Luxury Travel to Scotland: Affected by Lockerbie Bomber's Release?

Last week, I was planning to write about Dream Escape, an exclusive luxury travel outfit that organizes completely customized tours of Scotland. (Says David Tobin, owner: "many companies offer "bespoke" travel, but I've gone the route of "couture". We start from scratch around what our client's want, whether it's a two-day trip for two people, or a six day trip for 200.") Even if you're arriving in Scotland without Tobin's incredibly hands-on service, which includes a UK cellphone pre-programmed, and should you desire, a photographer, or even a genealogist among other essentials, I've long maintained that Scotland is one of the best destinations to truly feel like you're a Master of the Universe.
There's something about Scotland's mix of castles, golf, whiskey, landscape and royal history that feels to me like getting wrapped in a cloak of wealth, power and prestige. Just one example, Royal Yacht Britannia -- decommissioned from royal use since 1997, now a tourist attraction in Edinburgh. Everyone can visit it for a tour, but once can arrange private access to the state apartments for events and be served to exacting royal protocol, which includes measuring the distance between cutlery with a ruler, among other measures designed to make anyone of royal descent or aspiration feel comfy. (For instance, sailors were made to use hand signals rather than shouting, to preserve royal tranquility. Effectively, apparently, since Her Majesty stated: "Britannia is the one place where I can truly relax".)
Dream Escape can arrange access to the Royal Yacht -- and to an endless number of luxey Scottish attractions, see the gallery for more -- but as I sat down to write about it last week, Scotland, made international headlines for its release of the only man convicted of the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi, who returned to Libya as a hero. I've heard talk of boycotting Scottish travel, and whiskey -- and it just felt strange to write enthusiastically about Scotland without addressing all this directly.
So yesterday, I chatted with David Tobin to see how it was affecting his business, considering that he brings anywhere between 100 and 300 visitors to Scotland each year. His answer, in a nutshell: not at all. "We haven't seen a downturn or have clients change their plans or anything like that," he says. "My clients want to go somewhere because they want to go, and they're suitably educated to understand that this is a murky area, surrounding [al-Megrahi's] release. This won't change my client's perception of Scotland, they love the country, but not necessarily the politicians." He doesn't expect any cancellations of bookings in the future.
Of course, Tobin's company is small, and very high end at that -- and it remains to be seen whether Scottish tourism as a whole will be affected by the bomber's release. Do you think luxury tourism to Scotland will be affected by current politics? Should it?

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jim Sep 4th 2009 12:07PM
While this gentleman's services may not have been yet affected time will still tell if they shall. We are expressing our discontent with the decision by Scotland by voting with our dollars and encouraging all others to do so.
No more Scotch, or products from Scotland for a minimum of one year and we shall see what happens from there.
What a horrific and shameful decision to release those convicted terrorists.
Did the terrorists show or offer any compassion to their victims, certainly not.
Jim Sep 4th 2009 12:15PM
Absolutely there should be a boycott on ANYTHING Scottish for a few years.
This is simply the worst blunder conceived by Scotland, "if it's Scottish, it's now all crap!"
Valerie Sep 4th 2009 12:48PM
I do not believe in blaming all of Scotland for a decision made by a few,while I do believe this man should have been executed for his horrible action,boycotting Scotland will do nothing except hurt the working people there,innocent people who had nothing to do with his release.
Jeremy Sep 4th 2009 3:49PM
Most Scots disagreed with Megrahi's release (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8226585.stm), with only 20% swallowing the line about compassionate motives. Everyone I know thinks the whole affair stinks. By all means support temporary boycotts to make the point felt, but please don't confuse "Scotland" with a minority, unpopular government that's about to exit stage left.
Jim Sep 5th 2009 1:38PM
LONDON (Sept. 5) - Trade and oil considerations played a major role in the decision to include the Lockerbie bomber in a prisoner transfer agreement between Britain and Libya, a senior British official said in an interview published Saturday.
Justice Secretary Jack Straw said trade, particularly a deal for oil company BP PLC, was "a very big part" of the 2007 negotiations that led to the prisoner deal. The agreement was part of a wider warming of relations between London and Tripoli.
"Libya was a rogue state," Straw was quoted as saying by The Daily Telegraph newspaper. "We wanted to bring it back into the fold and trade is an essential part of it — and subsequently there was the BP deal."
The British government has faced intense criticism over the release of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, a Libyan convicted in the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am airliner over Lockerbie, Scotland. The attack killed 259 people aboard the plane, most of them American, and 11 on the ground.
Last month Scottish officials freed al-Megrahi, 57, on compassionate grounds because he is dying of prostate cancer.
Although he was not released under the prisoner transfer agreement, opposition politicians, and many victims' families, claim business considerations influenced the decision to free him.
On Wednesday, Prime Minister Gordon Brown insisted there was "no conspiracy, no cover up, no double dealing, no deal on oil" over the bomber's release.
But officials admit the prisoner transfer agreement was part of a wider set of negotiations aimed at bringing Libya in from the international cold, and improving British trade prospects with the oil-rich nation.
David Lidington, foreign affairs spokesman for the main opposition Conservatives, said it was "very hard to square what Jack Straw says today with Gordon Brown's repeated denials of any kind of deal."
"That's why we need an independent inquiry to get to the truth."
Documents released by the government show Straw had originally tried to ensure that al-Megrahi was exempted from any prisoner deal with Libya, but in December 2007 he changed his mind. He wrote in a letter to his Scottish counterpart that "wider negotiations with the Libyans are reaching a critical stage" and a blanket agreement was in "the overwhelming interests for the United Kingdom."
Soon after, Libya ratified a $900 million oil exploration deal with BP. The oil company acknowledged Friday that it had urged the government to sign the prisoner transfer deal, but insisted it had not singled out al-Megrahi as part of the discussion.
Straw said Brown had not been involved in negotiations over the prisoner agreement.
"I certainly didn't talk to the PM," he was quoted as saying. "There is no paper trail to suggest he was involved at all."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah, relying on the old paper trail excuse, if you can't prove it then of course we'll deny it.