Chamber and committees

Andrew Chadderton submission of 9 June 2021

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

Having been a party to the Public Inquiry process for two local Wind Farm Applications – Rothes 3 & Clashgour, I would like to submit the following observations regards the above-noted Petition.

I support this Petition.

I have a BA Hons Degree heavily focussed on Company Law. My subsequent employment involved legal matters and Court work. I hope that this background sets a context for my comments below.

The Planning system is structured and familiar to those working with it. To most lay people it is hugely complex, difficult to follow and intimidating of itself. I found this to be the case. Effectively, private individuals are pitted against Planning Professionals and Advocates.

Locally, a number of people had objections with the two proposals I mention. Most were prepared to get involved. However, as matters developed – and particularly the events at another local Inquiry hearing unfolded, numbers rapidly dwindled. Ordinary people felt very intimidated. Eventually, only I took active part in the Inquiry.

The volume of documentation involved is simply impossible to follow as an individual. Indeed, none of the other parties involved are working solo – but with teams of experienced people. This hugely disadvantages the individual local voice. Indeed, some local Community Councils, including Finderne and Speyside, have expressed the exact same view to the Inquiry.

Many local residents have slow internet access or none at all. Even if time were available, accessing huge files via the web was not possible. To facilitate my taking part at the actual Public Hearing the Developers very kindly arranged for a Communication Expert to attend my home with a view to providing Zoom access. I remain thankful to them for that gesture. However, even the expert was unable to provide workable access from my home. In the end equipment was loaned that required my driving out to a suitable location and accessing remotely whilst sat in my car.

Despite several test runs, on the day the system failed, and I had to rapidly drive into Aviemore in order to deliver my testimony. So in addition to the nerves of public appearance, cross questioning (which in the end was minor and very politely delivered) and being telecast etc – I had to unwind from rushed journey. I make no complaint about that – but do use it to highlight that even with the extensive aid of the Developers, effective internet involvement failed.

I made procedural errors in ignorance. Notwithstanding the Reporters assistance and acknowledgement, my submissions based on practical, on the ground and lengthy experience were seemingly rebutted time and again by formulaic responses from retained Professionals acting for the Developers. In many instances I had significant challenges to some of the assertions being made but no apparent recourse to voice them. Whilst several ad hoc offers of assistance were taken up by me, I feel strongly that ultimately my input was swept aside almost by default.

Whilst I do feel that the Developers are maximising the situation – as it is perhaps understandable they do so, I felt the Scot Government system was sympathetic, but had perhaps lost sight of the aspect that this process is wholly unknown territory to the majority of folk who comprise the ‘local voice’ that every press statement claims central to the process. The system extant in England appears to give significantly more credence to that local view and that of local Councils.

If even our local County Councils are struggling to take active part in these processes, what chance an individual? Further to that, I was appalled that through March 2021 onwards, pleas from our Local Councils regarding Covid impacts were very largely attacked by the Developers. Covid impacted the Councils and certainly individuals up here and certainly the Inquiry Process. I do not feel that was properly addressed. Indeed, upon taking matters up with my MSP at the time, his reply stated the process had been suspended – which was very definitely not the case. Both Highland and Moray Council were helpful but were hugely constrained in what assistance they could give via resource and subsequently Covid impact. Local authority input is essential.

There is a desperate need for a ‘public advocate’ to act on behalf of the local voice, otherwise there actually is no effective voice. For lay people the process will remain complex and daunting; no amount of pamphlets, help pages etc are really going to help with that – far better they have a named individual that can advise as required and ultimately be their Advocate. The process simply does not meet its avowed mission otherwise.