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: 亚洲同性男gay网站在线观看| 情侣视频精品免费的国产| 亚洲精品国产高清在线观看| 精品欧美军人同性videos| 国产午夜小视频| 午夜小视频在线| 性色av一区二区三区| 亚洲国产成人va在线观看| 狠狠色丁香九九婷婷综合五月| 国产四虎免费精品视频| 男女下面无遮挡一进一出| 国内自拍视频一区二区三区| v片免费在线观看| 成人99国产精品| 中文字幕在线视频观看| 日本成人免费在线| 亚洲性久久久影院| 精品成在人线av无码免费看| 国产亚洲婷婷香蕉久久精品 | 最新浮力影院地址第一页| 亚洲国产片在线观看| 欧美色欧美亚洲高清在线观看| 人人爽人人爽人人爽| 跪在校花脚下叼着女主人的鞋| 国产欧美在线观看一区| 三级黄色毛片视频| 国产精品无码久久综合网| 7777精品伊人久久久大香线蕉 | 亚洲一卡2卡4卡5卡6卡在线99| 第九色区AV天堂| 国产国语在线播放视频| 免费足恋视频网站女王| 国产福利在线观看极品美女| caoporn地址| 好男人看的视频2018免费| 一本久久a久久精品亚洲| 性欧美暴力猛交xxxxx高清| 两根硕大一起挤进小h| 成人无码午夜在线观看| 中文字幕123区| 成人区人妻精品一区二区不卡|