Bookmark and Share
wpfb9b4c8d.png

“Evidence” emerges over SNH’s “deceit and duplicity”   21/9/11

► Leaked e-mail implicates SNH over Barra row

The Scottish Government is being urged to probe Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) amid “evidence” it acted with “spite and malice” against islanders.

A furious Barra councillor Donald Manford maintains SNH “lied” about the need to impose environmental restrictions over important fishing grounds against the wishes of Barra and South Uist fishermen.

Mr Manford says that a SNH boss falsely claimed the European Commission had proactively earmarked conservation measures for the Sound of Barra. SNH has launched a formal consultation which many islanders believe is a done deal to impose more conservation rules.

A controversial e-mail has now emerged which, if accurate, appears to suggest that - SNH, needlessly and freely offered up the fishing grounds between Barra and South Uist.

Mr Manford demanded: “In light of this new evidence I call again on the Minister for Environment and Climate Change to suspend consultation while he thoroughly investigates these matters.”

The councillor added: “It is becoming impossible to deny that this action is more about SNH spite and malice, against a community which refuses to submit to the economic sterilisation of the area’s most important and precious business lifeline.

“Despite SNH stonewalling release of information, evidence of their deceit and duplicity is emerging.”

He explained: “During a meeting with members of the community in 2008, SNH Chief Executive Ian Jardine (in presence of then minister, Roseanna Cunningham, MSP) insisted that the European Commission had directed this specific area for designation - that there was a designation “gap” in this specific area.

“ Not only has this assertion been proved false, I have been forwarded evidence which states that the “gap” in UK designation had already been filled, when Mr Jardine was making his untrue claim.”

The communication for the Joint Nature Conservation Committee dated January 2008, goes on to explain that, despite other areas having been prioritised; Scotland were offering to replace them - the gap be filled by Sound of Harris or Sound of Barra.

The e-mail also says “as “Scotland are very likely to progress these areas as SACs; would we need to rethink our site progression priorities?”

Mr Manford stated: “If this evidence is confirmed to be true; the statement of the SNH Chief Executive in 2008, to this community, in the presence of the minister, must be blatantly untrue.  

“As I am confident the minister at the time can confirm she was unaware of these actions, it falls to Ian Jardine to explain why he unnecessarily offered-up the Sound of Barra for designation while he was insisting the opposite to the minister and the community.”

Mr Manford says SNH must fully explain why it forward the Western isles sites and reveal the process behind their decision.

He asked: “Why does SNH continue to misrepresent and mislead the public and the government by claiming it did not submit the Sound of Barra to replace the Flannan Ridge or the Solan Bank for designation?”

“What action will the Scottish Government take where its agents mislead and misrepresent the public and the government?”

No-one from SNH was available to comment but the agency is expected to respond later today.