leyton.org

The Save Pollok Park campaign sent out an e-mail this morning highlighting a number of issues surrounding the Go Ape proposal for the historic North Wood. The big news was that my local constituency MSP, Nicola Sturgeon, has publicly come down against the proposal in a letter to The Herald. At the recent Public meeting she had kept her public comments specifically to calling for the flawed public consultation to be restarted. In her letter, the Deputy First Minister of Scotland, said:

The fact is that this consultation failed and, instead of pressing full-steam ahead to a planning decision, the council should allow it to be rerun. That would allow everyone - those who favour the Go Ape proposal and those who, like me, think that the North Wood of Pollok Park is not the right place for it - to be fully informed and have their say before a final decision is taken.

In an article covering her letter and the ongoing controversy a council spokesperson talks blithely that “A third party has made a planning application and, as a result, the statutory planning process is now under way. Glasgow City Council’s role in the process is as the local planning authority and it is not in a position to stop, alter or frustrate the application.”

Glasgow Council is no “third party”. They invited Go Ape in, and far more importantly stand to financially benefit from their own planning decision. Reading the Proposed lease (PDF) we learn that Go Ape will be paying a rent to Glasgow council, and after the 4th year they will pay, in addition to a base rent, up to 8% of turnover if visitors exceed 35,001. At, say, £20 a head (normally it’s £25 for an adult, so allowing a little for discounts), that could be upwards of £56,000 per year, hinging on a planning decision they themselves make. If this is not a conflict of interest, I really don’t know what is.

I’m certainly hoping that Nicola Sturgeon, who is not without some clout, continues to take an active interest in this proposal. By any measure, other than as a demonstration of how to rig the system, the councils public “consultation” was deeply flawed, especially when viewed against the turnout at the public meeting. Glasgow council have also managed to fall out with their ‘partners’ in managing Pollok Park, namely the Maxwell family that donated the park to the people of Glasgow, and the National Trust for Scotland. Both are on record as opposing the plan.

If Glasgow council proceed any further, they are demonstrating nothing but hubris and naivety. Their conflict of interest alone is reason enough for the planning proposal to be “called in” by the Scottish Government. With the badly flawed “consultation”, disagreeing Park management partners, and overwhelming public opposition, I fail to see how they can actually not want to find a way out.

Finally, Go Ape, an otherwise admirable company, talk about being a “Good news story“. In the right place (namely, forest and private facilities), they most certainly are. In inner cities, and within parks that occupy a special place in the heart of a city, they risk turning themselves into little more than an arrogant profit seeking company, prepared to chase a profit regardless of public opinion. They would do well to take note of the opposition from a local community, the dubious activities and bias of their ‘partner’, Glasgow council who have a conflict of interest on their hands.

Hopefully the furore that has arisen over this will not be lost on them, and they’ll see fit to withdraw the application which, as things appear to stand, is more than likely to be thrown out when these conflicts of interest are brought to book.

This entry was posted on Saturday, January 26th, 2008 at 4:09 pm and is filed under Campaigns, Glasgow, Politics, Scotland, Scottish Politics, Southside. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.