Yesterday, 13th March, the agenda for the next administration meeting, scheduled for Tuesday 18th March, was circulated to councillors.
A stand-out item is the proposal that the council should change its name to ‘Argyll and the Isles, Nature’s Paradise’.
The proposal is thought to have emanated from Councillor Bruce Marshall – who had circulated the agenda itself. A number of elected members have apparently been letting him know their individual reactions to the proposition.
In replying to one of these communications – from Councillor Donald Kelly of South Kintyre, who is not in favour of the change of name – Councillor Marshall inadvertently did what all do in a hurry and hit the ‘Reply All’ button, meaning that all 34 other councillors got to know Councillor Kelly’s view and Councillor Marshall’s response. This is no bad thing.
Councillor Marshall says:
‘Donald
‘I attended Nature’s Paradise event in Inveraray on Tues. run by Argyll & the Isles Tourism Co-operative. This event is one of many that have been run by Carron Tobin which is about maximising the tourism potential in A&B. There was general agreement that we live in a wonderful scenic part of Scotland, teeming with wildlife and many of them of national importance and our culture and history too, are not well appreciated outside the County.
‘Changing the name is obviously a major change but not impossible, Western Isles have changed their name. My reason is not to be divisive, although I appreciate that many have entrenched views, it is about our economy and attracting more tourists to our area not to mention people who may wish to come and live here particularly as our population is in decline. To the uninformed public, what does Argyll & Bute say to them, not a lot except we have at least one island when in fact we should be advertising to the world that we have dozens of islands and incredible scenery.
‘I look forward to the debate.
‘Bruce’
So what’s the matter?
For Argyll understands from a range of sources that the majority of councillors are opposed to the suggestion.
We suggest pause for thought.
Councilor Marshall’s emailed reply to Councilor Kelly shows a man unafraid of change, interested in the new and keen to explore its positive potential.
What’s wrong with that?
It also shows a man aware of just how desperate is Argyll’s economy.
What’s wrong with that?
It is little known that Argyll and Bute is now, with the Western Isles, one of the basket-case economies ‘below the floor’ in the Scottish Government’s Grant Aided Expenditure [GAE] procedure, which calculates the annual revenue allocations to Scottish local authorities. We are now amongst the licensed beggars at the table.
There is no doubt that Argyll’s unarguably fabulous natural resources, above all for activity tourism, are underdeveloped in marketing but have very real potential to contribute strongly to our local economy.
Councillor Marshall’s position is beyond dispute when he says: ‘…what does ‘Argyll & Bute’ say to them [Ed: meaning to 'potential visitors], not a lot except we have at least one island when in fact we should be advertising to the world that we have dozens of islands and incredible scenery’.
Anhyone who watched the Scottish Sock Puppet Theatre’s mocking satire on You Tube of Argyll and Bute Council’s Stalinist assault on schoolchild Martha Payne, who didn’t like her school dinners, must have heard just what a horrid phonetic ‘Argyll and Bewt’ was. And it is.
It is bureaucratic, constipated, pinched and defensive – suggesting a place buttressed against visitors rather then open to and welcoming of them.
It is also an offence against the trades descriptions act, suggesting that, as Councillor Marshall says, Argyll and Bute is the possessor of only one island. For Argyll has, from its inception, repeatedly suggested that the name of the council should more accurately reflect its true nature – which includes, for example, islands of the majesty of Islay and Mull. These are far too important to be rendered invisible by the bureacratic legacy of earlier horse trading on local authority boundary changes.
The one problem with the totality of what is proposed as a new name for the council is that it confuses the promotional with the administrative, in the addition of the branding tag of ‘Nature’s Paradise’.
An administrative title does not have to be soulless and ought to be accurately descriptive, which ours is not. But it cannot be promotional, an overt marketing device. Imagine where Scotland would go if we started this new formula? ‘Beef up in Angus’. ‘Orkney and Shetland, Up Helly How Are Ye’. ‘Dumfries and Belted Galloway – on yer bike’.
Not the way to go.
But the core suggestion of ‘Argyll and the Isles’? Whats wrong with that?
Everything’s right about it. It’s accurate – we are a place of islands and of a mainland much of which might as well be islands. It is as administratively efficient as The Western Isles and carries the equal lure of mystery and ease, a promise of other worldliness and exploration.
And who really loses? Bute simply becomes one of our spectacular islands, embraced by the collective – and God knows someone needs to embrace Bute and get it moving.
It’s not as if the name of ‘Argyll and Bute’ is indelibly associated with success as a well managed, economically thriving, successful council, the envy of its peers and the model they secretly aim to emulate. If we could leave behind a truly awful local authority culture along with a name that doesn’t fit and that holds us back – that’s yet another reason to do it.
With a nod in the direction of the latterly sainted Martha Payne, it would be silly to make a meal of a name change. It’s nothing, It can be done. Let’s do it.
