Oil Leak 79 Tourism……who cares?

17th February 2017
 |  2 Comments

In the response from our legal letter…….in the Intertek summary document, under the issue heading “impacts of operations on Tourismn” where the following comments were highlighted:

  • Impacts on operations will damage the local tourism even if no oil spill occurs
  • This impact has not been adequately assessed

I think you could start with saying – “consultees comments have not been adequately collated”. We are trying to obtain the currently via FOI just to find out exactly what was said. In a classic dismissive Intertek response they reply,

“The regulations focus on Environmental Effects and not social impact. Requirement for assessment to be considered by the MCA.”

Nothing like a contradictory response – if the you don’t need to look at social impact why would the MCA even consider the need. Again, at the risk of being repititve, if you go back to the regulations you quickly find:

2.—(1) The environmental statement must contain—

(a) a description of any aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected by the proposed cargo transfers, including—

  1. (i)  human beings,fauna and flora;

There you go……does tourism come under the heading of “any aspect likely to be significantly affected……including…..human beings” or do the consultants not have even a basic understanding of what they should be delivering? You decide.

The 2010 regulations are HERE if you want to read for yourself. If you don’t consider tourism it really does make a mockery of the whole thing – you have communities on the Black Isle and Moray coast that depend on tourism and are actively trying to expand their tourist industries, and then you have the CFPA who are selflessly pressing on with the scheme which threatens to put all that at risk for the sake of a few quid. How can they be so selfish? How can they be trusted to run an important public asset?

 

News