Meeting of the Parliament 10 February 2026 [Draft]
As a Borders MSP, I thank Finlay Carson for this debate. We all agree that it is essential to meet our net zero targets and deter further global warming, which has affected the Borders with increased flood risk, and that we need alternative sources of energy, with turbines and pylons taking that green energy to the grid—mainly to meet the demands for energy from England. That said, I certainly agree that, as a result of significant growth in wind farms, battery storage projects and new electricity transmission infrastructure, there are real concerns in the Borders about overdevelopment.
Communities are concerned about the scale and pace of development. They want fairness and meaningful local benefit, and they feel that decisions can seem remote. I have raised their concerns about the cumulative impact of wind farms, battery storage and pylons in the Borders at First Minister’s question time. This was the exchange, which I have truncated in the interest of time.
I asked,
“whether the Scottish Government has carried out an assessment of the potential cumulative impact on the wildlife and the landscape, in light of the importance of tourism to the area.”
The First Minister replied:
“I appreciate the point that Christine Grahame makes on cumulative impact, and—
I emphasise—
“I have asked that work is taken forward to consider what further steps we can take as part of our strategic spatial energy plan. Through the plan, we will work to balance the need to deliver net zero with the need to protect our natural environment, tourism and rural communities.”
I pursued the issue further:
“I hope that there is progress …I understand that there are 30 sites in the Borders operating more than 440 turbines, with three more being built and others being applied for”
and
“the SP Energy Networks project—the cross-border connection—will require … 400 pylons”—
or thereabouts—
“to take Borders-generated energy”
south.
“That application … seems to me to be taking segmented parts of the impact in isolation, and not considering the cumulative impact. That cannot be fair when communities are certainly left getting absolutely nothing out of this but an industrialised landscape.”
The First Minister answered:
“Issues of cumulative impact are a legitimate consideration in the planning process … Indeed, there will have been examples of developments that have not been able to proceed because of the concerns about cumulative impact.”
He hoped that
“the consideration that we are giving to the implications for the strategic spatial energy plan will assist in addressing the point that she has raised with me.”—[Official Report, 22 January 2026; c 16-17.]
That is as it should be, together with improving statutory benefits to communities from developments, which currently arise mainly through agreement with the developers, and consideration of regional electricity pricing, albeit that I understand that that is a reserved matter.
Not all applications are agreed. CWP Energy wanted to build 60 turbines of up to 250m—820 feet—in height at Scoop Hill, a few miles south-east of Moffat. Dumfries and Galloway Council objected to the scheme on the grounds of its visual and landscape impact. The Scottish Government has concluded that it is
“not the right development in the right place”
and has refused permission for it to go ahead. We can look at that in the balance of the Government’s taking forward the real issues that people have—