Locals insist they’re not against renewables, but say their voices were silenced over how the project was handled.
“Nobody was allowed to ask a question.” David was talking me through the Kinlochbervie Community Council meeting of June 2025.
“I was deafened by the silence because when they had the presentation, not one community councillor or the Highland regional councillor asked a question of the developer.” David mused. “Very strange. Strangest meeting I’ve ever known.”
I had been there too, and sensed the strangeness.
The minutes of the meeting confirm: ‘It was made clear by the Chair at the beginning of the session that no questions were to be asked of Galileo or the CC regarding the proposed KLB Energy Park during the meeting.’
What no one asked, though, was ‘why not?’.
Galileo Empower were attending the community council meeting to make a presentation as part of their community engagement duties.
Senior project manager Laura Petrie, flicked through the slides as fast as the software would allow. Minutes later, she and her colleague excused themselves and left.
“The developer left the meeting immediately after they made their presentation and disappeared into the night,” recalled David. “She didn’t even wait until the end of the meeting to talk to people, who were obviously there, concerned about the wind farm.”
At the back of the room sat the landowner, Sara Harkins, whose land will host the development, if approved. Flanking her for the duration of the meeting, were the developer’s PR team from Morrison Media, unannounced, almost invisible; unless you later read the attendance list, you’d never have known they were there.
Keeping it quiet
As he put the kettle on, David described the first time he’d heard about the proposal.
“Out of the blue, in March this year, there was this rumour going about. We had no idea, just through the grapevine. And even when you went to this drop-in event, you still can’t believe it.”
There, he asked the rep a simple question: how could there be a wind farm, if there was not sufficient grid capacity in the area?
“And he just said ‘oh that’s a separate application’. And you just can’t figure it out at all.”
“Four days after that meeting, the Scottish Government announced millions of pounds to upgrade the grid in the north of Scotland. So they obviously knew it was on the cards.”
Old minutes confirm his suspicion: the council first discussed the proposal in October 2024. Why, though, was the wider population so taken by surprise?
“It was obviously going on in the background, but we never really took much notice of it. Why should we, there’s no grid. And there never was likely to be a grid, so you wouldn’t expect anything to be happening.”
Out of David’s kitchen window, high above Loch Inchard, we watched a sea eagle being mobbed by crows.
“It takes a long time to put a plan together – two or three years. So the landowner clearly knew about it the whole time. And she didn’t say a peep. She works a lot in the community, doing all sorts of stuff. But she’s kept this from us”, David said. “It’s a betrayal.”
The long grass
Back in the community council meeting, wind farm talk was temporarily suppressed by discussion of broken fences, white goods collection times and job vacancies.
But the elephant in the room soon reared its white rotating tusks again.
The chair was obliged to read out correspondence, a letter from Maree Todd MSP addressed to Laura Petrie, the same Galileo employee who had hit the road just a few minutes before.
“Dear Laura,” Todd had written sternly, “I have been made aware that the Kinlochbervie Community Council recently submitted a request for Galileo to hold a public meeting. I understand however, that this request was declined. I would be grateful if Galileo would consider this request…it is important that the community feels heard from the outset.”
Todd went on, “I understand the Community Council is prepared to coordinate the meeting and facilitate the submission of questions in advance”.
Where she got that understanding, nobody knew. When it came to the crunch, the community council was not prepared, or even willing – in any way whatsoever – to coordinate such a meeting.
“I’m not doing it” was the Chair’s answer. The Vice Chair also passed.
One of the councillors sighed a heavy sigh and opined that it was essential for the community council to facilitate a public meeting. The minutes state that “(The Chair) replied that the CC had decided not to facilitate a public meeting to date.” A former councillor, who was observing, said it was the community council’s duty to understand and represent the views of the community.
The community council continued to resist, but agreed to hold an Extraordinary Meeting to discuss whether to hold a public meeting, date to be announced.
Again, the question was: why? Why not just discuss it now?
An observer asked to speak.
“As long as it’s not about the wind farm,” replied the Chair.
