Letters: The development plan discusses problems and brings environmental benefits to Loch Lomond


The Big Read of last Saturday (“Angry locals battle to save the Bonnie Banks from large-scale developments,” Jan. 2) presented a deeply unbalanced view of our plans to create the Hunter Global Leadership Centre (HGLC) in collaboration with Ross Priory’s Strathclyde University.

The impression was given that the development, a development that is much needed for Scotland, and indeed encourages an investment in historic Ross Priory, is massively objected to.

For years, we have been working on this development and approached the Planning Authority formally in March 2020 about our plans. We have substantially changed our plans to resolve the issues posed after extensive consultation, including with the local community, and after extensive and diverse studies – from wildlife habitats to the atmosphere to light pollution. Indeed, by linking Ross Priory and our settlement to the sewerage network, our plans now have a major environmental benefit; Ross Priory’s sewage currently flows through a reed bed vulnerable to flooding into Loch Lomond.

The plans are endorsed by the Friends of Loch Lomond and have gained unilateral approval from the Committee of the Planning Authority, although not without substantial conditions – and rightly so, the Authority has been quite conscientious in this regard and we will conduct several studies and agree to several mitigation steps until we touch a blade of grass.

About the construction of HGLC, the planning document states that it “would not cause significant environmental impacts.”

As far as objections are concerned, none of the bodies paid to review this development – from the Sepa Environment Agency to the SNH Natural Heritage Protector and several others – objected, but Kilmaronock Community Council did. It received 72 responses to a survey on the HGLC; 20 in support of the development and 51 against – not a landslide from a population of 700 or so, but these noisy voices are now trying to beat sound judgment and attempting to sabotage an excellent world-class development.

For our part, in order to deliver a world-class facility for Scotland, we will continue to collaborate with all related parties.

Dundonald, Sir Tom Hunter.

Why would I insist on the right to die?

I literally do not accept Dr. Gillian Wright’s opinion (Letters, Jan. 2), who practically argues that every life must be saved wherever possible, irrespective of the individual’s own desires, and I agree that we should all have the right to decide the time of our own death, provided that when we make that decision, we are of sound mind.

I wrote to my doctor a few years ago that I wanted “Do Not Resuscitate” to be recorded on my own medical record. “If you were to collapse in our office, would you like us to do nothing?”Would you want us to do nothing if you were to collapse in our office?”Yeah, right.”Yeah, right.

My life ended about three years ago after being married for 53 years, when my wife died, who is now buried next to our dead daughter, and my son knows that if I have ever been diagnosed with dementia, and because there is no other choice, I plan to commit suicide until I can no longer do so.

I definitely don’t want to “keep me alive” by Dr. Wright or anybody else just to fulfill their own perceived “value” they put on my life.

I fully understand that this is a very delicate issue, but when one grows older, when family and friends die suddenly, the inevitability of our path – and that is death – is acknowledged and understood, and each of us should have the right to determine that when one is beyond the reach of medical science, the time is ripe.

Edinburgh EH16 Alan McKinney.


We YET have another jeremiad of good grammar people again (Letters, December 31). The object of all speech and writing is to get a thought out of the head of one person and into the head of another person. One can do this elegantly or barbarically, but it does not guarantee elegance by following the “rules of good grammar” nor does breaking those rules guarantee barbarism.

A dinner party was once given by the Roman writer Pliny at which a slave read from the classics.


Leave A Reply