Chamber and committees

Elaine Procter submission of 10 June 2021

PE1864/EE - Increase the ability of communities to influence planning decisions for onshore windfarms

I support the petition.

1. Much is made of the Scottish Government's "right development in the right place - not development at any cost." We cannot agree. In our opinion it is rather "Industrial windfarm development everywhere, no matter what the cost to communities, landscape, residential amenity, health, tourism, economy, environment and wildlife."

We have been fighting the Mochrum Fell windfarm for nine years and every day we worry about its consequences for our lives. It has robbed us of our time, health, future and money. We believe that planning is unfairly stacked in favour of the Developer. The Mochrum Fell application received over 600 objections, strong objections from 5 Community Councils (CC), local MSPs and MP. The Planning Applications Committee (PAC) unanimously refused the scheme. At Appeal there were over 800 objections and, yet the Reporter overturned the refusal. One person, who is not independent; employed by Scottish Government, who does not have to live with the consequences of their decision. The local community will have to bear the heavy burden of vast turbines blighting our beautiful countryside, our homes and our lives in perpetuity.

The Reporter chose a written Appeal when we believe that the number of objections alone should have triggered a Public Inquiry. He ignored the considerable public strength of feeling and the unanimous refusal by the PAC. We could not afford legal representation, nor expert witnesses whilst the Developer left no expense spared, commissioning specialist reports and lawyers to counter our concerns. We felt the planning process had failed us and our honest concerns and desire to conserve our most wonderful landscape, a unique natural asset, vital for the life of the community had been unceremoniously swept aside.

We should be afforded the same parity and rights in planning, as enjoyed in England where majority opposition from a community will veto windfarm applications.

2. Whilst local Councillors have been very helpful and supportive we have had no help from local Authority officials. Our local CC has worked tirelessly, informing the community and canvassing their opinions but these are volunteers and the windfarm applications are relentless, time consuming and complex. CCs need time, funding, expertise and legal representation. We are at a distinct disadvantage compared to the endless resources and funds the Developer can use. I believe that a caring Government would have paused all windfarm applications until a time when face to face consultation was possible and people were not weighed down with concerns for their own and their families' health and safety. It is shameful that it seems profit (not climate change) is put above compassion.

Small and fragmented rural communities are the usual, unwilling hosts for windfarm development. Connectivity here is poor with little or no Broadband and many people without computers. How can they know about windfarm applications or navigate a virtual village hall exhibition or submit their objections via email alone?

This is not community empowerment in the ascendant, this is the imposition of a centralized policy which is neither fair or just.

3. Intimidation and bullying tactics at Public Inquiry should not be tolerated. This is an alien environment for people and it is disgraceful that they should be treated this way. It leads to people withdrawing from giving evidence and that can only obfuscate the truth. An independent Advocate would be a welcome start in redressing the inequalities of this flawed planning system. Ordinary people are intimidated by the complexities of planning; the terminology, technical documents and volume of documents to plough through. We have tried to communicate with our planning department, always being polite, courteous and hugely sympathetic to the pressure they were under due to Covid. We were met with silence, then a very harsh, hurtful admonishment that left us reeling. This is not the way to encourage communities to engage in the planning process.

To be even handed, we feel that planning officers should not be intimidated or bullied. We have FOI evidence that in the case of Mochrum Fell, the landscape Architect was intimidated and manipulated to change her previous strong objection to the scheme, to one of support - just to make the scheme viable for the Developers. Local planning policies have been formulated with much care, thought and debate - these polices should be defended and upheld, not ridden roughshod over.

People ask, "Why do you bother? What’s the point objecting - they always win. Every refusal will be overturned.” We are weary of this unequal struggle and have zero faith in a planning system so monstrously weighted in favour of developers.

We still fight on, giving a voice to all who are excluded from the process; to try and stop this endless sacrifice of all we hold dear and to protect our beautiful Scotland that is under threat - not from climate change, but from the very thing purported to save it.