Vested interest
As a crofter and former councillor, David was well-placed to explain to me the effects of placing any development on common grazing land.
“If you happen to be a crofter you will be entitled to so much money if a development goes ahead on your grazing or on your croft.”
“So you’re bound to get people who will have a vested interest if they stand to make money.”
“Different views is not the same as a conflict of interest. Whenever there is finance involved, it becomes illegal when you have a financial interest in it. It’s as simple as that.”
“It’s up to the individual to declare a conflict of interest, if he or she has one, and that’s always been the rule in community councils.”
Later, another resident, whose claims could not be independently verified, alleged the Vice Chair is a tenant of the landowner and has shares in the grazings earmarked for development. “The Vice Chair rents or owns more crofts than anyone else, therefore he gets a bigger share,“ they said.
We asked the Vice Chair to comment on this but received no response.
Alternatives
Back in the meeting, David had his say, despite the chair attempting to close down any more wind farm talk.
The minutes succinctly sum up his contribution: “David urged the CC to make inquiries into alternatives to Galileo’s proposals, in the form of a small-scale community-owned wind farm project (as on the Western Isles), which would deliver much higher community benefits.”
He’s right. Community-owned projects typically return far more profit to locals and require far less invasive infrastructure. Ironically, Kinlochbervie already has its own small-scale renewable energy, a hydro scheme run by the local development company. The structures for community owned power, then, are already available within the community.
But time is running out – Galileo’s proposals are on a fast track planning process. The main beneficiaries? Not the people of Kinlochbervie, but instead, state-owned pension funds in New Zealand and Australia.
Cold summer
The profit-laden Atlantic winds prevail in the North West, but you do get warm weather – sheep are shorn, holiday people bathe in the sea and windfarm-sponsored cabers get tossed. But the icy chill of the previous meeting had soaked into the community during the summer break.
There was no indication of the Extraordinary Meeting having taken place as I made my way to the August community council meeting. There were two items that set the scene early on:
First, it was revealed by the Chair that the Extraordinary Meeting had in fact taken place in private. Galileo had suggested a range of dates for a developer-led public meeting.
Secondly, a petition was presented by David, calling for the community council to hold a dedicated public meeting, without the developer.
“This petition, signed by over 100 residents of the Kinlochbervie area should not be dismissed as anti-wind, it is pro-community” David stated. “Rushing it risks dividing the community even further and undermining local democracy”.
The petition, then, stood in direct opposition to what the community council had planned on behalf of the community, and with the developer, in private.
Slipping standards
After the usual community council fare had been chewed through for half an hour, and the chair tentatively announced “any other business”, David mapped it out for everyone in the room:
“We didn’t know you had a meeting; we knew from the previous meeting you were going to have a meeting, but the meeting you had was never advertised – so in effect it was a private meeting.”
The Chair fired back: “We had a meeting ourselves because we knew what everybody wanted – we don’t need 40 people in here pushing us to make a decision. And it’s minuted.”
As the petition showed, they didn’t know what everybody wanted.
The Vice Chair followed up, “We were not required to invite anybody else, because it’s an Extraordinary Meeting. So we’re not incorrect. That’s why it’s been documented.”
David had a response to this: “There actually isn’t anything as an Extraordinary Meeting anymore; it’s now called a Special Meeting. Let me make it absolutely clear: ALL meetings have to be public – AGMs, General Meetings, Special Meetings.”
“I have to be honest and say to you – you aren’t working to your constitution,” David said. “And if you’re not working to your constitution things are going to go very wrong, very quick. Look it up, it’s all on the Highland Council website. Just follow the constitution and everyone will get on a lot better.”
“If you look at other wind farms elsewhere, they start off with a big public meeting. And this hasn’t happened at all with this Galileo proposal.”
The chair seemed to get the wrong end of the stick: “We are here to represent the whole community, not just the people who are against it. Not the small voice we’re hearing.”
