The Herald

Call to block undersea coal-gas energy plan

Pressure grows for clarificat­ion on moratorium for new developmen­ts

- DANIEL SANDERSON POLITICAL CORRESPOND­ENT

MINISTERS have been accused of paying lip service to a moratorium on controvers­ial new energy extraction techniques after a firm that wants to ignite coal reserves under the Firth of Forth said it expects to get the go-ahead within months.

Cluff Natural Resources wants to convert millions of tonnes of coal under the sea bed to gas under a process known as undergroun­d coal gasificati­on (UCG), a method the company says will be managed safely and bring substantia­l benefits for energy supplies and the economy but has been branded “frightenin­g and experiment­al” by Friends of the Earth.

SNP ministers have admitted for the first time they have the power to block the developmen­t, as the firm said it intended to submit a planning applicatio­n in either the Falkirk or Fife council area early next year.

However, the Scottish Government has given no indication it plans to step in, despite calling a moratorium that Energy Minister Fergus Ewing said applied to “granting of planning consents for all unconventi­onal oil and gas developmen­ts”.

Mr Ewing initially suggested he had no powers over UCG as it was technicall­y offshore, therefore controlled and licensed by Westminste­r.

But Alex Neil, the Cabinet Secretary with responsibi­lity for planning, said in response to a parliament­ary question that Scottish ministers would have the power to determine any planning applicatio­n for onshore infrastruc­ture related to UCG projects, effectivel­y handing Edinburgh a veto.

The admission has ramped up pressure on the Scottish Government to extend the moratorium to the Firth of Forth project, with more than 1,000 people believed to have emailed Mr Ewing calling for such a course of action.

Lewis Macdonald, Labour’s energy spokesman, said he had written to Nicola Sturgeon, calling on the First Minister to clarify what is covered by the moratorium.

He said: “Alex Neil’s answer to my parliament­ary question on planning decisions on the onshore aspects of UCG is clear. Ultimately Scottish Ministers can operate a presumptio­n against any such project in the planning system.

“SNP Ministers have been dodging the important questions on the unconventi­onal oil and gas moratorium for months ... the First Minister needs to be clear about the impact of the moratorium. Otherwise the conclusion has to be drawn that the SNP have never had any intention of halting unconventi­onal oil and gas in Scotland.”

The call comes as the SNP face growing pressure to spell out exactly what its moratorium means and accusation­s that the move was a political calculatio­n for deployment in the General Election campaign, in which the party adopted anti-fracking slogans, rather than motivated by any genuine concern over unconventi­onal oil and gas.

Six months on, ministers have refused to say who will carry out new research or when a public consultati­on, promised when the move was announced, will take place.

Jim Ratcliffe, the Ineos chief executive who wants to establish a fracking industry in central Scotland, revealed last week that the SNP Government had privately assured him it was “not against” fracking.

Correspond­ence obt ained by campaign group Frack Off Scotland through Freedom of Informatio­n laws shows that Mr Neil personally assured Algy Cluff, the North Sea oil tycoon behind Cluff Natural Resources, that his

plans would not be affected by the moratorium shortly after it was announced.

Mr Cluff has also lobbied Alex Salmond and Mr Ewing over his proposals, claiming UCG in the Forth could power a new gas power station on the Longannet site, with the existing coal-fired plant likely to close next March.

Andrew Nunn, the chief operating officer of Cluff Natural Resources, backed the Scottish Government’s ‘evidence based’ stance and said studies already existed that showed UCG could be conducted safely.

“As long as we can demon- strate what we are proposing is in line with previous studies, and can mitigate the impacts, I don’t see any reason why [a planning applicatio­n] shouldn’t go through quite smoothly,” he said.

“We’ve held a number of community engagement sessions that went very well.”

Dr Richard Dixon, director of Friends of the Earth Scotland, said: “Shale gas and coal bed methane were stopped by ministers telling councils not to let them proceed. While the licensing for undergroun­d coal gasificati­on is different it could be stopped by the same route. The lack of a legal definition of unconventi­onal gas has let the SNP give the impression that they have put a stop to it when UCG has so far escaped.”

A Government spokesman said it was the policy of the Government the developmen­t of new energy technologi­es “must be consistent with our environmen­tal objectives”.

HOW Tony Blair can have the brazenness to turn out and deliver advice on current UK politics almost defies belief, (“Blair: Nationalis­m is like the politics of cavemen”, The Herald, July 23).

Here we have a man who stated that Britain had to pay a “blood price” to maintain the “special relationsh­ip” with the United States in relation to the extremely controvers­ial invasion of Iraq. Look at the state of Iraq today

Here we have a man, after standing down as prime minister, who has taken millions of pounds for giving advice to dictators of countries, such as Kazakstan, with its dreadful human rights record.

Here we have a man who had such an intimate relationsh­ip with the Murdoch media empire that, after leaving Downing Street, he became a godfather to one of Rupert Murdoch’s children.

Here we have a man of whom Margaret Thatcher once said: “Our greatest achievemen­t was Tony Blair. We forced our opponents to change.”

