Cairngorms (World Heritage Site Status)
The final item of business is a members' business debate on motion S1M-2669, in the name of Elaine Thomson, on world heritage site status for the Cairngorms. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament congratulates the United Nations on its co-ordination of the International Year of Mountains; believes that an appropriate way to celebrate the year would be to ensure that the Cairngorm Mountain Range, the largest continuous area of high ground above 1,000 metres in Britain, is designated a World Heritage Site, and therefore considers that the Scottish Executive should speedily propose discussions with Her Majesty's Government to achieve the ultimate international acclaim of World Heritage Status for this beautiful and environmentally unique part of our heritage.
I am delighted to have secured the debate today. This year is the international year of mountains and there is no better time to achieve world heritage status for the Cairngorms. I thank Kevin Hutchens, convener of the United Nations Association committee for Scotland, for encouraging me to lodge the motion.
Everyone has their own special mountains. Without doubt, mine are the Cairngorms. The views up Deeside looking across to Lochnagar or walking up past the Linn of Dee into the beginning of the Lairig Ghru, where one catches glimpses of red squirrels in the native Caledonian pine forest, are for me Scotland in its essence.
One of my favourite views, which, amazingly, can be seen from just outside Aberdeen, is the view across to Lochnagar in winter, with its sheer rock faces etched in snow. I have made it to the top of Lochnagar only once, when the weather—in true Scottish fashion—ensured that we could see only 20ft in any direction. On that day I was part of a multinational group of Scots and Malaysians who had never walked so far or so high in their lives, but who knew nevertheless that it was a special place and a special experience.
Scotland has many mountains to celebrate in the year of mountains. I argue that none are more spectacular that the Cairngorms. Aberdonians have a special affinity with the Cairngorms—perhaps it is the granite connection—and Aberdeen is the gateway to them. Many a family has climbed Bennachie or Clachnaben, the easternmost outcrops of the Cairngorms, on a sunny Sunday afternoon. We must not forget all the serious climbers, such as those in the Cairngorm Club, Scotland's oldest climbing club. The club is based in Aberdeen and counts among its members several members of my family, both past and present.
The Cairngorms are a unique and special part of Scotland's natural and cultural heritage. The international year of mountains is the right time to achieve world heritage status for the Cairngorms. Someone not so familiar with the area asked me what made the Cairngorms any different from the Cuillins, the Mamores or parts of the Alps. The answer has three key aspects.
First, the natural heritage is truly spectacular. The combination of geological, geomorphological and ecological features is unique. In the Cairngorms, Scotland has a little outpost of the Arctic, where flora and fauna from the Arctic north mixes with those of the formerly glaciated alpine south. That happens nowhere else. Even the Cairngorms' wet and windy climate is a unique feature. The Cairngorms also include large tracts of remnant Caledonian forest—the woodlands that gave the name to that kind of forest. Granny pines can be found in Glen Derry that are estimated to be up to 900 years old.
Secondly, the cultural history of the Cairngorms and the variety of land uses have had such an impact that the area has produced some truly unique landscapes. I speak in particular of the eastern Cairngorms and the extensive rolling grouse moors, which are a feature that is unique to that part of Scotland—the habitat and flora and fauna that they support are not replicated elsewhere.
There is also the historic and cultural interest in the Highland sporting estate. Although such estates are perhaps nearing the end of their more traditional days, they are nevertheless of importance in European historical terms, if only because they created such a significant cultural landscape. Deeside has been the preferred holiday location of the royal family for a long time. There is also the earlier history. This is not well known, but land improvements in the Cairngorms in the 17th century were some of the earliest clearances in Scotland. A remarkable archaeological record is emerging that shows the existence of sizeable villages many miles into some of the Cairngorm glens.
Thirdly, there is the sheer scale and remoteness of the mountains, where one can walk for several days at a time and escape from the trappings of the modern day. From the summit of Ben Macdui, it is more than 30 miles due south to the first public road.
I am aware that this is not the first time that the Cairngorms have been proposed for world heritage status. I know that they are on the United Kingdom's tentative list. Many of the inadequacies that resulted in the failure of the previous bid, which was made 10 years ago, are now being resolved. A national park is being created. Land reform legislation will protect and extend public access as well as help to bring land into public ownership.
I was delighted when the Mar Lodge estate was taken over by the National Trust for Scotland. That put an end to the wanton environmental vandalism by some of the estate's previous owners, including the felling of some of the remaining fragments of the ancient Caledonian forest.
Further legislation to protect Scottish natural heritage, which will comply with the European Union birds and habitats directive, is being considered. The opportunity to achieve the accolade of world heritage status has never been better.
The minister might be aware of concerns that the proposed Cairngorms national park should have adequate planning powers to meet the criteria sought by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation for world heritage site status. I ask the minister to ensure that that point is considered as development of the national park moves into its final consultative stage. I am also interested to find out whether the Scottish Executive is having discussions with the relevant United Nations committee—the International Union for the Conservation of Nature—which advises on the suitability of world heritage status nominees.
This undeveloped, extensive area of wild land will have increasing value to 21st century society as a repose, a retreat and a place to think big thoughts. It is a place that is not only worthy of designation as a world heritage site, but worth protecting.
I am happy to speak on St Valentine's day with my wife beside me—[Members: "Aw."] Yes, and I remembered the flowers. As I was saying, I am happy to talk today about my love affair with the Scottish Cairngorms. They are truly magnificent and I congratulate Elaine Thomson on suggesting this interesting idea for a debate. As a former mountain rescue team member and hillwalker, I have visited many of the tops of the Cairngorms and indeed participated in the Cairngorm hill race in 1995, in which I had the distinction of coming last. Just before the race, Gordon Lennox, who was a local photographer with the Strathspey & Badenoch Herald, said to me, "Fergus, you're going to come last. Is that a good omen for a potential politician?" I said, "As a former minister, you know that it says in the Bible that he who is last shall be first." And so it came to pass.
I am pleased to participate in the debate and I will make a few brief comments. First, although I welcome any new idea, the local community must be fully engaged. The feeling in Badenoch and Strathspey that ideas are imposed from above should be taken into account.
Secondly, Elaine Thomson's idea might well be an excellent means of promoting the number of tourist visitors to the area. However, the local chamber of commerce and community councils—certainly those in my constituency, which includes most of the Cairngorms—should be consulted.
Thirdly, there is concern that giving the national park structure its own planning system will add an extra layer of bureaucracy. There is no desire for such a system. Although I know that a number of interest groups believe that that view is wrong, I feel that, instead of having a two-tier planning structure, local planners simply need more resources to deal with the work that they already have. The introduction of such a structure would set a bad precedent. Other members will have strong views on the issue, but I believe that it would be a shame to spend resources on introducing such a system when so much needs to be done to improve the environment.
Elaine Thomson's suggestion would best be pursued through consultation with the local communities. Indeed, it should be pursued after the national park board has been set up and people are comfortable with the way in which it operates. Although the board does not have full support, it is generally seen in Badenoch and Strathspey more as an opportunity than as a threat. I welcome this debate and hope that it plays a part in the appreciation of the Cairngorms as a mountain range of worldwide significance.
For obvious reasons—my voice—I will be very brief. Although I am pleased to support Elaine Thomson's motion, I must disagree with her suggestion that Aberdeen is the gateway to the Cairngorms—I think that many people in Strathspey and Badenoch would not agree with her either.
The Cairngorms are one of several mountain ranges in Scotland that fit the criteria for world heritage status. Others that come to mind are the Cuillins, the Torridon range and the Nevis range. Such a site must be an example of a state of evolution on earth; be representative of biological evolution; contain natural habitats of endangered animals; be a scene of exceptional beauty; or have a spectacular view of large concentrations of animals. Indeed, Loch Ness also fits those criteria.
