大象传媒

This was Terence Blacker writing in last week's Independent - I forwarded it Mr. Salmond for his consideration. (My home town Dingwall have also suffered at the hands of Labour central government imposing a project - A PFI school on the flood plain opposed by 73.5% of the electorate in a local referendum).

"For as long as politics and cynicism have co-existed, the excuse of the apathetic non-voter has remained unchanged. Politicians? They're all the same, aren't they? Almost always, the line is demonstrably false, but in one area at least it is true. Big-time politicians like to make warm, supportive noises about local democracy but, when a council puts central government on the spot, their attitude is quickly revealed to be bogus.

Everyone likes local neighbourhoods, as long as they behave themselves. When Gordon Brown, on becoming Prime Minister, argued that "our
participatory democracy is too weak at local level, so we have to rise to the new challenge of engagement," he was echoing what the Leader of the
Opposition had said a few months previously. Local democracy, according to David Cameron, is "an idea whose time has come". Joining the chorus,
Vince Cable has recently urged his party to move to "a more locally-based way of running the country".

If these pronouncements had been halfway honest, the qualifying phrase "so long as that locally-based way of running the country coincides with
that of central government" might have been added. Within weeks of becoming PM, for example, Brown was introducing a Bill that would substantially
reduce the power of local communities when it comes to major planning applications.

But the most perfect example of hypocrisy in this fashionable policy area comes from the UK's newest governing body, the Scottish National Party.
In the past, the SNP leader Alex Salmond has been as localist as any politician - he even donated his salary as First Minister to local causes - but the complex business of governing rather than opposing has revealed his true position.

Last week, the Aberdeenshire planning committee bravely and correctly voted against a monstrous application by the American billionaire Donald Trump
which would turn a 1,400-acre stretch of unspoilt coastline into a housing development and one of the biggest golfing complexes in the world. The
committee decided that the rare sand-dune habitat, described by a creepy-sounding henchman of Trump's as "a menace - sand that blew in off the beach", was too important to be sacrificed to the greed of a
developer.

The new ruling party in Scotland quickly proved that no dog snarls quite like an underdog that suddenly finds itself on top. Alex Salmond was said
to be "furious" about the decision. One of his senior SNP colleagues referred to those who put the countryside before consumerism as "yahoos". In the local press, the decision was reported under the inflammatory headline "You traitors".

Here is the true face of localism, and more and more of it will be seen throughout the UK over the coming months. In the face of the rush for growth, a brutal and uncompromising alliance quickly develops between those who want to make money and the politicians who want to win votes by encouraging what is often fraudulently presented as an opportunity for jobs, wealth, regeneration. The media, following the money, forget their own pious editorials about conservation and scramble on to the bandwagon.

The beleaguered landscape and the communities that are part of it find themselves at the mercy of tycoons and politicians. Their only remaining hope lies in the determination and courage of the local people abused and vilified as yahoos because they refuse to worship at the shrine of development. Brown, Cameron, Cable and Salmond are right: local democracy is an idea whose time has come. It must not be bullied into submission on the very issues that affect communities and their future most deeply

As a political neutral who does not live in the NE, I have to say that there seems to be a complex among the obvious SNP supporters here. How you can see a conspiracy between the 大象传媒 and the opposition parties in the parliament, I don't know. Furthermore I would expect the 大象传媒 to investigate this at length (as is their job) If the SNP don't like the results you cannot call foul!

Where all the comments regarding lack of coverage over Wendy Alexander's donations are coming from I also don't know. I felt Brian's coverage was in depth andwell handled. Also I have to say I am less concerned about Wendy Alexander receiving 拢950 (broken law or not), than I am about Brian Souter donating
拢600000. Just think of the political influence that must buy!

With regards to Alex Salmond and 'sleaze', I personally don't think there has been any sleaze in the traditional sense ( However, the call to the council with the Trump officials in the room is concerning). I do agree with Annabel Goldie though, this does seem like a re-emergance of Alex Salmond's 'arrogance' rather than ignorance. I do feel this could be the begining of the end of the honeymoon for the SNP. Although I am sure their supporters will see a plot.

While we argue over facts, one fact keeps being overlooked and one lie repeated in this thread.
Claims that Aberdeenshire's Infrastructure Services Committee voted 7 against the Trump development and 7 for are simply untrue.
The Committee first divided 9 against the development and only 5 for.
It was the subsequent vote to either refuse the appliaction outright, or to defer consideration pending discussions with the applicant, that was tied 7-7. Neither would have placated Trump.