‘You have stolen our voice,’ claims Flamingoland opponent Sid Perrie

Balloch man Sid Perrie and a map of the planning application area.

By Bill Heaney

Flamingo Land protester Sid Perrie is furious with the Balloch and Haldane Community Council for refusing to call a special meeting to discuss a motion of no confidence in them.

And he has pointed out to their Secretary, Jim Biddulph, is contrary to their constitution which states they have a duty to be responsive to the community it represents.

This states that: “Should the community council receive a written request (petition), signed by at least 20 persons resident within the community council area to convene a special meeting for a particular matter or matters to be debated, it shall call such a meeting within 14 days of receipt of such a request and advertise it in the manner prescribed locally for special meetings called by the community council.”

Mr Perrie claims that his request has been fudged and strangled by red tape by the community council who have told him they want time to discuss the matter.

He said: There is nothing to decide or talk about, you are obliged by the constitution of the community council to call a public meeting and publicise it.  that is all.”

Mr Perrie added: “We are fully aware that you had knowledge of the request well before your last meeting, hence the snide remarks made about the ’49’ (signatories) to Councillor Sally Page.

“We are fully aware that you met with an official of West Dunbartonshire Council on 21/9/18 where the request to hold a special meeting was presented and you refused to accept it.

“We are also aware that it took a month, allegedly, to check the validly of a mere 20 signatures against the voters’ role.

“It was not for you to arrange to discuss the request amongst yourselves at a time that most people are at work.

“It was not for you to pretend that you only got the request yesterday, the 23/10/18. That lacks integrity and honesty. It was not for you to pretend that receiving it by e-mail does not count.

“You have stolen our voice and must answer for it at a public meeting.”

He demanded a meeting asap – “Book the white church now where you can face the 200 locals who made it perfectly clear they were against Flamingo Land.

“Only Murdoch Cameron spoke for Flamingo Land, but unfortunately as chairman he should have remained neutral. Your cowardice to face the assembled community and the theft of our voice brings B&HCC into disrepute and you are in breach of the Scottish Government’s rules for the establishment of Community Councils.

“You are also in breach of the code of conduct for Community Councillors as provided for in ‘the ethical standards in Public Life (Scotland) Act 2000.”

He requested the community council to “repudiate your submission to the National Park Planning Department … and replace it with a total rejection of Flamingo Land in any form in Balloch.”

Mr Perrie said the office bearers responsible for the submission to the National Park should “resign, forever, with immediate effect from the Balloch & Haldane Community Council”.

Only then would they be able to avoid “avoid public disgrace and humiliation”

Either that or they could meet with the residents of Balloch & Haldane within 14 days to discuss the motion, which states “’The residents of Balloch and Haldane have no confidence in the Balloch & Haldane Community Council”.


  1. I have to agree with Mr Perrie on this crucial matter. Instead of being a voice for local people the Community Council appear to be in Flamingoland’s pocket.

  2. I attended a protest organised by Friends of Drumkinnon Woods outside the National Park Office (?on a Sunday? when there is no on there?) when I was approached by Mr. Perrie, (who had attended BHCC meetings) and pushed this piece of paper in front of me asking me to sign it as they wanted to remove the current community council. I said to him “so you are trying to push me out of my volunteer job then? Blank look. I said I am a Community Councillor and I enjoy being one so no, I don’t think I will be signing your petition. To me that shows how much he knows about the CC! They appear to have a vendatta against us yet Friends of Loch Lomond voted for the development but I dont see anyone from Drumkinnon Gate targetting them although I noticed from their petition they had spread their wings to other “airts & pairst” with the CC area.

    1. In reply to Jan Shields post can I make some observations and points. What Mr Perrie handed you was a paper containing signatures, requesting an Extraordinary Meeting of B&HCC, with the agenda being, to discuss ‘ no confidence’ in the existing sitting councillors. Nowhere was there a request asking for the removal of the current community council! To write this is a gross distortion of the facts. The majority of Balloch residents, I’m sure, will appreciate the commitment and sterling work that all CC members have given in the past, but I fear, when it comes to Flamingo Land, the CC are seen by a lot of Balloch residents, as being deaf to the opinions and feelings coming from the street! As far as I know, there is no ‘vendatta’ against you and your fellow members of the CC. The appearance of a vendetta does not constitute proof, and as such, I would welcome your evidence of this ‘vendetta’ currently being waged against B&HCC! To write that Friends of Loch Lomond seem to receive ‘less of the accusatory spotlight’ is surely trying to dodge the issue here. I know that B&HCC’s own constitution, states that it should listen and reflect the opinion of the community at large (paraphrased) As far as I know Friends of Loch Lomond do not have a constitution, even vaguely outlining this point, therefore aligning the two organisations as a comparison to suit your argument is completely wrong and should be dismissed by readers. Finally, to read your piece, any casual observer would think that the sole objectors to FL were all residents of Drumkinnon Gate, with a few living outwith the estate, really! You write how much Mr Perrie knows about B&HCC? Can I ask you directly how much you know about the objectors to Flamingo Land? With petitions, numbering tens of thousands, being lodged against FL, only the most blind and ill informed would write that the only objections were from Drumkinnon Gate and ”other airts and pairts”

  3. I have been saying the same thing for at least 2/ 3 years since BHCC supported without public consultation in regard to the Queen of The Loch, planning submission. It is allegedly common knowledge they supported the Flamingo proposal prior to the planning submission. They do not support the local community. Mr Perrie’s views as to BHCC are shared by a large number of local people and businesses within the area.

Leave a Reply