Please help Sid defend his right to speak up for the public he was elected to represent.

Sid Perrie, a lifelong member of the community of Balloch raised concerns about the controversial Flamingo Land development proposal at Balloch, on the shores of Loch Lomond. As a retired Biology teacher who has spent his lifetime caring for the environment he was worried about the loss of natural habitat in the place he calls home, and whether the public could have confidence in the way decisions about its future were being made.

He also questioned a potential conflict of interest. Park Authority staff appeared to have been involved in the earlier selection of Flamingo Land as the preferred bidder for the site, yet the Authority was subsequently responsible for determining the developer’s planning application. Sid believed this deserved proper scrutiny and clear answers.

For raising those concerns in terms the Standards Commission considered unacceptable, Sid was suspended from the Park Authority’s Board for six months. He is now appealing to the Sheriff Court - and needs help to obtain legal representation.

In 2022, the people of Balloch and West Loch Lomond elected him to represent them on the Park Authority’s Board, giving him more votes than all the other candidates put together.

He took that responsibility seriously. The Board’s role includes scrutiny: to “oversee the work of the Chief Executive and National Park staff”, as the Authority’s own website says. Sid believed asking questions about Flamingo Land was part of the job he had been elected to do.

When he joined the Board, Sid disclosed: “I am disabled due to my dyslexia. I need hard copies of papers to read. I have been told I am on other spectra too. This causes me to be blunt, speak my mind, the opposite of ‘social intelligence’.”

For years, Sid tried to raise his concerns about the handling of the development proposal, without receiving what he considered proper answers. In August 2024, shortly before the Board was due to determine the application, he wrote to Board members again.

The Convener subsequently complained to the Ethical Standards Commissioner about his communications, alleging that he had been rude and disrespectful and had breached the code of conduct. The complaint ultimately led to a hearing before the Standards Commission for Scotland.

In February 2026, the Commission proceeded with that hearing despite medical evidence that Sid was unfit to participate. He was neither present nor represented. Nevertheless, it found that he had breached the code and suspended him for six months.

For Sid, the suspension represented a loss of over £4,000 in Board payments. It also meant being prevented from carrying out the role local people had elected him to fulfil.

Sid’s appeal seeks to challenge both the findings against him and the suspension.

His appeal challenges the fairness of proceeding when he was medically unfit and unrepresented, the way his disability was taken into account, and the Commission’s treatment of his right to speak out on matters of public interest.

He is also asking the court to examine his complaint that he was prevented from calling relevant witnesses and presenting evidence needed to explain his concerns. Sid says the Commission restricted the evidence it would hear about why he spoke out, then criticised him for making accusations without a sufficient factual foundation. He wants a fair opportunity to have those issues examined.

Balloch is Sid’s home. The loch and its surroundings are places he has spent a lifetime caring about. He stood for election because he wanted to help look after them, safeguard public resources and make sure local people’s concerns were heard.

Sid is also worried about what happens next. He fears other elected representatives will look at the suspension, the damage to his health and the cost of challenging the decision, and decide that raising concerns is simply too risky.

Yet those representatives have a responsibility to ask difficult questions, scrutinise decisions and protect the public. Sid wants people who take on that responsibility in future to have the confidence to fulfil it—and to know that, if their conduct is challenged, they will have a fair opportunity to explain themselves and present relevant evidence.

If people become afraid to speak up, problems can go unchallenged, and the communities and places they were elected to protect can suffer. That is why Sid believes this appeal matters.

The proceedings have already taken a heavy toll on his health. He has spent a four-figure sum bringing his appeal, and legal advice and representation for the next stages will involve further substantial costs. The Standards Commission has publicly funded legal representation; Sid must find the resources to pursue his challenge.

Please donate to help Sid put his case before the court and defend his right to have spoken up for the public.

Your support will help him seek a fair hearing and stand up for the community and natural environment he has spent his life caring about..