AN unprecedented Highland Council motion to clarify renewable energy developments and strategies has received significant support from the region’s communities.
How that motion – at times, amid contentious discourse – plays out among governments and developers will determine its success.
In apparent pushback against the Labour Government’s 2030 net-zero ambitions and Scotland’s renewable energy role with its Great British Energy investment vehicle in Aberdeen, the Highland Council (HC) narrowly passed a motion expecting greater public clarity on the many wind farms, massive overhead pylon schemes and prospective renewable battery plants within its area.
Some 63 community councils backed the motion earlier this month to introduce a “real-time” holistic mapping feature on its website to show the overall effect of energy generation, storage, transmission and connections in the Highlands – in effect, giving a “big picture” of northern Scotland’s connectivity to the National Grid and its contribution to the UK’s renewable energy push.
“A holistic map using what is now mainstream technology will help everyone see the whole picture,” said Helen Crawford (below), a Conservative councillor for the Aird and Loch Ness Ward, who introduced the motion.
“It also instructs the HC to start planning training for community councils and to upgrade its dialogue with government on the cumulative aspects of energy development.
Crawford said: “Community councils will rightly be expecting the expert major infrastructure training to be rolled out at pace and to hear reports directly from the Highland Council about the tough conversations it needs to have with the government to bring an end to piecemeal consideration of major infrastructure applications – so-called salami-slicing.”
Backing the motion are community councils such as those from Thurso, Beauly, Cromarty and Inverness and from small villages such as Kirkhill and Bunchrew.
Cameron Kemp (below), the chairman of Kirkhill and Bunchrew Community Council, said: “Our specific concern is the proposal for 400kV pylon lines passing through our area and the detrimental implications to health, wellbeing, tourism and employment, and our world-class environment – solutions such as underground and undersea cabling would be better in the long run for everyone.
Kemp believes the motion is very significant. He said: “Communities are really struggling to deal with the overwhelming onslaught which they are facing due to the current major energy infrastructure proposals. Improved engagement by the Highland Council will go a long way to enabling decisions more acceptable to the people to be taken. We need and demand vastly superior solutions.”
Activists are also celebrating the motion’s passing. Dan Bailey of Better Cable Route (Strathpeffer and Contin), a group which has repeatedly called for a more public-facing approach to energy initiatives in its opposition to plans for high-voltage overhead pylons, says it creates a precedent.
“It sets a new bar of openness and accountability in local decision-making for the Highland Council,” he said. “Other councils, such as in Angus, Aberdeen and Dumfries, are looking closely at what is happening here and having similar conversations about the proliferation of new energy infrastructure that has been snowballing out of control.”
The HC vote on the motion was carried by just two votes, 33-31, with the latter number backing an amendment from Emma Knox, SNP councillor for Aird and Loch Ness Ward, who has not responded to questions for this article.
The amendment was blocked from further discussion and the motion was put to vote by council convener Bill Loban.
Last June, he rejected as “not competent” a previous motion with reported cross-party support on the same subject by Crawford.
One point is whether the latest adopted motion could prejudice future energy planning applications to the Highland Council. Crawford rejects that, saying “If it really did prejudice future planning applications then it would not have been ‘competent’ and we could not have debated it, far less voted on it.”
Crawford, a former Scottish lawyer, contends that the amendment to her Highland Council motion sought to remove a “Full Council” reporting requirement and instead put this to the council’s economy and infrastructure committee: “crucially, with no timeline for that reporting to happen.”
Despite fearing the amendment would “kick the motion into the long grass”, Crawford did back one item included – introduction of a planning fee to benefit community councils when the motion is reported at the next full Highland Council meeting: “Local communities have spoken – and now they are watching.”
