23rd September 2018
Established 1872. Online since 1996.

Jonathan’s old chestnut (James Mackenzie)

It doesn’t matter how much one argues; in spite of a number of commentators’ observations, and previous letters contradicting him, Jonathan Wills (Readers’ views, 9th October) is himself incapable of distinguishing fact from fantasy.

His old chestnut that SS stands for “Sabotage Shetland” – or worse – is also getting rather worn and feeble.

If a referendum was impossible under planning law, why then did no councillor (nor he himself) point that out when the Shetland Islands Council convener in 2009 said that “… if most Shetlanders are against it, of course we couldn’t go ahead with it”.

What was impossible was an appeal against the Scottish ministers’ decision in 2012, such as could have been made by the developer, had it not been granted planning consent.

Judicial Review was the only option open to objectors. This was, and remains, a fundamental, unfair and undemocratic flaw in planning law.

Dr Wills’ ignorance about the Judicial Review is also telling. He writes: “We then saw lengthy legal actions where objections that would have been considered by a public inquiry were minutely examined. The objectors lost.”

As someone in his twin positions in the council and Shetland Charitable Trust ought to know, the scope of the review was extremely limited – to points in law. Objections that would have been considered at a Public LocaI Inquiry could not be “minutely examined”.

As I’m sure he well knows, however, neither the Western Isles nor Orkney (along with Shetland) yet have new interconnectors enabling expansion of renewable energy projects. Does he seriously think that Sustainable Shetland’s court action has delayed these cables?

There is ample evidence to show that other factors, in the political and economic arenas of Scotland and the UK, have been the reason that no interconnector has been laid, nor income yet accrued from the Shetland Charitable Trust “investment”.

As has been pointed out before, this was investment in a gamble, made with unreliable financial advice, and as such can by no means be regarded as charitable.

James Mackenzie
Vice-chairman,
Sustainable Shetland
The Lea,
Tresta.

3 comments

  1. iantinkler

    One just has to ponder, is Dr. Wills losing touch with reality, or just what is his motivation? May I respectfully point out the following, just so there is no ambiguity? In his letter, The Shetland Times, of 10/10/2015, , Dr Wills claim that “Viking might have been generating revenue for good causes by 2017, but for the attempts at sabotage by “Sustainable” Shetland, which must have cost the project getting on for a million pounds already; and that the windfarm revenue cannot now arrive before the early 2020s, again mainly because of SS”. That statement is manifestly not true. The reason this project has stalled completely, is that there is at this time, no Island Interconnector. To blame sabotage by “Sustainable” Shetland for any delay is just not credible nor honest.

    Reply
  2. iantinkler

    O dear, Jonathan Wills, just a tad disingenuous or outright dishonest? A statement from Viking Energy “Meanwhile, Viking Energy said it had missed out on the first round of the CfD auction, when 27 projects received more than £315 million in funding, this February.

    Following the May election, the second CfD round, originally due this month, was postponed until next year leaving renewable energy companies in the dark over future funding.”
    O dear, what will happen to our speculated £10 million of SCT funds. I would not hold your breath waiting for an honest answer from Dr. Wills!!!

    Reply
  3. iantinkler

    And answer was there non!!!

    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.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.