Readers’ letters: Piecemeal planning is not good enough for giant data centres
A reader says the planning system is not designed to make decisions of national importance
The controversy surrounding the proposed Cato hyperscale data centre in Fife points to a wider problem than the merits of one planning application.
Scotland has promoted itself as an attractive location for data centres because of its renewable energy resources, temperate climate and infrastructure. Yet the planning system now being asked to determine these proposals was not developed with industrial computing campuses of this scale in mind.
There is, in consequence, a growing disconnect between national industrial policy and local planning law. National government encourages investment, while local authorities are left to determine individual applications whose demands upon energy, water and infrastructure may extend far beyond their boundaries.
Questions of cumulative environmental impact, landscape, resilience and the allocation of national resources cannot sensibly be considered one development at a time. Nor should individual communities find themselves debating projects of national significance without Scotland first having considered the policy which has encouraged them.
The issue is therefore larger than Cato. Before Scotland commits itself incrementally to becoming a major host for hyperscale data centres, parliament should determine the principles within which local planning authorities are expected to operate. Otherwise, decisions of national importance will continue to be made piecemeal, through a planning system never designed for that purpose.
Mary Bain Lockhart, Lochgelly, Fife
Injection of hope
Well he didn’t get banished to the governorship of the Chagos Islands as I hoped but at least Ed Miliband’s new job as Foreign Secretary keeps him out of domestic politics, and under Andy Burnham’s thumb.
This excision, plus the removal of other duds like Reeves, and Lammy, the appointment of John Healey as Chancellor, and the retention of Pat McFadden and Shabana Mahmood give me great hope that at least rUK will get council houses built, a National Care Service sensibly funded from a percentage of people’s estates, defence prioritised, the benefits bill tackled (hopefully) and perhaps even a drastic rollback on woke and gender lunacy. In terms of getting oil and gas fields drilled and developed, however, new Energy Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh seems to be Miliband on steroids.
I say “rUK” because many of these policy areas are devolved and unless he finds a Scottish Andy McBurnham the Prime Minister will struggle to get his Scottish colleagues out of their 27-year torpor.
But if it all applies – and works – up here this should surely mean a necessary wake-up call and common sense injection for Holyrood, not least any devolution of power to councils and the removal of the main current argument for independence – blaming Westminster for everything.
Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven, Aberdeenshire
Props to Rayner
There is a long tradition of politicians turning to theatrical props.One recalls Prime Minister Harold Wilson and his pipe or, today, Nigel Farage and the pint of beer and a cigarette.
Now Angela Rayner – reinstated as Housing Secretary – is wearing spectacles. She looks older and more intelligent.
John V Lloyd, Inverkeithing, Fife
Old adages
Kier Starmer left Downing Street after telling us about all the good things he had accomplished in his two years as Prime Minister: higher National Insurance, business rates and energy bills as well as another half a million unemployed.
Andy Burnam performed the best managerial decision of all time by appointing the ex-Defence Secretary John Healey as Chancellor, who criticised the former Chancellor for not providing enough money for defence.
He can now look to see where he can find the cash. The old adages of “hoist by your own petard” as well as “watch what you wish for” are still very relevant today.
James Macintyre, Linlithgow, West Lothian
Broken promise
The new Prime Minister should point out to John Swinney that, before there can be any discussion over IndyRef2, the SNP must redeem the pledge made in 2020, as part of their election campaign, to back the Green plan drafted by Andy Wightman, incorporating the European Charter of Local Self-Government into Scots Law.
The minute Nicola Sturgeon obtained the keys to Bute House in 2021 the pledge to the people of Scotland landed in a Bute House bin. Her two successors both refused to honour the pledge to implement a bill to devolve power and finance out of Edinburgh into the hinterlands of Scotland.
Why should the new Prime Minister listen to a politician who ignores the voters north of Hadrian’s Wall?
Ian Moir, Castle Douglas, Dumfries and Galloway
Electoral reform
What this country needs more than a general election is electoral reform, with the first-past-the-post electoral system scrapped and replaced by the Single Transferrable Vote or some other proportional system.
What it also needs is reform or abolition of House of Lords – and as for mandate we elect a party, not a president, and therefore if the governing party retains the confidence of the House of Commons they continue in government.
Seven prime ministers in ten years doesn’t indicate the need for a general election – it suggests the problem is much more serious than that.
If something is broken, in this case the electoral system, then having a general election using the same broken electoral system will not solve it.
Peter Ovenstone, Peterhead, Aberdeenshire
Lack of belief
“I believe in you, why don’t you believe in me?”
This question posed by Scottish musician and poet Bobby Motherwell was directed at those who still do not support self-determination, in spite of nearly two-thirds of voters in Scotland having wisely rejected Brexit.
At his Labour Party leadership coronation, Andy Burnham, in addressing the assembled politicians and supporters, stated: “I believe in all of you.”
We should soon know whether this belief of the new Prime Minister actually extends to the people of Scotland or whether the democratic right to choose our constitutional future post-Brexit is to continue to be denied by England’s appointee.
Stan Grodynski, Longniddry, East Lothian
Equality law
Tim Hopkins (Letters, 21 July) presents Jenny Lindsay’s piece (“We’re reaching the ‘find out’ stage of the ‘mess around’ era”, July 20) as claiming that it is unlawful for Engender and the Equality Network to campaign for legal change. That is not, it seems, her argument.
Ms Lindsay’s concern appears more fundamental. These organisations, ostensibly advocating for women and “LGBTQ+” people respectively, receive substantial Scottish government funding. Yet it is difficult to identify in their public work any particular advocacy for women and same-sex-attracted people who hold gender-critical beliefs: that biological sex is real, immutable and sometimes materially relevant, particularly to women’s sex-based rights and to homosexual people’s understanding of sexual orientation.
Those beliefs are protected under the Equality Act 2010. Yet these organisations echo the Scottish government’s preferred gender-identity framework and resist its retreat following the Supreme Court confirmation that “sex”, “man” and “woman” in the Act refer to biological sex.
They consequently risk appearing less like independent equality organisations than taxpayer-funded sock puppets for Scottish government genderist policy: amplifying one side of a profound conflict of rights while marginalising the other.
In terms of the Public Sector Equality Duty, the public funding of organisations that advance one contested worldview, while scarcely acknowledging the protected beliefs and corresponding interests of many whom they purport to represent, raises an obvious question about whether that duty is being discharged properly.
Those, it seems, are the “unlawful positions” which concern Ms Lindsay – and rightly so.
Brian Forsyth & Joe Bryce, Edinburgh & Saltcoats, North Ayrshire
Business rates
You report (20 July) that Edinburgh Council has waived business rates for businesses affected by the Princes Street fire. Excellent news for those affected, and the council is to be congratulated.
What is shocking in the article. though, is that Boots pays £1,438 a day in business rates. Yes, per day. No wonder businesses struggle to survive when they are hammered by business rates, then National Insurance increases, plus some of the highest energy charges in Europe. If we want a thriving economy, with the tax revenue that comes with it, we have to lower the costs of doing business so that more business start and small businesses grow, providing jobs that help people get a step on to the job ladder, gain experience and hopefully reduce dependence on benefits.
Let’s start by cutting business rates. A bold step but one that the SNP will be reluctant to take as success might lead to a demand for lower income tax rates too, and we can’t have that. Not when broad shoulders can bear so much of the burden!
Brian Barbour, Haddington, East Lothian
Write to The Scotsman
We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won’t print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, and in the body of the email – no attachments – and avoid ‘Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters’ or similar in your subject line. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading. No poems.