I never saw a single poll which concluded "A significant majority of the local population were enthusiastically for the "scheme"."
I never saw any independent numbers detailing the economic impact Trump's project would have.
The main area where Duncan veers left instead of right with his explanation, when the old boys built links the land wasn't protected. To me, this means all the difference in the world if conservation is important. If one doesn't buy into conservation - fair enough. I just wonder why we go through the motions and spend the money if expert opinion on the issue is to be ignored. The government(s) want it both ways.
To date, one can only conclude this project has been a one way affair with Trump making out like a bandit. Mind you, he only took what was offered so again, I blame the Scottish government for this fiasco. Trump is in business and conducted business in the fashion he is famous for - no hood winking there.
I would say that to date and according to club pros at Cruden Bay and Royal Aberdeen, visitor fees are way up (40+%) over last year. There was a fear that the traditional clubs would be swamped by Trump, but to date the opposite has been the case. Golfers are coming for Trump and playing Cruden Bay and Aberdeen as add-ons. I suspect Murcar too has experienced an upsurge of visitor money. I also suspect Trump will drag prices up over the long haul and thus probably reduce the number of British visitors. For instance, I liked Aberdeen a lot. I think the course is every bit the quality that Trump is, but I shant return. The green fee has gone too high (through no fault of Trump) and I expect it will rise significantly as there is plenty of room between RA's £120 and Trump's £195.
But as I say, the course is built so there is no point in wishing for Trump to fail. Its better to make the best of the situation and learn from the mistakes made.
Ciao