for Sunday Herald, 10 September 2000
The Scottish Executive is facing one of its toughest environmental trials to date when it appears in the high court tomorrow accused of procrastination over the landmark decision whether to dig a massive new superquarry in the Western Isles. But, the Sunday Herald has learned, that may only be the start of its troubles.
The Environment Minister, Sarah Boyack, is being taken to the Court of Session in Edinburgh by Lafarge Redland, the French company that wants to remove the mountain of Roineabhal on south Harris to provide aggregates for roads and railways. The company alleges that the delay caused by Boyack's decision to refer the issue to the government's conservation agency, Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), is a breach of the European convention on human rights.
SNH was asked in July to reassess whether or not the site contained enough rare plants for it to qualify as a Special Area for Conservation, a European designation that would effectively outlaw the quarry development. There was speculation at the time that Boyack was hoping SNH's verdict would enable her to reject the superquarry.
But now the Sunday Herald understands that SNH scientists are planning to recommend to a special meeting of their board at the end of this month that the site should not be proposed as a conservation area. If this is endorsed by the SNH board, it will put the ball back in Boyack's court and make it more difficult for her to refuse the superquarry planning permission.
A group of scientific advisors under the SNH chief scientist, Michael Usher, have visited Harris and are now preparing a report which is expected to conclude that the health, grasslands and bog on Roineabhal are not of sufficient national importance to merit designation as a conservation area. This will be a major blow to environmental groups who have campaigned for a decade against the superquarry.
"If this is true, we are disappointed that Roineabhal won't receive the protection of European conservation law," said Lloyd Austin, a senior official from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds who was involved in the Link Quarry Group representing 37 voluntary environmental bodies.
"However our evidence to the inquiry, and developments since it ended, provide numerous good reasons to refuse planning permission. That is what we hope the minister will still do, as well as pursuing more sustainable development options for Harris."
Environmental groups say that the superquarry will destroy the landscape and endanger wildlife while only providing a handful of local jobs. They point out that the world demand for aggregates has halved since the inquiry, making the development economically unattractive. Some senior managers at Lafarge Redland have even been rumoured to have doubts, though this is firmly denied by the company.
The company argues that the superquarry, which could end up extracting ten million tonnes of rock, will benefit the local economy without causing undue environmental damage. There is a long term need for aggregates for roads and railways, despite short market fluctuations.
Lafarge Redland first applied for planning permission for the superquarry at Lingerbay in March 1991. It was the subject of Scotland's longest running planning inquiry from September 1994 to June 1995, the final report of which was submitted to the Scottish Office by the former Chief Reporter, Gillian Pain, in April last year.
Pain's report, which is widely believed to favour the superquarry, apparently mentions the need for clarification of the site's conservation status, a source of lengthy debate at the public inquiry. As a result, Boyack was advised by the executive's law officers to make the referral to SNH.
In court tomorrow lawyers for Lafarge Redland are planning to argue that asking advice from SNH on the issue was a breach of the company's rights because the agency was originally an objector to the superquarry. They will point out that two high-profile opponents, Kevin Dunion from Friends of the Earth Scotland and Michael Scott from the conservation group, Plantlife, have since been appointed to SNH's board.
Ironically, it now seems that the verdict of SNH's scientists will favour the company. SNH, which steadfastly declined to comment on the issue last week, has previously maintained that its scientific advice on the status of Lingerbay would be impartial. Earlier this year it conspicuously did not include Roineabhal in its list of proposed conservation areas.
On Friday there were persistent rumours that the Scottish Executive was about to pull a fast one by announcing a decision on the superquarry before the court proceedings open at 10.30 on Monday morning. This was categorically denied by an executive spokeswoman, however, who was reluctant to make any other comment.
Comments