:00:04. > :00:14.tried. The banks have to take hard fiscal choices and let others worry
:00:14. > :00:17.
:00:17. > :00:26.Tonight on Newsnight Scotland, the Government announces it will
:00:26. > :00:30.announce -- it will allow a return Denny-to-Beauly power line to be
:00:30. > :00:34.built. Is the one approved now it any different to the one proposed
:00:34. > :00:37.earlier this year? And are these projects all
:00:37. > :00:41.imperative to save the environment or is there a backlash from people
:00:41. > :00:48.who believe they are destroying the environment in the process?
:00:48. > :00:51.The Government has given its final response in the mitigation of the
:00:51. > :01:01.Denny-to-Beauly power line. What does that mean? You have to choose
:01:01. > :01:11.
:01:11. > :01:14.your preferred version of the narrative. Everyone knows that it
:01:14. > :01:20.depends on the power getting delivered South.
:01:20. > :01:24.The Highlands - you might not want to live with them but you do not
:01:24. > :01:28.function as a nation without them. The Government says that the Denny-
:01:28. > :01:32.to-Beauly power line is the more significant project their
:01:33. > :01:37.generation. It will allow the renewable energy in the north of
:01:37. > :01:43.Scotland to be harnessed. But it underlines issues that have faced
:01:43. > :01:47.the SNP in government. Protesters in Stirling say their 25 metre
:01:47. > :01:53.pylons currently would be some -- would be replaced by those much
:01:53. > :02:00.higher, almost as high as the Wallace Monument. While none of the
:02:00. > :02:06.new collectors are to be buried underground, an extra section will
:02:06. > :02:12.be. Today, the Energy Minister, Fergus Ewing, explained by
:02:12. > :02:19.underground in was not an option. - - explained why sticking the power
:02:19. > :02:26.lines underground was not an option. I do not find it appropriate to
:02:26. > :02:34.seek approval for spending �63 million of electricity consumers'
:02:34. > :02:39.money, especially at a time of economic difficulty. It is bad news
:02:39. > :02:46.for campaigners against the pylons, who want their lines buried
:02:46. > :02:52.underground. The minister offered some general compensation, with all
:02:52. > :02:56.apply once coming down. The us will carry a cost of �12.9 million for
:02:56. > :03:01.seven kilometres of having power once removed. This represents a
:03:01. > :03:08.more efficient use of money than the �20.7 million for a section of
:03:08. > :03:15.all the 1.6 kilometres of the �263 million for a sector of 15
:03:15. > :03:23.kilometres. I have asked that wider landscape enhancement is ensued --
:03:23. > :03:28.has pursued. Consultants have recommended a wider landscape to
:03:28. > :03:34.offer other Bannister -- to other benefits. Opponents remained
:03:34. > :03:39.unimpressed. The announcement today is a slap in the face for the
:03:39. > :03:46.people of Stirling. The additional schemes proposed to mitigate amount
:03:46. > :03:55.to be AV -- commented very little given the impact on locals and the
:03:55. > :04:00.Wallace Monument. It was in January last year that the last SNP energy
:04:00. > :04:06.minister kicked the Denny-to-Beauly power line decision into the long
:04:06. > :04:15.grass by asking the Scottish government to mitigate the impact.
:04:15. > :04:22.There is no required to under ground any of it? We cannot do that.
:04:22. > :04:31.We can mitigate. Today, he continued his line of questioning.
:04:32. > :04:37.Given that he rejected recommendations but required to 16
:04:37. > :04:42.kilometres of existing wind to be under grounded, does that justify
:04:42. > :04:47.the two years further of reaching the decision by his very modest
:04:47. > :04:51.requirement? The Liberal Democrats smelled a rat with the timing of
:04:51. > :04:59.the decision and the usefulness of the delay. Will he acknowledged
:04:59. > :05:04.there is a strong suspicion cobble notably in the Stirling area, that
:05:04. > :05:10.it is more the timing of last May's election that is to do with the
:05:10. > :05:17.announcement rather than the cost of putting the lines underground.
:05:17. > :05:27.In rural areas, pions can be very contentious. But in a country where
:05:27. > :05:29.
:05:29. > :05:35.the cold bites and energy builds can sting, this debate is heated.
:05:35. > :05:40.The Energy Minister, Fergus Ewing came in the earlier. I asked him
:05:40. > :05:44.how it would defer to day from what was proposed by Scottish Power
:05:44. > :05:54.earlier in the year. The proposals we have approved a different in
:05:54. > :06:01.several respects. Firstly, we have approved the placing of the lines
:06:01. > :06:05.underground of another line. That extends seven kilometres in length
:06:05. > :06:11.across open countryside. That will be placed under ground. That
:06:11. > :06:17.followed a proposal initially put forward by the reporter and backed
:06:17. > :06:22.up by our independent landscape consultants. But beyond that, which
:06:23. > :06:26.does not involve putting any of theUnderground, is there anything
:06:26. > :06:36.involved here other than painting a few to was green and planting a few
:06:36. > :06:44.hedges? The underground nature of the liner will involve a cost, so
:06:44. > :06:47.it is not something we will say is cosmetic. We are proposing agree
:06:48. > :06:54.network of landscape improvements in the hall area and that will
:06:54. > :07:01.involve a significant investment. - - the whole area. I have written to
:07:01. > :07:06.the leader of Stirling Council for a meeting before the end of the
:07:06. > :07:14.year to take this forward. This will improve the landscape,
:07:14. > :07:20.particularly of the areas which are most effective -- most affected. It
:07:20. > :07:25.will create a new path networks and woodland habitat and provide
:07:25. > :07:31.opportunities for local residents to benefit. So if you live in the
:07:31. > :07:36.area, you may well welcome the fact that some pylons will be put
:07:36. > :07:42.underground but none of the new big ones will be, but beyond that,
:07:42. > :07:50.what? A path, some hedges, and a couple of car-parks? Why is that
:07:51. > :07:54.going to make you think that, in any way, that makes a difference?
:07:54. > :07:59.have already explained to ways in which we have provided additional
:07:59. > :08:05.mitigation. As far as the main line is concerned, we have concluded
:08:06. > :08:11.that to spend between five and 15 times more than is required, at a
:08:11. > :08:18.cost of up to �263 million, which would have to be paid for by you
:08:18. > :08:22.and I, through their electricity bills, that cannot be justified.
:08:22. > :08:25.Secondly, were we to have approved the placing of the lines
:08:25. > :08:29.underground, the delay is that would have resulted would have
:08:29. > :08:35.created two to three years to lay and would have hampered and
:08:35. > :08:41.jeopardised their jobs, jobs which we believe will come in their tens
:08:41. > :08:47.of thousands for young people in Scotland. That surely is a prize
:08:47. > :08:56.that we cannot afford to jeopardise. Anyone that says we can afford that
:08:56. > :09:06.delay, I am afraid it is an argument that is false and reckless.
:09:06. > :09:11.
:09:11. > :09:14.Did you explore ways to explore -- to use public money to police these
:09:14. > :09:20.lines underground so that the cost- benefit analysis would be changed?
:09:20. > :09:25.We did not consider using taxpayers' money because the
:09:25. > :09:30.insistent -- the system for improvements to the ground if men
:09:30. > :09:34.the improvements being met by the electricity bill payer. But you
:09:34. > :09:38.could ever explored ways of using public money to do that. A we do
:09:38. > :09:48.not consider it prudent to spend additional amounts of public money
:09:48. > :09:49.
:09:49. > :09:52.where it is neither appropriate nor necessary. But yesterday, Alex Neil
:09:52. > :09:59.proposed �60 billion spending on dozens and dozens of projects,
:09:59. > :10:03.stretching out into infinity. It is a question of priorities. It is
:10:03. > :10:07.reasonable for you to say that you have a lot of these proposals, we
:10:07. > :10:14.just do not really care about the Stirling mitigation measures. In
:10:14. > :10:24.that case, just be honest about it. The proposals do not stretch into
:10:24. > :10:32.infinity. The question here is not how placing the lines underground
:10:32. > :10:37.would be funded, it is whether it is appropriate. When the cost of
:10:37. > :10:42.overhead lines is between 5 and 15 times less expensive. Surely,
:10:42. > :10:47.especially at a time of economic difficulty, the public expect
:10:47. > :10:57.politicians not to pile extra costs on two schemes. These costs can be
:10:57. > :11:04.avoided. Was there any reason to delay all this? You candidates were
:11:04. > :11:09.being criticised. Was there a case for kicking us into touch? When he
:11:09. > :11:14.kicked it into touch, he said he wanted all at options examined,
:11:14. > :11:17.including putting the lines underground. You are saying that he
:11:17. > :11:21.did not know all these basic economic truths that you're telling
:11:21. > :11:25.me about. There was no way you could justified spending public
:11:25. > :11:35.money on it. Have you just discovered this in the last few
:11:35. > :11:38.