Since the world heritage convention was signed in 1972, hundreds of sites, including some of the most famous places on earth, have been accorded world heritage status. Those sites are of such universal value that protecting them should be the concern of every man and woman. It is beyond doubt that the Cairngorms mountain range is one such place. Like others, I regularly walk in the Cairngorms, although, as more of a flat walker than a mountain walker I do not achieve the heights of my colleague Murray Tosh.
It has been said that attaining world heritage status means that an area is fully protected and cannot be knocked down, dug up or painted over. Although I support the granting of world heritage status, I do so on the basis that the areas that are covered should be recognised rather than on the basis that there is any threat of their being knocked down, dug up or painted over. Managing a world heritage property is an ever-changing task that calls not only for special knowledge of the site but awareness of what is going on around it and in society at large. If world heritage status means that future planning would be more realistic than was the case for the funicular railway, which had the longest-running planning application in Scottish legal history, it would be worth while and I would fully support it.
I fully support Elaine Thomson's motion, the first part of which states:
"That the Parliament congratulates the United Nations on its co-ordination of the International Year of Mountains".
I was happy to sign the motion to show my support, but I am a little perplexed about why Elaine Thomson has not so far supported the motion on that very subject—the international year of mountains—that I lodged a few weeks ago, which now has the support of 18 MSPs from across the range of parties in the Parliament.
It is very important to gather as much support as possible, to encourage Scottish Executive ministers to take action to celebrate the international year of mountains. I encourage Elaine Thomson to support my motion. I have the great privilege to represent many people who live and work in Deeside and Donside—identified so eloquently by Elaine Thomson a few moments ago—in the Cairngorm mountain range.
While I support Elaine Thomson's suggestion that the Cairngorms be declared a world heritage site, she may be a little premature. Due to the UNESCO regulations, the UK can submit only one site for world heritage status each year. The submission—from the tentative list drawn up in 1999—was due on 1 February. The Cairngorms are on the tentative list but the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew has received this year's nomination.
A Cairngorms management committee and the Scottish Executive have to prove to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport that the Cairngorms are ready for nomination. To satisfy UNESCO regulations, a fairly strict management regime has to be in place—which suggests that the national park will have to be up and running before the Cairngorms will be considered for nomination.
The first piece of legislation that I helped deal with as a member of the Rural Affairs Committee was the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000, which is the enabling legislation for the national parks. We are well on course for setting up a national park in the Cairngorms, but as has been pointed out by the Cairngorms Campaign and others, if the Cairngorms are to have any possibility of achieving world heritage designation, the Cairngorms national park authority needs to have far stronger powers than are presently envisaged. I am talking about planning powers. What is currently proposed is an arrangement of shared responsibilities between the various councils. There would be input from the park authority, but there is the possibility of confusion.
Will the minister consider changing the Executive's stance—although, as it is really Scottish Natural Heritage's recommendation, it is SNH's stance—on giving full planning powers to the proposed Cairngorms national park, on the same lines as those proposed for the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs national park, so that we can achieve world heritage status for the Cairngorms?
I welcome the opportunity to debate this issue and congratulate Elaine Thomson on securing the debate. It is fitting that the debate should take place during the international year of mountains. It is also fitting that the third European Mountain Convention is being held in Inverness later this year. It is a European association that promotes co-operation between mountain regions.
The Cairngorms are a place of outstanding natural beauty and have attracted visitors from all over the world for many years—people who are interested in mountaineering, wildlife and nature conservation. The question is, what would world heritage status add to the Cairngorms and what benefits would it bring? The most obvious benefit would be recognition. The list of sites with world heritage status is impressive and includes the great wall of China, the cathedral of Notre Dame, the giant's causeway in Northern Ireland and, more recently, New Lanark. Those sites are all well known and stand out as visitor attractions.
There are four world heritage sites in Scotland: the Neolithic monuments of Orkney, Edinburgh's old and new towns, St Kilda and New Lanark. They are regarded as the gold standard of Scotland's heritage and are recognised throughout the world because of the historic value they add to it. It cannot be doubted that tourism would be boosted through the granting of such status to the Cairngorms. I am sure that some tourists who come to Scotland would be swayed to visit the Cairngorms if the area attracted world heritage status. That would be a welcome boost to the communities in the Cairngorms.
Tourism would not be the only industry that would be helped; there would be a knock-on effect on local industries and the local economy. The part of the Cairngorms that lies in my constituency is dominated by the ski resort of Aviemore. With the award of world heritage status, the attraction of the area would be further enhanced. The opening of the funicular railway has also provided an incentive for tourists to come to the Cairngorms.
The creation of the national park will affect the area, too. With that development, there is potential to promote the area. Furthermore, the national park development and world heritage status will not confine economic activity and development. Throughout the passage of the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000, serious issues were raised about the balance between economic and environmental concerns. I believe that those issues have been resolved. If granted, world heritage status would recognise the natural beauty of the Cairngorms and would have the potential to bring economic benefit not only to the tourism industry, but to the wider local economy.
I hope that the Scottish Executive will back the proposal and that the minister will seek to persuade Westminster colleagues that it is worth supporting.
I have many happy memories of the Cairngorms. When I was 16 and attending Elgin Academy, I visited Loch Morlich and climbed Braeriach. In my 20s, I took school groups to the Cairngorms. We stayed at the Lagganlia centre for outdoor education and went skiing. In my 40s and my Munro-bagging days, I went up all three major ridges and climbed all the Munros in the area. It is a stupendously beautiful area of Scotland of which I am very fond and I was glad when it was made a national park. Nonetheless, I have two reservations.
First, the present set-up, in which the separate local authorities bargain with each other, will not be workable. Something much stronger is needed, such as an overall planning authority. Secondly, I have concerns about the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000. I appeared at the Rural Affairs Committee on several occasions to ensure that the Sandford principle was enshrined in the bill. I was reassured by Sarah Boyack, on the day when the bill was passed, that it was. I asked her to give me a copper-bottomed assurance that the Sandford principle was incorporated in the bill and she said that it was. However, I still hae ma doots. World heritage status for the Cairngorms would make absolutely certain that the Sandford principle was protected in the Cairngorms.
I have two questions for the minister. First, does he intend to take steps to meet the world heritage committee's requirement that appropriate management arrangements be put in place—in effect, an integration of planning controls and a proper parks authority? Secondly, how large would the Cairngorm world heritage site be? Would it extend to the boundary of the forthcoming national park or would it be just a small part of that? The latter option would not be acceptable.
I congratulate Elaine Thomson on securing the debate. An opportunity exists for Scotland, but with every opportunity there are threats. The Parliament must work hard to guard against the threats.
As I come from the north-east, the Cairngorm mountain range is naturally one of my favourite areas. I have been in many of the world's famous ranges but still look at the Cairngorms with a different eye. They are comforting whereas some ranges can be quite awesome, although it is obvious that someone in the Cairngorms in the wrong weather can be in real trouble.
Balances must be considered. Conservation and protection must be borne in mind while we look at the potential for tourism. There must be discussion of the management of people and infrastructure support to ensure that people can obtain access in a way that does not damage the fragile ecology.
Controls have been mentioned. As always, I am concerned about who manages controls. I agree with Fergus Ewing that we must get the national park authority in and up and then look outwards from there. I have lived in the new national park in Loch Lomond and worked there as a community councillor and as a councillor. I saw all the tensions not just with funding, but with getting local control and input, proper consultation and management and recognition that people live in the area. Not everyone is a tourist. Normal life must be encouraged wherever possible, but the economy must be developed. There must be a single planning authority for that area, otherwise there will be mixed messages. Members saw what went on at the beginning of the national park exercise at Loch Lomond—it was a disaster, a shambles.
There are other issues. Access to the mountains has been mentioned. Access has never really been a problem, but it is important that if there is to be further development—I always worry when nature is developed—proper measures are in place. The land managers—organisations or trusts, for example—should not be burdened with costs with which they cannot cope.
We must ensure that in any application for the status of world heritage site, all such matters are considered. I am glad that Elaine Thomson has brought the matter to our attention and I look forward to what the minister has to say.
In 1894, that great Scot, John Muir—founder of the conservation movement and the Yosemite national park—wrote in his book "The Mountains of California":
"Thousands of tired, nerve-shaken, over-civilized people are beginning to find out that going to the mountains is going home. That wilderness is a necessity."
During my childhood in the 1950s, I had the privilege to be brought up partly in upper Deeside on the edge of the Cairngorm massif—that great wilderness of startling beauty.
I have no doubt that the Cairngorm mountains meet the criteria to be a world heritage site. The area has outstanding and universal value. As colleagues have said, the Cairngorms have been on the tentative list since 1999, with the flow country and the Forth bridge, but it would be premature to nominate them as a world heritage site before the Cairngorms national park is established in February 2004. A rushed or premature nomination could be counterproductive.
Colleagues have also said that for a nomination to be successful, a rigorous management plan involving strong planning powers will have to be in place to meet UNESCO regulations and to satisfy the IUCN. UNESCO and the IUCN advise the world heritage committee on the suitability of a candidate site. I understand that that is also SNH's position.
There is also the sensitive issue of the boundaries of the Cairngorms national park, which have yet to be finalised. If the boundary is drawn tight along the lines of SNH's proposed minimum boundary, only half of the park would be a world heritage site. I do not want a premature nomination to complicate or affect the boundary issue. That is a particular concern to those of us who wish the park to be drawn closer to its maximum boundaries to include not just the heads, but the whole of the Angus glens.
Like others, I want to celebrate the Cairngorms in the international year of mountains. I am a passionate supporter of the Cairngorms national park and I want the Cairngorms to be a world heritage site. Again in the words of John Muir, I want us
"to do something for wildness and make the mountains glad"—
but let us do it in a considered way and in a logical order.
I am a signatory to both of the motions that have been mentioned. I confess a partiality for the mountains of western Scotland, for Lochaber and Wester Ross and the Skye Cuillin. The hills of eastern Scotland are generally rounder, offer much less rugged walking and are often a beast to get to. However, among the hills of eastern Scotland the Cairngorms are surely the jewel in the crown. There is no scenery more spectacular than that to be had when, for example, standing on Sgor Gaoith looking over Loch Einich, or standing out on the northernmost top of Beinn a'Bhuird—I will not try to pronounce the name of the top—or walking round the spectacular corrie walk from Braeriach to Carn Toul.
The height and remoteness of the Cairngorms is unparalleled in this country. Hillwalkers and climbers have delighted for generations in scrambling on the remote and spectacular tors and mountains, such as Bynack More, Beinn Mheadhoin or Ben Avon. Standing on those tors in a howling gale, or retreating from them under the threat of an impending storm, brings home to us how insignificant man—or indeed woman in these politically correct times—is in the midst of such grand and impressive scenery.
Elaine Thomson referred to the important work that is being done now that Mar Lodge is in the ownership of the National Trust for Scotland, such as the removal of the obtrusive vehicular tracks and the restoration of forests. That is all valuable work. All of us in our political life, and the excellent people who are involved in the work on the ground in these areas, have a responsibility to do all that we can to recognise and celebrate those wild and wonderful places. Everyone should know and visit them. A day in the Cairngorms is a marvellous experience. One can spend it with thousands of people, yet the area is so vast that one hardly comes across anybody. I can think of no better antidote to a strenuous week in the Scottish Parliament spent jousting with members over the length of their questions or the relevance of their speeches than to escape to the wilderness that is the Cairngorms. Long may they survive to provide the relief that is necessary for us stressed city dwellers.
Off you go then, Mr Tosh.
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.
Will the minister mention the planning issue and say why the two national park plans are different?
Does the minister agree—
One at a time, please. Your chance will come, Mr Harper.
In my concluding remarks, I will come to the issue of planning and to other issues connected to the national park.
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".
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.
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?
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.
Meeting closed at 17:40.