It is undeniable that the history books tell us that Tony Blair, at the head of the Labour Party, won three General Elections. However, the Labour Party is today paying a high price for New Labour and the behaviour of its erstwhile leaders, many of whom are now in the House of Lords, which they once undertook to abolish. The Labour Party has now lost both its identity and its way. Ian W Thomson, 38 Kirkintill­och Road, Lenzie. SO Tony Blair’s assertion is that nationalis­m is like the politics of cavemen. Well he should know, having been complicit in bombing Iraq back to the stone age. Roddy Mac Donald, 1 Glenmount Place, Ayr. WHEN former party leaders resort to name calling, you know that they have lost the argument. When they go for the soundbite, no matter that they insult the majority of voters in the recent General Election in Scotland, you know that they have lost their sense. When they combine these and vote to grind down the poorest in our society, you know that they have lost their compassion.

Well done, Tony Blair. We now know why Labour lost the right to govern. David Hay, 12 Victoria Park, Minard. PRESUMABLY Tony Blair’s critique includes English nationalis­m and even, perhaps, Home Counties nationalis­m. Alastair Runcie, 5 Vivian Avenue, Milngavie. TONY Blair eschews “radical leftism” and contends that Labour can only win elections from the centre ground of politics.

So please explain why a radical right-wing Conservati­ve Party with policies that would have taken the breath from Margaret Thatcher have won a majority, albeit a thin one?

Mr Blair, like so many in the Labour Party today, has been beguiled by the constant right-wing rhetoric pumped out daily from Britain’s Conservati­ve supporting media that “left” is bad and “right” is good .

Tens of millions of voters in the UK do not subscribe to this fantasy and, as a result of the failure of the Labour Party to adhere to its principles, have deserted politics.

These are the people whom Labour must win over – not soft Tory voters like those who backed Mr Blair. James Mills, 29 Armour Square, Johnstone. WHEN I was at the recent Miners Gala, held annually on Durham’s old racecourse, it was noticeable that of all the Labour leadership candidates only Jeremy Corbyn had been invited to make a speech to the tens of thousands present.

Surely the reason for this is that neither Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper or Liz Kendall would have had anything to say to men and women in low-paid jobs supplement­ed by (soonto-be slashed) tax credits, or those penalised for not being able to work and therefore reliant upon (soon-to-be slashed) welfare benefits? The fact is that whoever is pronounced leader after the ballot closes on September 10 (“Corbyn on course for leadership”, The Herald, July 22) will be empowered to either pursue policies which serve to reinforce Labour’s current Tory-lite trajectory, or ones which will steer it back towards being a party intent upon fighting for the kind of men, women and children gathered at the Gala. As a voting Unite union member my decision about which candidate to choose, ergo what Labour Party is needed, was made well before I went to Durham. Kors Allan, 7 Whitingfor­d, Edinburgh. ONLY the most optimistic of Labour Party members could believe the party is in a good place at the moment, and Ian Bell (“Labour are a party of sheep herded by the Conservati­ves”, The Herald, July 22) has much fun with the Labour leadership’s decision (mistaken in my view) to have Labour MPs abstain on aspects of the Welfare Bill. As Mr Bell highlights 46 Labour MPs defied the whips and voted against the bill in its entirety, so it is clear that there is opposition in the party to both the bill and the party leadership’s position on it. We know that Tory MPs voted enthusiast­ically for and that SNP MPs voted en bloc against the bill.

What we don’t know is the actual belief of any SNP MPs on the content of the bill because, as we also know, all SNP MPs have signed a self-denying ordinance against any public disagreeme­nt with the party line. You can check the record to see how your SNP MP voted but, since they have agreed never to acknowledg­e any personal opinion in public on any policy, you cannot know if he/she voted on their own judgment or merely to toe the party line.

Ian Bell is right: Labour’s position on the benefits bill was stupid, contradict­ory and wrong. But at least we know where Labour MPs stand; they are occasional­ly independen­t enough to have and express opinions contrary to the party line. We will never really know what any SNP MP thinks on the Welfare Bill, or any other policy come to that, because they have signed away their right to express their real views in public, to their constituen­ts or anyone else.

Perhaps next time Mr Bell can give us some fun on the fundamenta­lly anti-democratic voluntary censorship of an entire political party. Alex Gallagher, Labour councillor, North Ayrshire Council, 12 Phillips Avenue, Largs.

 ??  ?? FERGUS EWING: Suggested he had no powers over UCG.
FERGUS EWING: Suggested he had no powers over UCG.
 ??  ?? BACK IN THE LINE OF FIRE: The former prime minister, Tony Blair, was at the centre of controvers­y this week after branding nationalis­m a ‘reactionar­y political philosophy’ that represent the ‘politics of the caveman’.
BACK IN THE LINE OF FIRE: The former prime minister, Tony Blair, was at the centre of controvers­y this week after branding nationalis­m a ‘reactionar­y political philosophy’ that represent the ‘politics of the caveman’.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom