LOCATION/TYPE

NEWS HOME

[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Archive
RSS

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

WHAT TO DO
when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates
RSS

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Heritage body may cut objections 

Scotland’s heritage agency may reduce the number of objections it makes to planning applications in an effort to ensure its budget is better spent.

Scottish Natural Heritage uses about a third of its resources on advice to local authorities on applications.

The Inverness-based organisation denied the move would be a step back from its role of safeguarding the environment.

A report commissioned by the agency found it should concentrate on high-quality advice on local cases.

SNH chairman Andrew Thin said the concern was to ensure money was wisely and effectively spent.

‘Clear’ advice

“We spend about a third of our resources, which totals up to more than £20m of tax payers’ money, on giving advice to planning authorities on planning applications,” he told the BBC’s Good Morning Scotland programme.

His comments came after SNH, which objected to US tycoon Donald Trump’s plans for a golf resort in the north east of Scotland, commissioned a report from Edinburgh’s Heriot Watt University.

It recommended that the agency should focus its work on giving “really good advice” to planning authorities in cases that were of local rather than national interest.

Mr Thin, who stressed that discussion had to be undertaken with councils and the Scottish Government on the contents of the report, added: “The key thing is the planning system is a democratic system and rightly so.

“A democratic system can’t work well if people aren’t adequately informed. What they are recommending is that we make our advice very clear.”

BBC News

27 December 2007

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)

Share:

e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share


News Watch Home

Get the Facts
CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.

 Follow:

Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky