Highland Council Planning Committee finally decided, with only 8 councillors present, not to object (by a vote of 6-2) to the 33-turbine windfarm proposal for Dunmaglass Estate, near Loch Ness, 15 miles south-west of Inverness. The issue, because it is a major project, will now be decided finally by the Scottish Executive (aka 'Scottish Government').
Reading some of the reasons for non-attendance at this crucial planning committee meeting given by various of the councillors (see linked article above) reads like the apochryphal 'excuses' given by those wishing to avoid jury service! In any case, I think the project should go ahead, even if I think we are fooling ourselves if we believe that nuclear power is not the real way forward. I certainly don't have the objections on aesthetic grounds to wind-farms that some say they have as I think modern wind-generator towers are very attactive and quite elegant in their form - I see quite a large wind-farm far in the distance from my Nairn home whenever it is reasonably clear and I think it adds to the interest of the landscape.
Blogging from the Highlands of Scotland
'From fanaticism to barbarism is only one step' - Diderot
Monday 29 March 2010
2 comments:
Welcome to my comment area. Whilst all comment is welcome you are requested to respect the views of others. To read full terms for use of this facility, please visit my 'Terms of Use' section, linked to under the 'About this Blog' heading at top right of the blog. Note added 12JUL2010 - All comments will now be pre-moderated before they appear in this blog; this is a measure to prevent 'spam' commenting, which has become frequent of late. Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
That vote when absent trick was clearly planned in advance. All major moves, e.g. the Fed, were voted in that way.
ReplyDeleteProbably - although it's not entirely clear to me who engineered that timing. It could have been a way of getting it through despite opposition by some of the concerned councillors, but it is at least as likely (in my view) that it was a 'cop out' by the Councilors concerned to avoid having to vote FOR a measure which they believe many of their ward electors oppose - so their voting record could not be used against them at the next election.
ReplyDelete