Undemocratic National Parks

By Angus Macmillan
0 CommentsPrint E-mail China.org.cn, November 12, 2010
Adjust font size:

Dear Sirs

I was interested to hear David Cameron preaching democracy to the Chinese people today.

Perhaps he should preach it to the Scottish Government in the UK.

In the year 2009, eleven years after devolution in Scotland, the Scottish Parliament introduced a consultation document under the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 which continues to discriminate against those residing in the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs areas by proposing nothing that reduces a substantial amount of power from the elected local authorities and placing it in the hands of National Park Authorities (NPAs) which are non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) responsible to central government.

This proposal continues the anomaly that those residing within national park boundaries do not enjoy the same level of local democracy as elsewhere in the country, as the 17 NPA board members dominated by central government appointees and board member electees, "must work together with the purpose, as set out in the Act [section 9 (1)], of ensuring that the National Park aims are collectively achieved in relation to the National Park in a coordinated way".

The suggested political structure of NPA Boards is:

(a) 6 central government appointees.

(b) 6 further central government appointees nominated by local councils that have at least part of a ward within the national park boundaries.

The nominated members shall be nominated as follows;

? two members (including one local member) to be nominated by Argyll and Bute Council

? two members (including one local member) to be nominated by Stirling

Council

? one member nominated by West Dunbartonshire Council

? one member nominated by Perth & Kinross Council

These nominated board members are generally, but not necessarily, local councillors who have been elected on mainstream issues but who are required to represent their electorate differently, depending whether or not their voters reside within the national parks. They are also entitled to make decisions that affect constituencies in which they do not reside or represent.

(c) 5 board member electees who are solely concerned with national park issues. This is passed off as "democracy" but there is a world of a difference between electing local councilors on the wide political front and board members "electees" of quangos with a single-issue remit.

Under this proposal, planning applications will still be determined by board members who must work together to ensure that the national park aims are collectively achieved. Board members who are councilors elected on mainstream politics will require to make different decisions depending on whether their constituents do or do not reside within national park boundaries.

The question that no politician will answer is:

Why are those who live within the boundaries of national parks in Scotland not entitled to the same level of local democracy as elsewhere in the country?

The National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 is an act of discrimination against a minority of the population based on where they reside.

Print E-mail Bookmark and Share

Go to Forum >>0 Comments

No comments.

Add your comments...

  • User Name Required
  • Your Comment
  • Racist, abusive and off-topic comments may be removed by the moderator.
Send your storiesGet more from China.org.cnMobileRSSNewsletter
主站蜘蛛池模板: 久久精品99无色码中文字幕| 亚洲精品欧美精品日韩精品| 黄网站在线观看高清免费| 图片区小说区校园| 一个人看的www在线高清小说| 无码人妻一区二区三区免费看| 久久青青草原亚洲AV无码麻豆| 欧美性xxxx禁忌| 亚洲精彩视频在线观看| 福利深夜小视频秒拍微拍| 同城免费妇女寂寞| 蜜芽亚洲欧美一区二区电影| 国产成人亚洲精品无码青青草原| h视频在线免费看| 国产美女精品三级在线观看| avtt加勒比手机版天堂网| 好男人在线视频www官网| 中国女人一级毛片| 拍拍拍无挡免费视频网站| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片AV东京热| 最新欧美精品一区二区三区 | 51久久夜色精品国产| 在线网站你懂得| avtt天堂在线| 天天天天天天干| mm1313亚洲精品无码又大又粗| 小次郎收藏最新地址| 三上悠亚精品一区二区久久| 成人区视频爽爽爽爽爽| 中文字幕亚洲一区二区三区 | 羞羞网站在线观看| 国产一区二区三区欧美| 花季app色版网站免费 | hkpic比思特区东方美人| 好吊色欧美一区二区三区视频| 一人上面一个吃我电影| 小12箩利洗澡无码视频网站| 一本色道久久综合狠狠躁篇| 巨胸狂喷奶水视频www网站免费| 丁香九月月小说图片区| 性欧美wideos|