28th May 2017

Sustainable Shetland ‘pleased’ as judge rules on Viking wind farm

4 comments, , by , in News

A judge has ruled that the Scottish government failed to take proper account of its obligations under a European bird directive in granting consent for Viking Energy’s 103-turbine windfarm.

In a lengthy judgement issued on Tuesday, Lady Clark of Calton stated that ministers had not “meaningfully engaged” with the EU directive. That is because of the project’s expected impact on the whimbrel, a protected migratory wading bird.

A statement from Sustainable Shetland, which lodged the petition at the Court of Session, said the protest group was “pleased” with the ruling and will be “discussing the implications of this decision with our legal team”.

Lady Clark’s judgement stated: “This case involves a very large, multimillion pound development with important consequences.

“It is plain that this is a case in which it appears not to be disputed by anyone that whimbrel are a declining species in the UK with approximately 95 per cent of 290 breeding pairs in Shetland.

“I am not satisfied that the respondents [Scottish government  ministers]… have complied with their obligations under the Wild Birds Directive 2009.”

She also ruled that ministers should not have granted consent to Viking Energy Partnership because the applicant does not have a licence to generate electricity.

Lady Clark stated that “all parties accepted that this development could not be ‘operated’ without a generation licence”.

The decision will come as a blow to Viking Energy, but it is not yet clear precisely how the ruling will impact on the controversial project. The judge said she would have the case continued to allow parties to address her on the terms of the court minute to be prepared.

Viking Energy said it needed to consider the 130-page judgement and was awaiting the Scottish Government’s reaction, as it is the party against which the petition was lodged.

A spokesman for the developers said: “We will continue taking appropriate steps on this project to maintain our positive momentum and we remain committed to what we believe is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to bring the many economic and environmental benefits of a renewable energy industry to Shetland.

“Indeed, both the UK and Scottish governments have recently demonstrated that they are keen to make the Viking windfarm happen with their proposed financial uplift to support Scottish island projects.”

Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) took the view that reducing the scale of the development was still likely to result in a significant impact on the conservation status of the UK whimbrel population.

The Scottish Government contended that its decision letter had paid careful regard to the potential impact on the environment, particularly wild birds. It claimed that ministers were “not satisfied that the estimated impact of the development on whimbrel demonstrates such a level of significance”.

A Sustainable Shetland spokeswoman said: “We would like to thank our legal team for all their hard work, and all our members and supporters for their unfailing encouragement and financial generosity throughout this challenging process.”

A Scottish Government spokesman said it had received the 133-page ruling, adding: “Scottish ministers note Lady Clark’s judgement and will now consider it and its implications.”

More to follow.

The full judgement is available here.

AboutNeil Riddell

View other stories by »

4 comments

  1. Ian Tinkler

    Thank God for an independent Judiciary. Now can the Trust have its £Millions and Millions back?

    Reply
  2. What a relief! Now perhaps a Public Enquiry could be held, which should have been held in the first place.
    I hate the thought that Shetland might become an industrial wasteland to serve the needs of Scotland.
    Why can’t each small Shetland community have its own turbine, or even two or three, if Shetland’s needs are being comsidered? Of course, no-one would make millions from such a plan, but it would be better for most Shetlanders.

    Reply
  3. john irvine

    Is this the time to call a halt before any more millions are pumped into this madness? or will the few from this utterly selfish and destructive venture continue to try and pull the wool over the eyes of the honest people of Shetland?

    Reply
  4. Ed Lacey

    This decision has changed me from wanting to visit the Shetlands for its wilderness value, to now thinking it will look pretty much the same as all the other previously unspoiled and now wrecked landscapes, so what is the point? I won’t be the only tourist with this view. Very disappointed and saddened.

    Reply

Your Comment

Please note, it is the policy of The Shetland Times to publish comments and letters from named individuals only. Both forename and surname are required.

Comments are moderated. Contributors must observe normal standards of decency and tolerance for the opinions of others.

The views expressed are those of contributors and not of The Shetland Times.

The Shetland Times reserves the right to decline or remove any contribution without notice or stating reason.

Comments are limited to 200 words but please email longer articles or letters to editorial@shetlandtimes.co.uk for consideration and include a daytime telephone number and your address. If emailing information in confidence please put "Not for publication" in both the subject line and at the top of the main message.