I Am Speaking on Behalf of the Bruichladdich Pier Action Group

I am speaking on behalf of the Bruichladdich Pier Action Group and would first of all like to thank the Planning Committee and the Planning Officers for arranging this meeting to hear our views. My remarks are also endorsed by Mark Reynier the MD of Bruichladdich Distillery and the entire shareholder base. This includes both Sir John MacTaggart of Ardtalla and Bruno Schroeder of Dunlossit – all of whom regret they are unable to attend in person. We collectively detect a certain bewilderment over the proposed refurbishment of the pier here in Bruichladdich. It should once again be made clear that I have not met anyone in this community who is opposed to the basic objectives behind this application. Everybody understands that something needs to be done at Bruichladdich to enable tankers to offload heavy fuel oil for the distilleries. The objections are concerned with the specific engineering solution put forward by the applicant and its disconnection from the overall development aspirations of Bruichladdich. It is not the aims of the proposal that give rise to the objections, but that the applicant, in taking a narrow approach to a particular problem, has alighted on a solution that will cause damage, albeit unintended, to the development aspirations of the local community. These aspirations, I underline, are not defences of a passive status quo, but positive plans and actions that are already in hand. So it is no wonder the Planning Department is not sure what all the fuss is about! Bruichladdich is classed as an industrial pier, so what could be wrong with sticking this berthing system on the end of it? The Council have after all, offered to paint it the same colour as Loch Indaal. The report seems to imply that the fifty-six objectors must amount to little more than a group engaged in a bout of nimbyism. They are worried about the view from their comfortable retirement bungalows. This is a serious misunderstanding. The community here is small, but it is enjoying an economic and social resurgence that is frankly entirely of its own making. It is a community that is looking forward to an ever brighter future in which it continues to position itself to maximise its social and economic potential. The most obvious example of this is the development of Bruichladdich Distillery. This is a community that knows what it needs for the future. In many ways, we represent a model for the very principles of Sustainable Development that are enshrined in the Structure Plan authored by Argyll and Bute Council. This in turn is lifted directly from the Scottish Executives own principles. I quote – “The fundamental aim of Sustainable Development is to secure the future. We have seen how actions in the past have made life more difficult for us today. Developing sustainably means ensuring that our actions today do not limit our quality of life in the future” We agree with the Scottish Executive. The environment in which we live, not only in the practical sense of how we use it, but also in how the outside world sees it, is central to our community vision of the future. This community is economically complex. It doesn’t make sense therefore to reduce the options for maintaining and growing that diversity though a proposal for Bruichladdich pier that has not taken these broader considerations into account. Tourism is hugely important to the communities of Bruichladdich and its neighbours on the Rhinns. Our tourism industry is successful. We enjoy occupancy levels way in excess of those found in comparable mainland situations. The whole ‘Islay experience’ is the secret of that success. Our high quality self- catering accommodation, hotels and restaurants, our museums, wild-life centres, distilleries, beaches, and international jazz, whisky and angling events are carefully structured around the fundamental reason people come to Islay – because of its consistently outstanding and well cared for environment. The built environment on the Rhinns of Islay contains some of the most beautiful villages in Scotland – which are, with delicious irony, designated as such by conservation orders imposed by Argyll and Bute Council Planning Department. There is no consideration given to the complex and inter-related needs of the tourism industry in this proposal. Bruichladdich Distillery is committed to natural production processes and the development of its brand image both of which are indivisible from their relationship to the environment. Image in the whisky industry is vitally important. Developments at the distillery, for example the creation of the whisky academy attracting students from all over the world, will be negatively impacted by the proposed pier extension. The Distillery is proud of its location. Proud of the fact that it is able to employ so many local people - 24 full time jobs at the last count, and rising. The majority of those jobs have been created because Bruichladdich has been able to successfully project its image onto a world market to a customer base that believes in that image. The distillery website attracts 8,000 customers and friends every day and has a webcam trained on the loch 24/7 simply because folk want to log on and see what the weather is like in their spiritual home. What are we going to tell these people? To suggest, as it does in this document, that the proposal will be barely visible and in any case will be painted the same colour as the sea is disingenuous at best. The truth is that it is going to be an industrial steel and concrete structure the height of a three storey house better suited to Grangemouth than Islay. Bruichladdich, as we know it, and thousands of our customers believe in it, will be gone forever. We would also like to formally regret the tone of the document which records a threat from Shell UK Oil Products Ltd that unless we acquiesce to the current proposal, heavy fuel oil deliveries to the island will stop in July next year. This is an astonishing threat. First, because it is obvious that whatever solution is implemented it is not going to be completed by July next year. Secondly, this situation has arisen because Shell is not willing to commission smaller sized double hulled vessels that fit our pier. And you the Council, which means we the taxpayer, are expected to pick up the bill for what is entirely a commercial decision by Shell Surely this cannot be a threat they would like made public beyond these walls. Perhaps that is why it has proved impossible thus far to obtain copies of the letter from Shell, despite repeated attempts to do so. There may be another reason. In the year 2000 the multinational corporation running three of the distillery operations on Islay, decided to end their relationship with Shell and entered into a contract with Shell’s competitor BP which meant that their Islay distilleries would be supplied with heavy fuel oil by road and ferry. Contracts were issued and plant purchased to facilitate this. At the last moment however, Shell, realising that the game was up and their monopoly finished, called a meeting at which one can only presume that their pencils were vigorously sharpened. So late was this intervention however, and so secure was the new contract with BP, compensation was paid by the multinational distillery company to contractors involved. So the monopoly position enjoyed by Shell is nothing like as secure as they would like you, our Council, to believe. Indeed they have come within a hairs breadth of losing that monopoly for purely commercial reasons in the very recent past. Now we, as a community, do not want that to happen. It is the wrong option for everyone. It would mean a loss of Islay jobs and the degradation of the environment with more trucks on the roads between Grangemouth and Kennacraig – but please don’t think that Shell’s services are indispensable to the Islay distilleries – because that is demonstrably not the case. We remain confident that through proper negotiation a resolution that meets the needs of all parties can be found. Ken Wilson Associates who are Consulting Civil and Construction Engineers in Inverness believe there are viable alternatives to the current proposal. I quote “We consider there is merit in considering an alternative scheme whereby the mooring dolphins are replaced by either mooring buoys or permanent seabed anchors. This would give the tankers secure mooring points in the same location as the dolphins shown, and remove the need for the dolphins, walkways and lighting. Permanent hawsers would be strung from the anchor/mooring buoy to the existing pier and taken up by the tankers in-haul system. This is not uncommon practice. The same engineers go on to point out “The Planning Department suggest that the walkways will be “relatively lightweight structures less than a metre deep”. We suggest that a steel walkway spanning the distances shown will either be a heavy triangulated truss, about 1.5 metres deep comprising horizontal, vertical and diagonal bracing members, or the walkway will require intermediate supports which have not been mentioned in their report. In either case, the scheme will be significantly more intrusive than the Planners have admitted.” Ladies and Gentlemen. This is a modern community which, unusually in modern Britain – both makes things and makes things happen. Products from the Rhinns of Islay are sold all over the country. Bruichladdich whisky is making waves all over the world as its marvellous award in New York this month shows. This community has an influence and creates an impact that far exceeds that which you would expect from a population of this size.

Load more