SCOTTISH and UK ministers ignored a warning last year that Edinburgh’s bid to be a green freeport should have been ruled “ineligible”.
The capital’s proposal for the billion-pound economic zone status was successful last week despite failing to meet one of the minimum criteria in the contest.
A total of five bids for green freeport status were submitted.
Proposals from Forth, taking in Grangemouth, Leith and Rosyth, and Inverness and Cromarty Firth in the Highlands triumphed over rival bids from the North East, Orkney, and the Clyde.
READ MORE: Inverness and Forth green freeport bids approved by ministers
The two winners will now be granted up to £26 million in funding over the next few years.
One of the key requirements for any bid was that it had a “firm written commitment” from the local council.
While all the other bids managed to secure that backing - including Clyde Green Freeport which took in eight councils - the City of Edinburgh Council was less decisive in their support for Forth.
READ MORE: EXPLAINER: What are green freeports?
Although they initially seemed to back the bid, Edinburgh’s council formally withdrew their support in November, with the Labour leader of the authority accused of “bypassing democracy and dodging scrutiny” for not first asking for the permission of councillors.
Officials were forced to tell both governments that their letter of support had been “premature”.
It was only at a subsequent full council meeting on December 15 that councillors finally, formally backed the bid.
However, the deadline for the contest closed at 10am on 20 June.
In a letter to John Swinney and Michael Gove – seen by The Herald – sent three days before that full council meeting in Edinburgh, the Clyde Green Freeport consortium questioned why the Forth bid was still being considered.
It said: “We have clarified with UK government officials that this letter of support was a pass/fail, and that failure to submit the letter would mean that any bid would not be competent to be passed for assessment.
“Therefore, any bid which is subsequently found to have submitted erroneous information would be deemed ineligible.
“The Forth bid includes one tax and one custom site within the Edinburgh City Council area, thus an appropriate letter was required from Edinburgh.
“I note from the City of Edinburgh Council’s paper on the matter to be considered on the 15th December, that ‘due to the circumstances following the 2022 local government election, there was no opportunity to take a report to the full council prior to the deadline’.
“The local government election occurred for all of the authorities within the Clyde Green Freeport, but all necessary approvals were sought, including a special Glasgow City Region cabinet to endorse the bid being held on 16th of June 2022.
“That one of the key partners involved in the Forth Green Freeport did not seek necessary approvals is not a consequence of the local government election, and is simply that the letter was incorrectly submitted and cannot be considered.”
READ MORE: Parties clash over green freeport announcement
The final announcement was due last summer, however, it was delayed because of the unexpected ousting of Boris Johnson, the Tory leadership contest, the chaotic premiership of Liz Truss and the impact of her disastrous mini-budget.
However, according to one source at the Scottish Development Conference held in Edinburgh last September, a key member of the Forth Green Freeport team reportedly boasted that they had already won.
That has been denied by Forth who said they only found out last Friday.
A spokesperson said: “The Forth Green Freeport bid was submitted on 20 June containing letters of support from all relevant local authorities and was fully compliant.
"Like all bidders, the Forth Green Freeport bid team learned of the bid’s success when it was announced by the Scottish and Westminster Governments on Friday (13 January).”
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “The successful bids were selected jointly by the two governments in line with the robust process and criteria set out in the Green Freeports prospectus.
"A decision note outlining the assessment process and outcome will be published in due course.”
The UK Government did not respond to requests for a comment.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel