Brian Monteith’s excellent article (Perspective, 27 July) about the cheek of recent Scottish Government demands on Westminster was spot on.
Fergus Ewing, vociferous in his opposition to industrial wind proliferation when courting the electorate in his own constituency in 2007, promptly U-turned when in government.
His about-face was so fast it must have taken even the wind developers by surprise. Fast forward eight years and now he and the new First Minister jostle for position to decry the well-advertised halting of onshore wind subsidies by Westminster with irrational outbursts that parrot hysterical sound bites from the wind industry.
“It is anti-business,” they say when most of the informed, without vested interests, can see it has to be a good thing for all consumers, including those industries that rely on affordable electricity to function.
Many of those are in manufacturing and they are the ones that really employ a lot of people and have valuable input into the economy – not the few fantasy jobs in the wind industry and handsome profits that will wing their way to the home country of the multinational developer.
Where is the hard, factual economic evidence on the exact number of jobs in which firms, full or part-time, in which locations will be affected and why? What precise economic rationale is there behind their assertions that the halting of subsidies is anti-business?
Is the Scottish Government saying that wind farms cannot operate without subsidies at all?
Did the wind industry ever see themselves operating on a commercial basis?
SNP politicians are using this issue as an attempt to score points against Westminster and, it appears, as a starting gun to herald the lead up to the second independence referendum.
They should come clean, admit their real agenda and explain why they faithfully support an industry that it is so despised by many of their citizens who live in those rural communities targeted by developers.