Chamber and committees

William Jackson submission of 5 June 2021

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

I am a resident of East Renfrewshire which accommodates the highest density (per square kilometer) of wind turbines in Scotland.

Since 2009 communities in the south west corner of the local authority area have been subjected to an overwhelming number of windfarm/single turbine applications.

Community Councils and local residents have struggled to cope with a tsunami of applications without any help to scrutinise and understand large technical documents. They are incomprehensible to most people.

Local residents have spent thousands of pounds of their own money commissioning expert reports and employing legal representatives to defend their position in both the application decision making process and again during the inevitable appeal process which follows in the event a refusal is made by the Council.

When an objection is lodged by the Council to a section 36 wind farm (that is a 50MW or larger) it triggers an Inquiry which results in even greater expense. After so many years of fighting inappropriately sited wind turbines which do not comply with local development plans, there is no money left to give to fund professional help and for many, no appetite to continue as they have been repeatedly reminded that public opinion counts for very little. We have no way of competing against the teams of consultants and lawyers employed by applicants without some form of professional help and we can no longer afford such a luxury.

In England, any application must pass two tests. They are required to comply with the local development plan and must have majority local approval or they will not be granted planning permission. We should have no lesser rights.

Organisations such as Planning Aid Scotland are very helpful in many situations but it is a charity and does not possess the man power required to help with the extremely time consuming exercise of scrutinising the vast number of large, technical and complex documents within a wind farm planning application. Their help consists of basic general advice. Their website confirms that it offers advice on how to represent themselves, or how to secure the services of an appropriate professional. It makes clear, however, that it does not have an advocacy role and does not submit planning applications or make representations on behalf people.

The initiative successfully pursued by Planning Democracy to show live streaming of Inquiries combined with archived footage to view at a more convenient time, is very welcome. Should there be any unacceptable behaviour such as bullying or intimidation of members of the public, it is recorded for all to witness. The one drawback is that many groups and individuals who witness such behaviour may feel they are unable to take part themselves and withdraw their representation. The provision of a publicly funded advocate would give the comfort and confidence needed to support these people and allow their voices to be heard.

This Petition’s requests are very reasonable. It seeks the same rights enjoyed by communities in England. This is only fair as it is due to their ability to refuse an onshore wind farm application that is behind the avalanche of applications we are presently witnessing in Scotland.

Without some form of help to level the playing field between communities who have little support and no funds to pay for professional help and developers who have the benefit of a financial bottomless pit to employ teams of consultants and lawyers, we cannot claim that democracy exists in this country.