Chamber and committees

Caithness West Community Council submission of 7 June 2021

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

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input to the above. Caithness West Community Council has been a statutory consultee for 10 windfarm applications/appeals during my time as a member. As such, we have relevant and direct experience of how the planning process impacts communities and support the aims of the above petition in trying to influence the necessary change to provide communities with more direct influence on major windfarm developments.

We offer the following observations;

1. Windfarms have major impacts on communities, some positive, some not so. Where windfarms are sited sensitively, there is no doubt that communities can benefit from the financial incentives provided by developers. Our experience suggests that when this is the case, the distance from settlements is a key factor. The two major developments impacting our closest settlement (Reay) are only 2-2.5 kilometres from the village and as such the community has been resoundingly opposed.

2. From a community council perspective, the biggest difficulty we have had is the sheer volume of applications in our area. This takes a huge amount of members’ time if we are to respond and engage with each application, right from the consultation stage, to scoping, application, inquiries, appeals etc. This is always against relatively tight timescales and is often very challenging for us a group, as members are volunteers, have other commitments and are not experts in the planning process. We have no financial resource to engage experts in supporting us respond to applications and feel the system is very much weighted in favour of developers.

3. On the few occasions when developments are refused, the appeals process to ministers is usually successful. We saw this with Limekiln 1 – the development was rejected by Highland council, overwhelmingly opposed by local people, refused following the initial inquiry, only for it to reappear as Limekiln 2 and be approved following a further inquiry. We now face the prospect of this development being extended both in number and height, before it is even built.

4. This has caused the community to feel very much disengaged with the planning process and feel “what is the point” of being involved, when our views continue to be disregarded. Members of the public have despaired at sitting through public inquiries where the impact on us, as residents, is given such little weight.

5. Members of the community feel particularly aggrieved that decisions that have such major impacts on their village, homes and amenity, are taken by officials on whom the decision will have no impact. Following the Limekiln inquiry the reporter decreed that despite the acknowledged significant visual impact, Reay “would still be an attractive place to live”. The 1000+ residents who objected and petitioned the Scottish parliament disagree, but along with our elected representatives in Highland Council, were disregarded.

6. Over the past few years we have been aware of the work undertaken to increase community engagement in the planning process, and local developments plans. However, there is no point whatsoever in creating “tick box” engagement, when our views continue to be disregarded. In reality, we have seen members of the public become less engaged as they feel worn down and resigned by a system that is stacked against them.

7. On a personal level, I will shortly appear as a lay witness for the Limekiln extension inquiry. This is a daunting prospect as having sat through a number pf previous inquires, have seen the intimidation and belittling undertaken by the developers legal and professional teams. Indeed, at the Limekiln 2 inquiry, our local ornithologist experienced this and had his work “rubbished” by a “professional” ornithologist. Members of the public all knew and trusted the findings of our local ornithologist and he was subsequently proved right, following the inquiry. Unfortunately, our wildlife seems to suffer the same disregard as residents when it comes to windfarms.

We therefore very much support the three key aims of this petition and believe they would at least go some way towards redressing the balance.