underpinned the partnership to have been consigned to take a look through the original agreement documents to check on the fate of some others. Changing climate measures Cracks had started to appear in the pact prior to Mr Yousaf's decision to end it, particularly when the government announced it was dropping its climate BHA had called for a "credible pathway" to hitting the admittedly ambitious 2030 interim target for cutting carbon after watchdogs underlined that this was looking increasingly unlikely, the government decided to do away with the interim goals and move to a system of carbon wasn't the last climate measure to be scrapped either, with ministers also conceding that a target of reducing car use by 20% by 2030 wasn't going to bone of contention at the time was Mr Yousaf's abrupt announcement of a council tax freeze - something the Greens the original agreement was that there would be a citizen's assembly on council tax has never materialised, and the longstanding promises to change how local taxation works have been kicked off into the next parliamentary term (again). One of the biggest pieces of work the Greens undertook in government was Patrick Harvie's heat in buildings bill, which aimed to move more homes to greener systems like heat pumps rather than bill was shelved earlier this year after acting net zero secretary Gillian Martin said it would "make people poorer", voicing concerns that it could increase fuel poverty.A revised version of the bill has since been published, but it stops short of a legal requirement to replace heating systems by 2045. 'Watered down' Mr Harvie was also the minister for tenant's rights, with the Greens central to plans to cap rents and ban evictions during the cost of living the party takes a fairly dim view of the "watered down" system of rent controls currently being considered in the Housing (Scotland) Bill, saying they are not nearly strong proposed bill was the ban on conversion therapy, which the Greens remain keen on - but which SNP ministers would really rather the UK government deal decision to kick that into the next parliamentary term compounded the rift over gender reforms, which the two parties had cooperated over while passing the Gender Recognition Reform Bill in Mr Yousaf decided to drop legal challenges to defend the legislation after it was blocked by the UK government, and Mr Swinney's administration have been clear that they will not be bringing it back. Ending the headaches These policies follow a pattern of the Swinney government being happy to drop particularly controversial same thing happened with a plan to designate 10% of Scotland's waters as highly protected marine areas, which sparked opposition in coastal fairness, a few things had been delivered before the Greens left new National Planning Framework had been finalised, including the BHA requirements for 20 minute neighbourhoods and greater priority for onshore wind it should be noted that Green hopes for an energy strategy which would support offshore wind and marine renewables remain unrealised, given Mr Swinney's government still hasn't published its long-awaited energy strategy. The Scottish government also boosted the Scottish Child Payment, something enshrined in the agreement - although given it is a flagship policy for the SNP, it is likely that would have happened same could probably be said of the £500m just transition fund for the North East and Moray, given it was in the SNP successes included the Fair Work First guidance, which requires public sector bodies which get government grants to pay the real living wage, and a pledge to replace the Scottish Qualifications Authority.A National Register of Ancient Woodlands is being produced, with a target date of 2027, and the promised Natural Environment Bill – aimed at improving biodiversity - has been do feel like relatively small wins, though, compared to what was promised and ultimately abandoned. 'Totemic policy' The decision to end the partnership agreement couldn't have been much more damaging for Humza Yousaf, given he ended up has had consequences for the party's broader policy platform too SNP had also been relying on Green support for one of its flagship policies for the term, the National Care BHA committed the parties to driving forward what it called a "totemic policy", but the Greens eventually joined other opposition parties in rallying against the proposal put down on paper by ministers.A vote at the party's conference went overwhelmingly against the proposal, underlining that it could not make it through parliament - although it was already clear by then that it would be undeliverable in any case, given opposition from key partners like unions, councils and health boards. The future Looking back over the wreckage of the Bute House Agreement may be instructive when we think ahead to the next Holyrood Swinney has sought to build bridges now, with a view to operating in a fractured parliament of minorities next would the Greens work with the SNP again in future?For all that they ultimately got out of the agreement, the smaller party may reflect that they may be able to deliver more by remaining in opposition and driving hard bargains when budget votes are was a budget deal which secured one of their favourite policies which still remains – free bus travel for Greens may also be happy to have more clear water between the parties on policy when voters go to the polls, given they are competing with the SNP for a similar slice of the there is one topic we know the parties do still agree on, which may remain of outsize Bute House Agreement included a pledge to secure a referendum on Scottish that didn't happen this term - but depending on the result of the election, building a "pro independence majority" may well be something which puts the SNP and Greens back on similar ground next May.
