It is very worrying when a company based in a foreign country tries to interfere with the planning system in another ("Energy giants condemn wind-farm protesters", The Herald, June 2).
I suspect that Vattenfall's concerns are much more about their profits than any thoughts about reducing carbon emissions.
It's not just Vattenfall who are challenging planning policies, the recently approved Interim Planning Policy in Dumfries and Galloway is under attack from developers who have questioned its validity. This policy has taken years to compile and at great cost. The final document is nowhere near as robust as local people hoped or envisaged after the wind power industry managed to implement changes during the consultation period which weakened it considerably. However, it would still bring, at least, a little local democracy.
Even this reduced document isn't weak enough for the developers who are acting like carpetbaggers putting in spurious applications in every possible location. The planning officers are so overwhelmed with the consequence that important information included in the environmental statements is not questioned but accepted at face value.
It is frequently left to members of the public to point out the discrepancies and inconsistencies in these statements, which is just what the wind-farm developers don't want.
Applications not processed in the permitted time limits are now being referred directly to the Scottish Government under appeal, by-passing the Dumfries and Galloway planning committee and any chance of a local decision.
It is a sorry day for Scotland and a sorry day for local democracy.
Keith Mycock,
16 Holroyd Road,
Kirkcudbright.
I read with incredulity Vattenfall's assertion that wind-farm protesters represent a "tiny vocal minority". This is not the case.
I write representing a large group of people who oppose, in particular, the development of at least two proposed wind farms on the edge of Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park. We are not bizarre, flat-earthers and are only too familiar with the extravagant and misleading claims of the wind energy lobby.
What arrogance Vattenfall and other development companies represent, in their voracious subsidy predation and immoderate attacks on any who have, in their view, the temerity to oppose the attempted industrialisation of the Scottish countryside which we love and cherish for future generations.
Arguments to change planning laws as suggested by Vattenfall are dangerous as, I would argue, are attempts to subvert the legitimate local democratic process in this most sensitive of areas. It is my ardent hope that a wise and attuned Scottish Government will have nothing whatever to do with such a suggestion.
Brian Rix,
Ardvulan,
Gartmore,
By Stirling.
I agree entirely with Raymond Pratt that the "enormous subsidies we pay for wind farms, an unreliable energy source" are impossible to justify (Letters, June 4).
I welcome the reports emerging to the effect that Chancellor George Osborne is planning to cut these subsidies by 25% ("Campaigners say turbine plan is a 'wind farm too far'", The Herald, June 4).
My hope is that he can be persuaded to reduce them by an even greater percentage.
John Milne,
9 Ardgowan Drive,
Uddingston.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article