| Allan Wilson:
I am sure that
we would all like to express our gratitude to Elaine Thomson for giving
us the opportunity to debate one of Scotland's most attractive areas.
As we have heard
from Elaine Thomson, Fergus Ewing and others, the Cairngorms area is quite
remarkable. It is the UK's most important area for nature conservation
and has some of Scotland's finest wild landscapes. It is the largest block
of wild high land in the country and the best area for sub-Arctic terrain
and wildlife in the European Union outside Sweden and Finland. The old
woods of pine and birch on the Spey and Dee date back thousands of years.
Throughout the area, the landforms, lochs, rivers, moors and marshes are
all of outstanding beauty. It is of little surprise that, as members have
mentioned, every year thousands of visitors from home and abroad come to
walk, climb, ski, fish or simply enjoy the many attractions of the Cairngorms
that have been outlined by Murray Tosh and others.
Over the years,
a great deal has been done to protect the natural heritage of the Cairngorms.
Much of the area is already designated as a site of special scientific
interest, a special protection area, a special area of conservation, a
national nature reserve or a national scenic area. Those designations all
apply in the Cairngorms. We are also committed, as all members who have
spoken have mentioned, to the establishment of a Cairngorms national park.
We must ensure the sustainable development of that important area. The
establishment of the national park is the optimum means of achieving that.
I recognise
the arguments for seeking world heritage status for the Cairngorms. As
the motion states, it would be fitting to take that idea forward this year,
which is the international year of mountains. We support fully the aims
of that UN initiative. We are aware of the importance of our mountain areas
and we welcome the programme of events that is being organised throughout
Scotland to mark the international year of mountains.
Mr Rumbles:
Will the minister mention the planning issue
and say why the two national park plans are different?
Robin Harper:
Does the minister agree—
The Deputy Presiding
Officer: One at a time, please. Your chance
will come, Mr Harper.
Allan Wilson:
In my concluding remarks, I will come to the issue of planning and to other
issues connected to the national park.
Robin Harper:
Does the minister agree that the issue has been around for some time? In
1990, Lord James Douglas-Hamilton agreed to the proposal to include the
Cairngorms on the tentative list for designation as a world heritage site.
He stated:
"the case for
conservation of not just the Northern Corries but the Cairngorms as a whole
outweighed the case for further development".
Allan Wilson:
Rhoda Grant made that point fairly effectively.
My colleague
Mike Watson launched the international year of mountains in Scotland. He
was impressed by the enthusiasm of the wide range of organisations that
promote Scotland's mountains. Those organisations will be engaged in that
process during the coming months. I am sure that they will pursue many
of the recreational interests that Robin Harper mentioned.
Unfortunately,
as Keith Raffan, Mike Rumbles and others said, there is no prospect of
progressing the nomination of the Cairngorms as a world heritage site this
year. The Cairngorms was one of 25 sites on the UK tentative list, which
is the list of sites that the UK is considering for nomination to UNESCO
for world heritage status by 2010. In the present climate, the UK does
not expect to nominate more than one site from the tentative list each
year. As was mentioned, the site for this year has been identified as Kew
gardens.
The case for
the Cairngorms will require careful preparation. In recent years, UNESCO
has adopted an increasingly critical approach to the consideration of nominations.
Although members recognise the worth of the Cairngorms, we must demonstrate
that they meet the detailed criteria that are laid down by UNESCO for world
heritage status. That process cannot be rushed through in a couple of months.
We are aware
from informal discussions with UNESCO and its advisers that the Cairngorms
cannot be considered for world heritage status until we put in place an
effective system of management to protect the proposed site. The changes
that we have proposed to the way in which we protect and manage our most
special natural places will go a long way towards establishing such a system.
As "The Nature of Scotland: A Policy Statement" explains, our aim is to
work more effectively with land managers and communities to protect and
manage those areas.
The integrated
management that UNESCO looks for, which was mentioned by Robin Harper and
others, will follow from the establishment of the Cairngorms national park.
When the park is in place and the policy and measures to manage the area
through the first park plan have been set out, we will be in a stronger
position to promote the Cairngorms as a world heritage site.
Mr Raffan:
I strongly agree with what the minister has said. Will he tell members
when he expects the boundaries of the proposed Cairngorms national park
to be finalised?
Allan Wilson:
I will come to that point.
The Cairngorms
national park will ensure the sustainable development of the area in a
way that is in keeping with the aims of the international year of mountains.
I will address
some of the questions that were posed. The next step in the creation of
the national park is for Scottish ministers to publish a draft designation
order on which there will be further consultation. We expect to do that
shortly. Following that, the responses will be considered and, if necessary,
the draft order will be revised. The draft order will be laid before the
Scottish Parliament for approval. The size of the park will be determined
by the draft designation order. The world heritage site must be determined
by the UNESCO criteria, which will be relevant to the draft order. I look
forward to joining everyone again here in the chamber when the draft designation
order is published, as it will be in the foreseeable future. Then we will
be able to have a debate about the size of the national park and about
the planning authority, which will be retained.
To
read this debate in full, click here
|