In the face of a petition by 40 percent of the adult population, this last comment, to me, sounded not like a personal putdown, but much more like a rote strategic PR line. It’s common for wind farm objectors to be characterised as fringe or extreme, by proponents.
Out in the open
As the discussion went on, the community council consistently pleaded impartiality: “We don’t have answers, we’re not acting as mediators, we’re all busy enough in our own lives,” as the Chair put it.
“All you’ve done is satisfy the developer’s tick box exercise,” David summarised. “Community engagement by a developer is not the same as an open public meeting. And that’s all that the community’s asking for and that’s what the petition is asking for. The petition is over 100 people in Kinlochbervie.”
“We’re not ignoring the petition,” acknowledged the Vice, upon which the Chair said: “We will discuss this after everybody leaves and it’s just community council.”
“Well, that’s precisely what you can’t do,” David’s voice cut through sharply. “Because everything a community council does, HAS to be public.”
The Chair snapped, “It’ll be in the minutes, we don’t need pressure from people!”
An exasperated David: “You have to have public meetings!”
The chair employed his computer-says-no voice: “We have taken your view on board.”
Everyone held their breath. David didn’t miss a beat.“Minute that – I’ve said that meetings have to be public, and the chairman has said the public is not to be there. Can you minute that?”
That landed. During the final part of the discussion, the Chair – publicly – introduced the matter of a public meeting. It was left to the Vice Chair to hammer out the format of a public meeting with two sections; one developer led, one community led.
Long road ahead
As I drove through private estate after private estate on the long road home, I wondered with whom the community council is bargaining harder – the wind farm developers or the community?
To many locals it appears that the process, rather than the principle of renewable energy, is what feels undemocratic.
Responses
Both the chair and the vice chair did not reply to our requests for comment.
The landowner made a statement during the August meeting outlining her position:
“Over the years the estate has been contacted by other developers who have not been serious or have been completely dismissive of community. As a crofting estate landowner anybody that’s not focusing on community we did not want to engage with. When Galileo got in touch, and genuinely, and I truly believe that genuinely, they are considering and being respectful to the community, we thought, right, that’s a developer we should take to the community. As soon as they showed genuine commitment, it came to both community council and the grazings clerks. I have been as transparent with this as I possibly could have been, and I will continue to be.”
We received Galileo Empower’s response via their PR company, Morrison Media. Laura Petrie, senior project manager, wrote:
“Keeping local communities informed, involved and listened to is key to how we work. From the outset, we’ve made it a priority to engage openly with residents, local groups and elected representatives – not just to share information, but to listen, respond and improve the project together.
“In the last year, we have attended five community council meetings across Kinlochbervie, Durness and Scourie, held two public exhibitions in Kinlochbervie and Durness, delivered community newsletters to residents and offered to meet anyone with any concerns for a one-to-one chat to discuss the project. We are also in regular contact with local politicians and have had extremely constructive dialogue with them about our plans.
“We will be attending a local community council meeting later this month and hosting a second round of public exhibitions later this year. These exhibitions will present updated designs, visualisations and findings from our environmental studies, and will give everyone another opportunity to ask questions and share views directly with us.
“This project is still at an early stage – with no planning application yet submitted – and we have been clear from the beginning that community feedback will be central to shaping it.
“Galileo is also committed to offering a community wealth fund of £5,000 per MW (index linked) per year for the operational lifetime of the Kinlochbervie Renewable Energy Project. Based on an anticipated generating capacity of 129.6MW, the community wealth fund will be in the region of £648,000 per year.
“In addition, we support aspirations for local and shared ownership by offering ownership options of up to 10% – where the profits generated by an ownership stake can be used to benefit the community.
“Earlier this year, we launched a £10,000 sponsorship fund and are inviting applications from any organisations working to benefit people in any of the communities within the Kinlochbervie, Durness and Scourie community council areas.
“In June, we followed the practice that is normal with community councils by leaving the meeting after our presentation so that councillors and residents could discuss items without an external company present. Those in attendance were told to direct questions about the project to Galileo rather than the community council and we were available to speak to local residents after our project presentation.”
