Hansard

I thank all the members who have supported my motion and those who will contribute tonight. By way of background, I note that it has been a bit difficult to bring this debate to the chamber. I previously lodged a motion on the subject for members’ business that did not attract cross-party support. Emma Roddick then lodged a motion that attracted cross-party support, but the Scottish National Party did not choose to use it for one of the party’s members’ business debates. I then copied her motion, just to make sure that we were all on the same page. It might not be the exact wording that I would have used, but it was important for me to bring the debate to the chamber. I also support, and whole-heartedly and completely agree with, the amendment that has been lodged by Fergus Ewing.

Why is it important that we are debating the issue in the chamber today? It is because of the people who are sitting in the public gallery: almost 50 people who have come down from Moray and the Highlands to their Parliament to hear the matter being addressed—[Applause.]

That is deserving of applause, because some of us make that journey weekly, and it is not easy. I have led debates in Parliament before that have had a lot of public interest, but I am not sure that I have previously seen 50 people coming down from the Highlands to the Parliament to hear a debate—and that is just a fraction of the people in our part of the world who are interested in this issue. Many are watching online tonight, and many will be catching up later.

This issue has captured the attention and interest of many people in Moray, Inverness and Nairn and further afield. I have had comments, emails and letters from people from all over Scotland and the United Kingdom, and from others around the world, who are aghast—and absolutely disgusted—at what Offshore Solutions Group is proposing for the Moray Firth.

As I am sure that we will go through in the debate, the proposals are now less than what was previously put forward. I think that that just shows how cack-handed the company that is making the proposals has been throughout the process. We in this Parliament have to recognise that we, as elected members, have been supported every step of the way by some very committed individuals in the area, and by a wider campaign group, who have provided me, as an MSP, with more detailed information and expert analysis than I have ever had on any other issue.

Although I welcome that information and am delighted to receive it, I question why members of the public have had to commit so much of their time and energy to fight against proposals that should never, ever have got to this stage. The proposals are completely unacceptable and are completely out of character for our area. The numbers of people in the public gallery tonight, and the numbers of those who have been corresponding with their MSPs, show that there is widespread opposition to the plans. Indeed, I have met no one who thinks that the proposals are a good idea—well, I have met the developers, who are, I assume, in favour of the proposals, but I have met absolutely no one locally who is.

To go back to the issue of public engagement, my colleague Tim Eagle hosted a very well-attended meeting in Findhorn, with a satellite meeting in Nairn. I have been involved in public meetings in Moray for a long time, and I have never seen such a turnout before. I have never seen so many people wanting to get involved and engaged, and that is because they are worried about what will happen to our area if the proposals go ahead.

I congratulate everyone who has been involved. To single out one person is perhaps not the best thing to do, but I want to credit David Ross and the stop the Moray Firth FLOW-Park Facebook page. When people have asked me questions about the issue, I normally go to that Facebook page to get the answer because, if I do not know the answer, it will be there. Again, that highlights the commitment of the people who have been involved in the campaign.

I have many concerns about the proposals and how they have been put forward, because the process was very underhand. They were announced with minimal fuss to try to dampen the opposition to them—and then the situation exploded. Subsequently, when there were serious questions to be raised, the developers first agreed to come to Tim Eagle’s meeting to debate the proposals, and then cried off and said that they would not engage with the local community. If you trust your proposals, you should be brave enough to be up front and answer questions about them.

The Government is involved in the issue, and I am sure that we will hear tonight from the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy that she cannot speak about live cases, but she can speak about Scottish Enterprise giving £1.83 million to the company to develop the proposals to meet Scottish Government targets. The cabinet secretary has been questioned about that in the chamber previously, but there is still huge concern and worry about that level of Scottish Enterprise funding going to an organisation that wants to create destruction in one of the most beautiful parts of Scotland.