The Scottish government has urged people to stop travelling to the Highlands and Islands in a bid to avoid coronavirus, following reports of an influx of self-isolators and people in camper vans travelling to the area in recent days.

In a strongly worded statement issued on Saturday night, Holyrood’s rural economy and tourism secretary, Fergus Ewing, described himself as “furious” at such irresponsible behaviour and warned that he would discuss with ferry operators and other agencies whether further restrictive measures were needed to halt the inundation.

Ewing, the MSP for Inverness and Nairn, said: “I am furious at the reckless and irresponsible behaviour of some people travelling to the Highland and Islands. This has to stop now. Let me be crystal clear – people should not be travelling to rural and island communities, full stop. They are endangering lives. Do not travel.”

He added: “Panic buying will have a devastating impact on the livelihoods of rural shops and potentially puts unwanted pressure on NHS services in our rural communities. The Scottish government’s advice is that essential travel only should be undertaken.”

Large concentrations of land ownership are leading to power being abused in some parts of Scotland, according to a report by the Scottish Land Commission. 

Its investigation said a “land monopoly” in effect existed in many areas.

The report also said the law provided very little protection.

Scottish Land and Estates, which represents land owners, said the report did not adequately reflect the contribution made by rural businesses.

The commission’s report calls for a public interest test for future land sales.

More than 400 people gave evidence to the investigation, including land owners, land managers and community representatives and individuals.

The report found that most of the disadvantages from Scotland’s current pattern of land ownership related to a concentration of decision-making power.

It said that in some parts, that hampered economic development and caused serious and long-term harm to communities.

It added that there was an “urgent need” for mechanisms to protect fragile communities from the “irresponsible exercise of power”.

The commission makes a series of recommendations including:

• A public interest test for significant land transfers
• The requirement for a land management plan for estates
• A statutory land rights and responsibilities review.

The report and recommendations will now be considered by ministers.

Sarah-Jane Laing, chief executive of Scottish Land and Estates, said: “We are deeply concerned that the report still sees land ownership rather than land use as the prime route to dealing with issues being faced by communities. Nor does the report adequately reflect the positive and substantial contribution made by rural businesses.

The Scottish Government has published a consultation into the country’s planning system, which includes proposals to align community and spatial planning, and better coordinate infrastructure planning locally and nationally.

Places, people and planning: A consultation on the future of the Scottish planning system lays out four key areas of change:

• Making plans for the future
  • People make the system work
  • Building more homes and delivering infrastructure
  • Stronger leadership and smarter resourcing

The proposals build on recommendations published in an independent review of the planning system in Scotland last year.

The review suggested that a National Planning Framework should replace strategic development plans.

Following the review, the Scottish Government identified 10 immediate actions, with housing and planning minister Kevin Stewart stating that the planning system would be reformed to deliver more homes and speed up the planning process.

Places, people and planning states that Scotland’s economy needs a planning system that is “open for business, innovative and internationally respected” while the people living there need one that helps to improve their lives.

Key changes laid out in Places, people and planning include:

• Aligning community planning and spatial planning: To do this, the Scottish Government suggests introducing a requirement for development plans to take account of wider community planning.

• Improving national spatial planning and policy: Develop the NPF so it better reflects regional priorities. National planning policies can be used to make local development planning simple and more consistent.

• Stronger local development plans: The plan period should be extended to 10 years and supplementary guidance should be removed to make plans more accessible.

• Keeping decisions local – rights of appeal: The Scottish Government believes more review decisions should be made by local authorities rather than centrally.

• Embedding an infrastructure first approach: There is a need for better coordination of infrastructure planning at a national and regional level. This will require a stronger commitment to delivering development from all infrastructure providers.

• Releasing more ‘development ready’ land: Plans should take a more strategic and flexible approach to identifying land for housing. Consents could be put in place for zoned housing land through greater use of simplified planning zones.

• Making better use of resources – efficient decision making: The Scottish Government proposes removing the need for planning consent from a wider range of developments.

You may recall I wrote some weeks ago about Bishop Auckland having to withdraw their printed claims as the birth place of Stan Laurel. Now the Loch Lomond National Park  have had to remove this chart because as explained by the article: “Local residents and boat owners were furious to discover that the chart had included “derogatory” and “megalomaniac” new names for key landmarks on the loch, one of the most popular and heavily used stretches of water in the UK.

The most offensive, they said, was to rename a sandy beach on Inchmoan island as Giro Bay after the Scottish slang term for a dole cheque.

There have been repeated rows over youths from neighbouring towns littering the banks of Loch Lomond with abandoned tents and unsightly rubbish tips after all-night parties and camping expeditions.”

On a more serious and contemporary English note, the governance arrangements for National Parks are being considered at the moment with potential scope to make them more democratic – is this a good thing?

And should the balance often pursued in such Parks in support of conservation over development (in view of the coalition government’s general disposition in favour of development) be deliberately re-tilted?