The Battle for Roineabhal Reflections on the successful campaign to prevent a superquarry at Lingerabay, Isle of Harris, and lessons for the Scottish planning system © Chris Tyler The Battle for Roineabhal: Reflections on the successful campaign to prevent a superquarry at Lingerabay, Isle of Harris and lessons for the Scottish planning system Researched and written by Michael Scott OBE and Dr Sarah Johnson on behalf of the LINK Quarry Group, led by Friends of the Earth Scotland, Ramblers’ Association Scotland, RSPB Scotland, and rural Scotland © Scottish Environment LINK Published by Scottish Environment LINK, February 2006 Further copies available at £25 (including p&p) from: Scottish Environment LINK, 2 Grosvenor House, Shore Road, PERTH PH2 7EQ, UK Tel 00 44 (0)1738 630804 Available as a PDF from www.scotlink.org Acknowledgements: Chris Tyler, of Arnisort in Skye for the cartoon series Hugh Womersley, Glasgow, for photos of Sound of Harris & Roineabhal Pat and Angus Macdonald for cover view (aerial) of Roineabhal Turnbull Jeffrey Partnership for photomontage of proposed superquarry Alastair McIntosh for most other photos (some of which are courtesy of Lafarge Aggregates) LINK is a Scottish charity under Scottish Charity No SC000296 and a Scottish Company limited by guarantee and without a share capital under Company No SC250899 The Battle for Roineabhal Page 2 of 144 Contents 1. Introduction 2. Lingerabay Facts & Figures: An Overview 3. The Stone Age – Superquarry Prehistory 4. Landscape Quality Guardians – the advent of the LQG 5. Views from Harris – Work versus Wilderness 6. 83 Days of Advocacy – the LQG takes Counsel 7. 83 Days of Advocacy – Voices from Harris 8. 83 Days of Advocacy – Last Rites 9. Views from Harris – Snakes in the Grassroots 10. Delays and Politicking 11. Views from Harris – A Long Goodbye 12. The Second Bite of the Cherry 13. The Strange Case of Lafarge and the Panda 14. The Last Dance 15. Learning Lessons – Messages from Lingerabay 16. ‘The Top of Roineabhal is Coming Back’ – Harris after Lingerabay. Appendix 1: Summary Timeline Appendix 2: The Cast of Characters Appendix 3: Personal Statements from the Authors Appendix 4: The Public Local Inquiry (PLI) Process Appendix 5: List of Acronyms used in this Report. The Battle for Roineabhal Page 3 of 144 Chapter 1: Introduction A tortuous tale The saga of the Lingerabay superquarry is a tortuous tale of almost epic proportions, lasting for more than a quarter of a century. It concerns a proposal – first mooted in 1974 – for a 10 million tonne superquarry that would chisel away almost a third of the magnificent mountain of Roineabhal on the Isle of Harris in the Western Isles of Scotland. The planning application by Redland Aggregates brought into focus major issues of national policy on mineral supply, rural support, community empowerment, sustainability, landscape protection and biodiversity. In the latter stages, even issues of European legislation were raised. This volume is not intended as a definitive history of the battle to stop the superquarry at Lingerabay. Rather, it is the perspective of one particular player in the ‘Battle for Roineabhal’: Scottish Environment LINK, a consortium of 19 environmental, non-governmental organisations in Scotland. At the start of this story, the organisation was called Scottish Wildlife & Countryside Link, but it changed its name in 1999 to reflect its wider remit, and for convenience it is referred to in the text by its preferred abbreviation: LINK. In many ways, LINK’s involvement in Lingerabay marks its ‘coming of age’ as an effective environmental network. Through the professionalism of its engagement, it gained respect and influence, and today its views are taken seriously by Scottish Ministers in a way that was unthinkable back in 1991 when LINK entered this particular fray. Yet the members of LINK who were at the forefront of its involvement in Lingerabay recognise that many mistakes were made, especially in the early stages of the campaign. This report tries to describe some of these also, in the hope that others in future will learn from them. Over the span of this story, Scotland has changed immensely, so much so that some of the murkier details in the early stages of the saga seem almost unthinkable today. Yet there are lessons from what has transpired since 1974 that remain just as relevant in the first decade of the 21st century. Already some of the key individuals involved admit that they cannot remember all the labyrinthine detail of what went on. This report, therefore, is an attempt to capture for posterity some of the story that lay behind the public debate, and more importantly, to draw out some of the lessons for environmental and community groups who might face a similar ‘David and Goliath’ battle over Britain’s finest landscapes in the future. Insights and hindsight It is important to record here what this report sets out to do. As authors, we were invited by LINK to write an overview of the campaign to prevent a superquarry at Lingerabay, in a way that is “readable and accessible to a lay audience, although technically correct”. We were asked to interview some of the key participants, then, with the benefit of their insights, to suggest the lessons for environmental NGOs and community groups, to propose the next steps for key players, and to consider the policy implications for LINK and its partners. The Battle for Roineabhal Page 4 of 144 The report deliberately focuses on the experiences of LINK and this is reflected in our choice of interviewees, although many interviewees were able to offer insights from other perspectives, including that of Scottish Natural Heritage and various development and political agencies. Some interviewees felt that it was prudent to speak ‘off the record’, and this has been respected. The points of view of various individuals who aided and interacted with LINK, particularly those in the Harris community, are also given. A full list of those consulted, together with brief professional biographies, forms Appendix 2 of this report. Although LINK members are rightly proud of the way they challenged the Lingerabay proposal, they would never claim that they alone ‘saved’ Roineabhal. One important factor in their success was that, by bringing key issues to the fore, they helped to change local opinion, initially enthusiastic, against the planned superquarry. The implications of changing local attitudes are explored in the following chapters, in parallel with the story of LINK’s efforts. In line with our brief, we do not devote much attention to the developer’s perspective and, as such, Lafarge Redland remains a rather shadowy presence in this tale. That said, we attempt to illuminate the errors the company made in its handling of the Lingerabay case, at least as perceived by LINK, and to record the events that led to Lafarge’s final withdrawal. It is important to make clear that this report is not intended as a definitive and impartial guide to the arguments for and against a superquarry on Harris. As authors, both of us would admit to being partisan: we both played a part in the battle against the superquarry, and we were specifically commissioned to write this report so we could draw on that experience. Inevitably, this means we bring prejudices to the report, and our personal statements in Appendix 3 will help readers to understand our backgrounds in telling this tale. The case against the superquarry Although this is not a detailed account of the pros and cons of the superquarry proposal, it will be necessary to refer to some, at least, of the arguments in telling this story. Chapter 2 summarises the key statistics about the proposed superquarry, and the sheer scale alone is one major reason why so many LINK member bodies objected to the planning application. More information about LINK’s planning objections is to be found in the excellent LINK Quarry Group booklet, The Case Against the Harris Superquarry, published in 1996, from which Table 1 below is drawn summarising the LINK case. The booklet is still available on-line at www.foe- scotland.org.uk/nation/superquarry1.html The Battle for Roineabhal Page 5 of 144 TABLE 1: The 21 planning reasons presented by the Link Quarry Group in support of its objection to the proposed superquarry at Lingerabay. 1. The proposal is contrary to the Government's sustainable development strategy. 2. The proposal is contrary to the Government's international responsibility for protected areas. 3. The proposal is contrary to Government policy as set out in NPPG4 Land for Mineral Working. 4. The proposal is contrary to the underlying reasons and objectives for the designation of National Scenic Areas (NSAs). 5. The development would adversely affect five other NSAs. 6. Valuable plant habitat would be lost. 7. There would be disturbance to Schedule 1 breeding birds. 8. The proposal is contrary to the objectives of the development plan. 9. Noise from the development would cause disturbance to local people and visitors. 10. Blasting would cause similar loss of amenity. 11. Dust would also cause loss of amenity, and damage to wildlife and fisheries. 12. The material and cultural asset of St Clements Church, Rodel would be devalued, and possibly damaged by vibration. 13. The development would increase the risk of marine pollution from accidental emissions from the site or associated shipping, or from ballast water. 14. Associated shipping would interfere with fisheries in the area. 15. The development would damage the image of Harris. 16. The development would cause economic dependency on a single company/single industry development. 17. The development would compromise future job prospects. 18. The development could damage the cultural heritage of the area, in terms of the Gaelic language and the Hebridean way of life.