A HIGHLAND campaign group is calling for all the region’s councillors to spell out their position on controversial moves to carry out ship-to-ship [STS] crude oil transfers in the Cromarty Firth.
Cromarty Rising said a survey of community councils in the area had found that all those in the Black Isle, with one exception, either opposed the transfers plan or had serious concerns.
The group’s call came as attempts were being made to form a coalition of community councils in Nairn on the south shore of the firth, whose views have not been considered by Cromarty Firth Port Authority (CFPA).
A spokesman for the coalition told The National: “We were deemed not to be consultees because we were not co-joining the Cromarty Firth boundary. But the seabed is still the same and we have a major problem with our beaches.
“There a number of initiatives currently being explored to promote Nairn as a high value health and wellbeing destination exploiting our unrivalled natural assets of beaches, golf courses and distinctive micro climate.
“This crazy application by the port authority is nothing less than corporate recklessness and sitting in their bunker seven miles across the firth on the other side of the Black Isle, it’s a classic case of out of sight out of mind.”
CFPA last week issued an update on the STS plans, claiming that three out of nine community councils – representing 17 per cent of the local population – had confirmed they were against the licence application.
However, Cromarty Rising said it canvassed those with a marine border and found 20 had signalled their opposition. The four nearest CFPA’s Invergordon HQ made no comment, despite being sent the survey several times.
Jacquie Ross, chair of Cromarty and District Community Council said: “It did not surprise me that the overall response was that of opposition.
Unprecedented levels of concern have been expressed to our local community council.”
Cromarty Rising said the CFPA update paid no attention to community councils just outside their limits. “The port authority are so disengaged they don’t deem Dingwall or Maryburgh as being worthy of consultation just because they are outwith their statutory limits, not to mention all the other communities on the Moray Firth and Dornoch Firth coasts that will be affected by this proposal,” said the group.
“All communities with a marine border will be severely impacted. In fact, in the event of a significant spill it is all Highland Council taxpayers that will foot the bill.”
A spokesman added: “The port continues to refuse public consultation on their revised application; the last one went on their website for all to see. Instead it has finally offered a public meeting but only under their imposed conditions for a handful of people.
“The CFPA seem determined to press on with this proposal which could cause serious and irreversible damage to local environment and the jobs that depend on it. They are showing complete contempt for coastal communities.”
CFPA was holding its AGM last night and a spokesperson said they had already responded to comments from Cromarty Rising.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel