Bad news (I assume) for Coul Links

[Marty Bonnar]

I’d guess the timing of this announcement isn’t entirely coincidental.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-44795229

[Niall C]

FBD

The gist of the story is a knock on Trump to coincide with the Presidential visit however I don't think SNH will be at all unhappy at the release of this news as it puts on a bit more pressure on Scottish Ministers with regards to calling in the Embo decision as I think you surmise.

No on posted anything last week but there was a bit of press coverage regarding comments from some "world" heritage organization (based in Scotland by the sounds of it) calling for the Government to call in the application. Interestingly enough the Scottish Ministers response was that they hadn't yet been notified of the planning decision so therefore couldn't comment. Not sure if that was someone hedging their bets or being totally non committal.

Either way I still don't see the Scottish Ministers calling this in despite the environmental lobbying.

Niall

[Jon Wiggett]

I believe the SNH objection was a statutory one which they had to do due to the SSSI. It was not one they wanted to make nor were there any grounds for it. As for the article, I suspect Niall has it about right though the BBC has been less than balanced in its reporting.

[Niall C]

Jon

You make it sound as though SNH’s objection was them just going through the motions rather than having any fundamental objection to the development which I think maybe is stretching it a bit.

As for the BBC, they report the “news”.  News in this context has often consisted of reporting Press Releases and reaction issued from both sides (ie. the developers and their supporters and wildlife/environmental groups and their supporters) so inevitably in that reporting it is going to appear that they are favouring one side or the other depending on who’s comment/PR they are reporting on at that point in time.

To be honest I don’t see any overall bias either way, just a fairly superficial broad-brush approach to reporting a subject that really isn’t that far up the public’s list of concerns.

Niall

[Jon Wiggett]

Niall,


SNH have an obligation to object to any proposal which destroys habitat regardless of the mitigation. SEPA on the other hand does not. SEPA had no objections and SNH made just this one which they are obliged to do. If the SNH objection was because they were obliged to or if they would have done so anyway I do not know.


Of course, should you know better then please do share. 


Jon