:11:38. > :11:42.By finger question presupposes Underground was the only option. It
:11:42. > :11:47.was considered. Had it not been for the fact that we underwent this
:11:47. > :11:54.process of consultation with nine meetings, 23 options considered in
:11:54. > :11:57.detail and are thereafter, following the formal letter we
:11:58. > :12:03.received in August, a further period of consultation with the
:12:03. > :12:07.council, which extended to 45 days. And I met with the council and
:12:07. > :12:12.concerned individuals inspecting the site. Had we not had that
:12:12. > :12:15.process, we would not have seen the additional measures to wit -- which
:12:15. > :12:21.I have announced. I think that justifies the process would we have
:12:21. > :12:25.gone through, and it will result in additional mitigation measures
:12:25. > :12:32.which will leave a lasting legacy and benefit I believe for the
:12:32. > :12:36.people of Stirling. I am joined now by the policy
:12:36. > :12:41.director of the John Muir Trust, Helen McDade, add the commentator
:12:41. > :12:44.at Ian Macwhirter. I know this is an issue to which
:12:44. > :12:51.you took an interest. Can I have your reaction to today's
:12:51. > :12:55.announcement? I suppose it is lack of surprise.
:12:55. > :13:01.What we have discovered, amongst other things, is we have a very
:13:01. > :13:05.terrible process for deciding large infrastructure is she's, and we
:13:05. > :13:10.need a national energy plan. It is no surprise, the decision. I did
:13:11. > :13:13.not think the economic case stood up at inquiry and I did not think
:13:13. > :13:18.the Scottish Government could risk going back to Ofgem to look at this
:13:18. > :13:24.again with further cost. When you mean the economic concern,
:13:24. > :13:29.you mean... For the Beauly-Denny line. Because
:13:29. > :13:34.the rest was marginal, they could not risk going back to Ofgem to
:13:34. > :13:40.look at it again with extra cost. They may have said, could we do
:13:40. > :13:45.this with an undersea cable, and the answer was certainly, yes.
:13:45. > :13:49.Ian Macwhirter, what do you make of this? What do you make of these
:13:49. > :13:51.people who don't like the prospect of these pilots? Do they have good
:13:51. > :13:56.bite the bullet in the greater interest of renewables?
:13:56. > :13:58.This has been a very traumatic experience for the environment of a
:13:58. > :14:08.whole. I have seen it ramblers and friends
:14:08. > :14:09.
:14:09. > :14:12.of the Earth having stand-up rows about the Beauly-Denny line. They
:14:12. > :14:22.are being very careful not to discuss this in public too much now
:14:22. > :14:25.that the final decision has been made. The City of Boston in America
:14:25. > :14:30.spent $8 billion putting a section of motorway underground because it
:14:30. > :14:34.was spoiling the view. Hang on a minute, that became
:14:34. > :14:38.famous as one of the greatest pieces of squandering of public
:14:38. > :14:42.money in US history. Yes, it was a lot of money and they
:14:42. > :14:46.went ahead with it. What I am saying is, under the present
:14:46. > :14:50.circumstances here in Scotland, the present financial constraints, this
:14:50. > :14:56.was not going to happen. The real scandal here is the many, many
:14:56. > :15:00.years it has taken to get this line up and running and we can afford to
:15:00. > :15:05.spend the best part of a decade on an infrastructure problem like this.
:15:05. > :15:08.I totally disagree. The real scandal is this was not the right
:15:08. > :15:12.project to go ahead and we don't have a national strategy to look at
:15:12. > :15:21.this. You say we do not have a national
:15:21. > :15:25.strategy, but if we did have, it is pretty much inconceivable it would
:15:25. > :15:29.have to incorporate some way of getting electricity generated by
:15:29. > :15:36.renewables in the Highlands and Islands down south.
:15:36. > :15:40.Absolutely that is why subs C/ cables but to be discussed at
:15:40. > :15:45.inquiry. We could not, I was told that undersea cables were not
:15:45. > :15:51.advanced enough. Now we're told, we need them as well. Actually,
:15:51. > :15:56.succeed tables are not so much expensive, Underground is more
:15:56. > :16:02.expensive and is a good way to move power over a long distance. --
:16:02. > :16:07.undersea cables. I am curious about
:16:07. > :16:11.environmentalists having stand-up fights about the Beauly-Denny line.
:16:11. > :16:16.As the green agenda has become more mainstream and things are being
:16:16. > :16:20.built to carry it out, you are seeing these disagreements, and the
:16:20. > :16:23.other obvious question is that there is a big split in the green
:16:23. > :16:27.movement over whether to build nuclear power stations because a
:16:27. > :16:31.lot of their instincts are, we have been against nuclear power for
:16:31. > :16:34.years, and other people in the agreement are saying, this is the
:16:34. > :16:39.easiest way to stop carbon emissions.
:16:39. > :16:43.The most obvious comparison is with onshore wind farms. They did create
:16:43. > :16:47.a blight on the environment and the physical environment on the view,
:16:47. > :16:51.they do damage it. Nevertheless, at the moment this is the only
:16:51. > :16:56.economically viable way of using Scotland's prodigious reserves of
:16:56. > :17:01.renewable energy. Certainly, the Beauly-Denny line under present
:17:01. > :17:06.technology is the only way of making a reality out of Scotland's
:17:06. > :17:09.extremely valuable resources of green energy. Things change, and
:17:09. > :17:15.the one good thing about pylons is they can be removed relatively
:17:15. > :17:19.easily. They do not have a huge long-term impact on the environment.
:17:19. > :17:22.Once undersea cables become necessary and technology developed,
:17:22. > :17:26.perhaps alternatives will be found. If you look at one of our cities,
:17:26. > :17:31.only 20 or 30 years ago you would have found a network of all sorts
:17:31. > :17:36.of electrical cables and telephone lines wedding across the street.
:17:36. > :17:40.Most of these have gone. Hopefully in future years this will goal, too.
:17:40. > :17:45.For the time being, there is no end up -- alternative, if you want
:17:45. > :17:52.energy, you have to have pilots. Do you think more generally there
:17:52. > :17:55.is a danger of a public backlash against a lot of these things, not
:17:55. > :18:02.just the pilot's, but like onshore wind farms, perhaps even offshore
:18:02. > :18:07.wind. Yes, I think there is a major issue
:18:07. > :18:11.there. One of the reasons is, people do not trust what they have
:18:11. > :18:14.been told. It is absolutely not true that the economic way to go
:18:14. > :18:18.about this is the way we are doing it. The best way to use public
:18:18. > :18:23.money is on energy conservation, and we should be using that public
:18:23. > :18:26.money taken from people through their energy bills into that and
:18:26. > :18:30.research and development. For instance, carbon capture and
:18:30. > :18:36.storage, which was cancelled. That is where public money should be
:18:36. > :18:40.going. Public money should not be going into onshore wind, which is
:18:40. > :18:45.really quite ineffective. It is not true that economically this stacks
:18:45. > :18:51.up. Our economic policy is being led by energy companies, who are
:18:51. > :18:54.subsidy junkies. There are thought the next
:18:54. > :19:00.generation of power will be offshore wind. Do you think that is
:19:00. > :19:05.I think this is not a religion, and you have a favoured thing. For
:19:05. > :19:13.older people it is to, we want wind-powered, we want nuclear, it
:19:13. > :19:15.saves our landscape. Obviously the John Muir Trust is a landscape and
:19:15. > :19:19.natural heritage organisation and we are concerned about onshore wind.
:19:19. > :19:24.It is easy for my point of you to see onshore wind would be --
:19:24. > :19:27.offshore wind would be better. I have to say, the country has to go
:19:27. > :19:34.back and look at the figures for this. We're spending public money
:19:34. > :19:39.in a way that is not justified. This is still experimental, we are
:19:39. > :19:45.really taking a huge leap in the dark here. To come back to
:19:45. > :19:48.something Fergus Ewing said, underground cables will happen in
:19:48. > :19:52.the English national parks and in London for the Olympics. People are
:19:52. > :19:59.spending that money, and it was not supported money because it was paid
:19:59. > :20:03.for the - - -- because it was paid for by the UK.
:20:03. > :20:08.Do you think there is something of a public backlash about these
:20:08. > :20:12.projects? Are the public saying we are not sure whether we want to see
:20:12. > :20:16.windmills in the countryside? There is certainly a backlash, and
:20:16. > :20:23.certainly concern about the economic viability of windmills and
:20:23. > :20:27.wind farms, onshore wind. At the moment you have a problem. The
:20:27. > :20:32.green energy resources are in the remote parts of the country, the
:20:32. > :20:36.cities are in the south. You have to get the power to play it is
:20:36. > :20:39.needed, and that needs transmission lines.
:20:39. > :20:45.Thank you very much indeed. Thank you very much indeed.
:20:45. > :20:51.Quickly, tomorrow's front pages. The Herald talks about the 90 mph
:20:51. > :20:56.hurricane forecast for tomorrow afternoon. The Scotsman, Mike
:20:57. > :20:59.Russell those to act on schools Russell those to act on schools