New golf course

Letters to Editor, The Citizen, 22 August 2003

J. Michael Buchanan, London

Prompted by features and letters in the Press, I visited the exhibition on the Links Trust’s proposed ‘Course Seven’ and then, in a Sunday paper, read the headline ‘Golf clubs face crisis from lack of interest’.

The minimalist exhibition was not staffed and there was no means for recording a visitor’s comments and opinions (e.g. a suggestion box). Many questions could not be answered by the information on the display panels, such as:

Have any courses been built and successfully operated elsewhere with a sewage works as a central feature, upwind from the club house? Surely local golfers deserve a better ambience for their passion?

Are there courses within, say, 10 miles of St Andrews with spare peak season capacity to which the Trust could negotiate access for its season ticket holders?

Has a thought been given to other means of dampening demand at busy times or to devising more imaginative tee allocation procedures (e.g. a time of play congestion charge, modification of season ticket prices, terms and conditions, internet auctions)?

Have professional in-depth market research surveys been commissioned to refine perceptions of future need in these unstable and uncertain times, in relation to local golfers and the, perhaps, more seductive and glamorous global market place?

In recent days, there has been much evidence in the Press of a charm offensive promoting Course Seven involving elected representatives, among others. In the interests of fair play and open governance, perhaps the Trust should help fund its critics who may be handicapped by a lack of resources, especially if a public planning inquiry follows later.

I was surprised that, already, aspects of the proposal have been endorsed by an employee of Fife Council - the planning authority. I also noted that several Trustees are nominated by the local authority. There is evidently plenty of scope for conflicts of interest. One hopes these will be declared as and when necessary in accordance with norms for the conduct of public life.

Course 007 is not necessary, desirable or likely to be a success. St Andrews already has one memorial to a misjudgement of golfing interest - the Gateway Centre. It does not need another.

The Links Trust has many fine achievements to its credit since it started out in 1974. In some ways, it is the victim of its own success. Since 1974, the world has moved on, Scottish devolution is a reality and even the R&A is contemplating the need to change.

A radical review of the Links Trust’s remit and structures would be timely, to deepen its relations with its roots in St Andrews and to formalise its avowed interests in wildlife and environmental conservation.

Perhaps it should be empowered to allocate financial surpluses to non-golf good causes to benefit the historical stakeholders in the Links, the citizenry of St Andrews.

Colin McAllister, St Andrews

It is interesting to note the lack of response from the Links Trust to my letter of August 8. I take it this means that my demonstration of the lack of need for a seventh golf course is substantially correct, as I am sure that if the Links Trust had been able to refute my argument, then they Would have done so.

Some economic analysis may throw further light on this matter:

1. The Links Trust has a monopoly on golf in St Andrews.

2. Monopolies tend to be inefficient and to make excess profits.

3. These excess profits are often “captured by the employees for themselves in the form of higher wages. Clear examples of this were the overmanning of nationalised monopolies like British Gas.

4. To prevent exploitation of consumers and to encourage greater efficiency, privatised monopolies were each given a regulator by the government to control their prices and to establish non-financial performance indicators relating to productivity.

5. The economic theory of bureaucracy states that, just as businesses seek to maximise their profits, so bureaucrats seek to maximise the size of their empire. Reasons for this are easy to understand as salaries are usually linked not to profits or efficiency, but to the growth in size of the firm or the bureaucracy.

It is no surprise, therefore, that the Links Trust should claim there is a need for a further golf course. Bureaucrats are not selfless, disinterested employees who work solely for the public good, any more than politicians are - it would be unusual if they were. The real surprise is why are the Trustees letting the staff get away with it? They, after all, are the “regulator” laid down by the Act.

I am not asking for the moon but for something like the status quo ante when locals had ready access to their courses. Locals do not “want” another golf course - they want access to their own courses. Of course a balance has to be struck between visitors, who provide most of the revenue, and locals. What I am saying is that there is now a gross imbalance as far as locals are concerned. If Carnoustie can protect the rights of access of local golfers, why cannot St Andrews?