[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Revealed: Duke of Buccleuch lobbied Energy Minister for £1 billion wind farm project  

Credit:  Rob Edwards | Sunday Herald | 14 June 2015 | www.heraldscotland.com ~~

The Duke of Buccleuch lobbied the Energy Minister, Fergus Ewing, and government officials behind closed doors to fast-track a £1 billion plan for one of Scotland’s biggest-ever wind farms, according to internal documents obtained by the Sunday Herald.

In a “private and confidential” presentation last November, Buccleuch’s chief executive, John Glen, urged Ewing to “de-bottleneck” the approval process for building 140 wind turbines across a large swathe of moorland east of Sanquhar in Dumfries and Galloway. He also named the senior civil servant whom he thought should assist with the project.

If it goes ahead, the wind farm will reap multi-million pound profits for Buccleuch, the UK’s largest private landowner. But critics fear that it could damage the prospects for popular, smaller schemes that could bring more community benefits.

The Buccleuch estate has been attacked by politicians, community and environmental groups for using “insider influence” to try and get its way behind the scenes.

Joan McAlpine, the SNP MSP for the South of Scotland, accused Buccleuch of “breathtaking arrogance” and of acting covertly to avoid public scrutiny. “I have serious concerns about the secretive way in which Buccleuch operates,” she said.

“The Sunday Herald’s exposure of such behaviour by Buccleuch will anger many SNP members and supporters who want to see powerful landlords brought to heel.”

Glen denied being secretive and insisted the estate had “acted in good faith and with the utmost propriety” to promote rural development.

Documents released by the Scottish Government and its conservation agency, Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), under freedom of information law reveal that Glen made an initial presentation on the proposed wind farm on April

16, 2014. A meeting was held at the government’s Atlantic Quay offices in Glasgow.

It was chaired by Professor Russel Griggs, a consultant based in Sanquhar and appointed by ministers to cut regulatory red tape. It included government officials, SNH, and other public agencies, all told in an email to treat the matter “with strictest confidence”. An official minute of the meeting recorded that officials were in principle “supportive” of the wind farm.

But concerns were expressed about implications for other smaller wind applications in the area.

According to an account by SNH, Buccleuch’s plan “had been taken to Fergus Ewing who expressed significant interest.” SNH pointed out that it “will make money for the landowners and investors” and questioned if community benefits were sufficient.

Buccleuch’s stated aim was to win consent by 2017 or 2018. Its original plan, called “Project Grousemoor”, was for 160 turbines and involved moving part of a conservation area giving legal protection for birds – an unprecedented step that was rejected by SNH and the Scottish Government because it could breach European law.

Glen then made a second presentation to Ewing and officials at the Scottish Parliament on November 13, 2014 proposing a slightly scaled-down development with 140 turbines. Like his earlier presentation, it was marked “private and confidential”.

He set out the case for a rebranded “North Sanquhar Moor wind farm” to generate up to 400 megawatts of renewable electricity to help meet government targets. A map showed turbines scattered over a large area of land around the two small villages of Leadhills and Wanlockhead.

Glen asked for “help and support” from Ewing for the wind farm, along with a proposed hydro scheme. He wanted a “realistic” approach to environmental studies, “pressure” to be put on power companies to accelerate electricity grid upgrades, and “private connections” to the grid to be considered. He added: “We need a dedicated point person in the civil service to help de-bottleneck the process. Our suggestion is that Frances Pacitti oversees the process.” She is now head of energy consents and, according to the Scottish Government, has had “no involvement” with Buccleuch’s plans.

Three months later, on March 1, 2015, the Sunday Herald reported allegations that Ewing had turned down a planning application for a popular 30-turbine wind farm at nearby Sandy Knowe in Kirkconnel to avoid conflict with another small development planned locally by Buccleuch at Glenmuckloch. The allegations were denied by Ewing. Claims that Ewing might have breached the ministerial code of conduct were investigated and rejected on March 30 by the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, who concluded that Sandy Knowe was refused “solely on the planning merits of the application”.

But at the time Buccleuch’s plan for a massive new 140-turbine wind farm in the area was still secret. It wasn’t announced until April 22, 2015 – the day before it was disclosed in a freedom of information response from SNH to the Sunday Herald.

Elaine Murray, Labour’s front bench legal spokeswoman and MSP for Dumfriesshire, was concerned. “Buccleuch’s latest plan must be considered in an open and transparent way which involves the communities affected, rather than being discussed behind closed doors,” she said.

Bill Frew, chair of Canonbie and District Residents Association, claimed locals were afraid to voice opposition because of the estate’s influence. “Buccleuch has a breathtaking capacity to unilaterally decide what is best for local communities, and then tell us,” he said.

Buccleuch’s behaviour was criticised by Dr Richard Dixon, director of Friends of the Earth Scotland. “Community-owned renewables are a growing and vital part of Scotland’s clean energy future but they are threatened when the big boys try to gain privileged access and exert insider influence.”

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds welcomed the government’s rejection of the bid to move a bird conservation area. The charity’s head of planning and development, Aedán Smith, stressed wind development “must be an open and public process”.

According to Glen, however, it was “wrong and a distortion of events” to say that Buccleuch secretly lobbied for its wind farm.

He attended two government meetings in 2014, after helping to restore an opencast coal mine and discussions with Professor Griggs. “We engaged in these conversations as a significant long-established local business wishing to play a constructive role in economic development,” he said.

Buccleuch made a public announcement about the wind farm in April, but had not yet submitted a planning application.”We are now beginning to engage with community bodies, but no decisions have been finalised,” Glen said.

“Landowners are criticised for not encouraging rural development yet when they do, they are criticised for that too. Buccleuch has acted in good faith and with the utmost propriety.”

The Scottish Government stressed it was an essential part of Ewing’s role to discuss potential energy developments with businesses. It strongly refuted any suggestion engagement with energy companies “is anything other than appropriate.” Such developments must be considered via planning process.

Source:  Rob Edwards | Sunday Herald | 14 June 2015 | www.heraldscotland.com

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 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 Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.