Currently there is serious concern that information that has been sought from the National Park Authority relating to complaints against Sally Dowden has been witheld.  BSCG considers  all such information is of important public interest and supports efforts in accordance with Scotland's Freedom of Information legislation for all the requested material to be made public.

Many are disturbed that Ms  Dowden has not resigned her ministerial appointment to the Park Board and we are shocked by the weak tone of the letter of "censure" she has received from Andrew Thin Park Board Convener. A copy of this letter is reproduced below. We take the view the Cairngorms National Park Authority  deserves board members whose actions are beyond reproach. 

Letter of censure from Andrew Thin to Sally Dowden

Sally Dowden Speyside Wildlife Rothiemurchas [sic]
By Aviemore PH221QT 15.6.05

Dear Sally,

As you are aware, at its meeting on 2nd June the CNPA board considered a report from our Audit Committee and a paper from our Standards Officer relating to a complaint made against you by Kevin Shaw.

The complaint centres around a statement made in a brochure produced by Speyside Wildlife: that your Cairngorms National Park Board membership was one of 20 reasons to choose holidays offered by this company. The complaint also focuses on whether a reprinted brochure, printed in a revised "calendar" format, adequately satisfied a suggestion made by the Standards Commission that the Speyside Wildlife promotional material be reprinted to delete the reference to your Board membership. The complaint relates to two aspects of the Authority's Code of Conduct -

• Selflessness: you have a duty to take decisions solely in terms of the public interest. You must not act in order to gain financial or other material benefit for yourself, family or friends.

• Leadership: you have a duty to promote and support these principles [the various principles of the Code] by leadership and example, to maintain and strengthen the public's trust and confidence in the integrity of the Cairngorms National Park Authority and its members in conducting public business.

The Board considered the Audit Committee's opinion on the complaint, determined following its investigation. The Board agreed that an original breach of the Authority's Code of Conduct on selflessness, arising from your referring to your Board membership as a reason to choose Speyside Wildlife within its promotional material, had, on balance, not resulted in a commercial advantage. The Board agreed that you had taken steps to correct the position within both printed material and website content soon after advice on this breach of the Code had been received. The Board agreed that, following this initial breach of the Code, you would have been expected to take all reasonable steps to ensure the outcome of actions was beyond doubt as to their appropriateness, and, therefore, that you and the Board were above reproach in the public eye. The Board agreed that there had been a breach of its Code of Conduct on leadership arising from action actually taken with respect to the format of the reprinted brochure.

The Board considered carefully the appropriate response in this regard, and in particular whether no further action should be taken or whether a note of censure should be issued. On balance, the Board agreed that censure on your conduct in this matter was the appropriate course of action.

I am acutely aware of how upsetting this whole episode has been for you, and given the huge and invaluable contribution that you make to our work it has been a matter of great regret to me too. I welcome the fact that as soon as your error of judgement became apparent last autumn, you acted rapidly to remove the offending statement from your brochures by over-stickering. The sequence of events that then led you to issue a reprinted brochure in a different format are entirely understandable from a commercial perspective. Unfortunately that format, when combined with the fact that copies of the original over-stickered brochure were also still being issued as well, cannot be said to fit fully with the standards of leadership implicit in our code of conduct for board members. I know that you now understand this fully, and I am therefore confident that we can put this episode behind us once and for all.

With best wishes Yours sincerely

ANDREW THIN Convener

Below a letter published in the Strathspey & Badenoch Herald (30th June 2005)

Sir,

Sally (Suzanne) Dowden is a director of the Cairngorms Chamber of Commerce, and a member of the Cairngorms National Park board serving a three year appointment. Based in Rothiemurchus, she has been described in the Strathy as “representing business interests” on the Park board and has been portrayed in a brochure of Speyside Wildlife, the company she part owns, as the “brains” behind the business. The fact that she has seriously misled the public as explained below harms the reputation of the Cairngorms National Park.

In October 2004 the Standards Commission upheld a complaint against the conduct of Ms Dowden concerning Speyside Wildlife’s 2005 brochure. According to a public statement from the Park Authority of 25 October 2004 the Commission suggested that this 2005 brochure that listed “Cairngorms National Park board member” as a reason for choosing Speyside Wildlife, “be reprinted, deleting the reference and be re-circulated to previous recipients”. The public were at that time reassured of the satisfaction of Park Authority Convener Andrew Thin that the Standards Commission’s recommendation “will be implemented in full”. However as the Strathy has reported this month (June 15), Ms Dowden plainly had made little attempt to live up to what the Park Authority announced she “had agreed to do”.

It appears she did not reprint, and re-circulate the brochure with deleted reference as recommended by the Commission. This led to the latest complaint to the Park Authority and an enquiry resulting in the board’s decision to censure Ms Dowden’s conduct. The Park Authority also reports this month that Ms Dowden has commented “I accept the findings of this enquiry and the decision of the Cairngorms National Park Authority.” On this breach of the Park’s Code of Conduct, instead of putting adequate effort into delivering on her commitment of last October or making any public apology, it seems she can only add that “I remain determined” to put “every effort” into the objective of making this “the best National Park there is”. Regrettably these fine sounding words contrast with her recent actions.

There is a history of boastful and misleading claims in the publicity material of Speyside Wildlife associated with Ms Dowden. While Speyside Wildlife claims to be “No 1 in Scotland”, adjudication by the Advertising Standards Authority (15 June 2005) upheld a complaint against this. The Standards Authority “welcomed” Speyside Wildlife’s decision to “remove the claim from their advertising”. However to date this welcome seems to have been premature. Currently the discredited ‘number 1’ claim continues to appear on pages in the Speyside Wildlife website, over ten days after the adjudication.

From a Speyside Wildlife promotional publication for 2005 we learn that “Sally is a board member of the Cairngorms National Park - helping to shape how we care for this special place”. Later this publication yet again mentioning her Park board membership boasts “She’s also at the hub of all things influential these days in Speyside.”

As if to reinforce this impression a photograph in the 2005 leaflet captioned “our viewing hide” is credited to “Jane Hope”, Chief Executive of the National Park. Some may wonder whether it is appropriate for the name of the most senior Cairngorms National Park Authority official to be used in a way so easily construed as promoting one business.

Mr Thin states in his letter of ‘censure’ to Ms Dowden this month that her actions were “entirely understandable from a commercial perspective.” He adds that Sally makes “a huge and invaluable contribution” and commiserates he is “acutely aware of how upsetting this whole episode has been” and that “it has been a matter of great regret to me too”.

Although the letter of censure in this case is public, according to the head of corporate services for the National Park Authority “the complaint itself” and the full findings of the audit committee investigation remain unavailable for public scrutiny. In a ‘Park for all’ this surprising lack of transparency seems regrettable. In addition the letter of censure publicly reveals the author of the complaint. This seems improper and raises concerns that in the future people may be reluctant to make complaints against board members found to abuse their privileged position.

Yours etc

(Dr) Gus Jones Fiodhag Nethybridge Inverness-shire PH25 3DJ

Inadequate standards will damage reputations of boards (letter Strathspey and Badenoch Herald 11 August 2005)

Sir, - I welcome the report that Mr Ross Finnie, Minister for Environment and Rural Development, has written to Cairngorms National Park convener Andrew Thin, expressing his concern about CNP board standards of behaviour. It is unacceptable that a senior minister should have to instruct the convener of the national park authority on such a matter.

When one considers the Dowden affair it is understandable that the Scottish Executive should be concerned. Presumably Mr Thin endorsed the national park board's decision to send a letter to Ms Sally Dowden, censuring her for misuse of her national park board member status.

Clearly both he and his board consider a letter sufficient to correct Ms Dowden's demonstrated inability to detect acceptable from unacceptable behaviour. If so, the board must be quite naive. I am sure that they are not. There must be another reason:

what it could be I cannot possibly imagine.

The alleged behaviour of the board when considering an application for the construction of a service facility on the A9 (as reported in the "Strathy", August 3) appears to be another example of unprofessional behaviour.

I note that Mr Thin is also a board member of the Crofters Commission.

The commission has been criticised in the Western Isles press and by the MSP for the Western Isles.

Apparently, there is a widespread belief that the Crofters Commission is actively encouraging property speculation in croft land.

In quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisations such as CNP and the Crofters Commission, it is vital that public confidence in the competence and integrity of office holders is established and maintained.

Mr Finnie is concerned - justifiably - that inadequate standards will damage the reputations of boards and ministers. In the case of the Cairngorms National Park board his warning appears to be too late. - Yours etc,

D. SCOBBIE 22 Seafield Court, Grantown.