The Herald Scotland
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Scottish Government scraps Galloway and Ayrshire national park plan
As part of the Bute House agreement which saw the SNP and the Scottish Greens form a government, it was agreed that "at least one" new national park would be created to join the Caringorms and Loch Lomond and Trossachs. After applications were invited the shortlist was narrowed down to Galloway, the Scottish Borders, Lochaber, Loch Awe and Tay Forest. Read More: The preferred option, which also took in areas of East and South Ayrshire, was proposed by the Scottish Government in July last year and further investigation and consultation ordered. NatureScot was appointed to carry out the process, holding a 14 week consultation from 7 November 2024 until 14 February 2025. Over five thousand surveys were completed and more than one thousand people attended events that were held across Galloway and South and East Ayrshire, with the respective councils also involved in the process. Ultimately 54% of respondents were in opposition to the national park with 52% in favour, with the balance 57% to 40% when including only local responses. As a result, Ms Gougeon announced that the government would not proceed with the proposal. In a statement to the Scottish Parliament she said: "Based on the evidence gathered during the investigation and consultation, the reporter has advised that, whilst it considers that the proposed area meets the conditions for a national park set out in the legislation, the proposal does not have sufficient clarity, nor has it garnered sufficient local support to proceed to the next stage of designation. "We have weighed up the arguments for and against the creation of a new National Park in the area, taking full account of the potential economic, social and environmental factors, and we have come to the conclusion not to proceed with the designation of a National Park in Galloway and Ayrshire. "I realise that this decision will be very disappointing for those who have been campaigning for a new National Park in Galloway over many years. "Whilst we have decided not to proceed with the designation of a new National Park in Galloway and Ayrshire in light of the consultation findings and the Reporter's conclusions, I want to stress that this Government remains committed to National Parks in Scotland and their vital leadership role in tackling the climate and biodiversity crises, promoting sustainable land management and supporting the economic and social development of local communities." The decision was welcomed in the chamber by Finlay Carson, the Scottish Conservative MSP for Galloway and West Dumfries. He said he had supported the idea in principle but "my support changed when the Bute House agreement saw Lorna Slater impose a top-down structure which seemed more like a Green-Nationalist park". Responding to the statement in the chamber, Colin Smyth, the Labour MSP for South Scotland, said: "For too long Galloway has been Scotland's forgotten corner. Strong words from @colinsmythmsp on Galloway and National Park being dropped👇@heraldscotland. — Rebecca McCurdy (@_RebeccaMcCurdy) May 29, 2025 "Today the government has made it clear it wants to tear down the 'welcome to Dumfries and Galloway' signs and put up 'no entry' instead. "Why is is that every idea this incompetent, useless, government touches falls apart?" Scottish Greens MSP Mark Ruskell said: "This decision to scrap the promised National Park for Galloway is the culmination of lack of confident political leadership and the dangerous influence of powerful vested interests. 'Scotland's two current National Parks have shown just how valuable the status can be. Communities have benefited from better management of tourism and forestry, and new investment in transport and housing. 'By scrapping plans for the third National Park in Galloway, the Scottish Government has slammed the door on the economic investment and new powers this designation could bring. This is devastating news for the local community and nature. 'Scottish communities were competing against each other last year to secure a new National Park. But now, thanks to a campaign led by vested interests and misinformation, the Scottish Government is denying all of Scotland the opportunity to benefit from a new National Park. 'Many of the Park's biggest opponents here in Holyrood once were vocal supporters of a new National Park in Scotland. The Tories backed the designation of a new National Park in both the 2016 and 2021 manifestos, even demanding the next park be in Galloway. But once again, they have sided with wealthy landowners who oppose change and lobby for their comfy status quo. 'Ultimately, it is the people of Galloway who will pay the price for this decision to scrap the National Park, and I'm sure this wasted opportunity will not be quickly forgotten by communities.' Kat Jones, director of Action to Protect Rural Scotland said: 'The news that Galloway is no longer under consideration to be Scotland's next National Park should send a chill down the spine of everyone campaigning to make the world a better place. That a policy so popular with the public, and a designation with so much promise for the region, has been dropped, seemingly in response to a well-funded media campaign spreading fear and misinformation, is a tragedy." Karen Blackport, co-convenor of the Scottish Rewilding Alliance and chief executive of Bright Green Nature, said: 'By scrapping plans for a Galloway National Park, the Scottish Government has yet again proved it cannot successfully plot a path to a wilder Scotland. "This decision undermines efforts to restore nature, protect wildlife and support resilient rural communities. Amidst a climate and biodiversity crisis, Scotland needs leadership and vision – not another retreat from meaningful action. " Ramblers Scotland director Brendan Paddy said: 'Scotland has waited for two decades for its third national park, so we are disappointed to see this major opportunity missed. 'A new Galloway National Park, if delivered well, had the potential to attract funding, promote responsible outdoor recreation and support people from all backgrounds to walk in this beautiful corner of Scotland. 'We hope that the next Parliament will work to rebuild confidence that national parks are a key part of how Scotland's finest environments can be managed for the mutual benefit of residents, visitors and nature.'
