We’re sure you will all remember the Scottish Government Onshore Wind Policy Statement Consultation to which SAS made a lengthy and very detailed response. SG Onshore Consultation response from Scotland against Spin
To our dismay, the Scottish Government, without any justification, redacted a substantial part of our submission https://consult.gov.scot/energy-and-climate-change-directorate/onshore-wind-policy-statement-refresh-2021/consultation/view_respondent?_b_index=120&uuId=922490245
This was publicised in the Express https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/secretive-snp-blasted-redacting-key-27591902?fbclid=IwAR0RWRPmKN8Bk2RtDcJpWLRdtijM90ahrK44UkAUQa5iH13jn3tL94mg6gc
We submitted a formal complaint and received the following response:
I am writing to you in regards to the complaint your raised (ref S1/24/22) querying the redactions made to your response to the Onshore Wind Policy Statement Redraft consultation.
In your complaint, you made reference to two specific examples, and I have provided detailed reasons for their redactions as per below.
1. Beauly-Denny power line: the project referenced is not an onshore wind farm and while transmission charging was included in the policy statement, the comments on costs to consumers fall out with the scope of the document.
2. Aspects on Tourism: Although comments made against specific organisations were not inflammatory, statements regarded as facts without evidence, cannot be included.
As noted in Annex 4 of the consultation document, under the ‘Next Steps in the Process’ heading, it is stated that ‘Where respondents have given permission for their response to be made public, and after we have checked that they contain no potentially defamatory material, responses will be made available to the public at http://consult.gov.scot.’
Under heading ‘Scottish Government Consultation Process’, it went on to say ‘While details of particular circumstances described in a response to a consultation exercise may usefully inform the policy process, consultation exercises cannot address individual concerns and comments, which should be directed to the relevant public body.’
Additionally, even though your response was for the Scottish Government, as Citizen Space host the consultation responses, we have to adhere to their terms of use, including:
· Responsibility for Contributions. If you place comments or ideas on the Service, post material to the Service, post links on the Service, or otherwise make (or allow any third party to make) material available by means of the Service (any such material, “Content”), you are entirely responsible for the content of, and any harm resulting from, that Content. That is the case regardless of whether the Content in question constitutes text, graphics, an audio file, or computer software.
· By making Content available, you represent and warrant that the Content is not pornographic, libelous or defamatory (more info on what that means), does not contain threats or incite violence towards individuals or entities, and does not violate the privacy or publicity rights of any third party;
· Without limiting any of those representations or warranties, we have the right (though not the obligation) to, in our sole discretion (i) refuse or remove any Content that, in our reasonable opinion, violates any of our or Delib’s policies or is in any way harmful or objectionable, or (ii) terminate or deny access to and use of the Services to any individual or entity for any reason, in our sole discretion.
With reference to redactions for the consultation on the National Planning Framework (NPF4), as we were not responsible for this consultation unfortunately we’re unable to comment.
I trust the above information provides clarity in regards to our responsibility to redacting consultation responses, however, you can take your complaint to stage two of the complaints procedure if required.
Yours sincerely,
Amy
Amy Keast | she/her
Onshore Wind Policy Manager
The Scottish Government
We have made the following response to Ms Keast and her team and await their reply. If it is not satisfactory, we shall escalate the complaint to the Ombudsman. Response to Amy Keast
0 Comments