Power struggle over bigger national park

Published on Thursday 25 September 2008 21:52

A MAJOR row is set to erupt between neighbouring councils over the make-up of the board controlling Europe's biggest national park.

Mike Russell, the environment minister, announced plans earlier this year to extend the boundaries of the Cairngorms National Park to take in Blair Atholl and parts of eastern and Highland Perthshire.

The new sections are currently under control of Perth and Kinross Council. Next week Aberdeenshire councillors are expected to demand that they be allowed to keep their three representatives on the park board, while Highland Council loses one of its five seats to make way for a new member from Perth and Kinross.

A consultation was launched last month by Scottish Natural Heritage to come up with detailed proposals on where the new boundary should be and how many representatives from each local authority should sit on the park's board.

The board currently comprises 25 members, including ten from the four councils with a stake in the park – five from Highland, three from Aberdeenshire and one each from Moray and Angus councils. Members of Aberdeenshire Council will be urged next Tuesday to endorse a call for measures to prevent Highland Council taking "too large an influence" on the board.

The consultation response, drafted by senior council officials, has already been endorsed by Anne Robertson, the leader of the council, and the three Aberdeenshire representatives on the board. In a report, Leslie Allan, Aberdeenshire Council's Marr area manager, states: "Scottish ministers wish to retain local authority representation on the park board at ten members, while increasing the number of local authorities involved by one. In giving Perth and Kinross a seat on the park board, either Aberdeenshire Council or Highland Council will lose a seat."

The council states: "

A population-based membership allocation is potentially affected by population growth or decline in different parts of the park.

"Significant growth in the Aviemore area could lead to calls for an even higher redistribution to Highland Council in the future," the council goes on. "This would not be in the interests of the management of the park, as one council would have too large an influence.

"Aberdeenshire Council believes that its contribution to the park board and to delivery of the park plan has been significant and reflects the council's very strong commitment to work in partnership. It has earned its three places on the park board."

A spokesman for Highland Council said the authority would be arguing that it should retain its five-strong representation on the board.

The spokesman said: "The council prefers the option based on estimated population within the park area for the allocation of local-authority nominations to the park board. We have made no recommendation as to which council should lose its seat."