CAMPAIGNERS AGAINST highly controversial plans for ship-to-ship oil transfers in the Forth Estuary reacted with fury yesterday after arrangements for dealing with oil spills were approved by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency.

However, while the MCA’s announcement has removed the main barrier to the proposal, those opposed to it have warned the fight is far from over.

The MCA said last month it would approve Forth Ports Authority’s oil spill contingency plans if a number of changes were made—something which has now been done.

The news comes just a day after the European Commission launched an investigation into the matter to ascertain whether it contravened EU Habitats Directives amid fears the Forth’s protected wildlife could be jeapordised. Campaigners clung to this yesterday, while branding the MCA’s consultation process “a farce.”

Fife has seldom seen such united and high-level opposition to any proposal, and there is real anger that Forth Ports seems intent on pressing ahead.

Forth Ports has the power to approve or reject the plans, which would see millions of tonnes of crude oil transferred between ships, but stressed a decision had yet to be made.

In a statement released last night, a company spokesman said, “It should be noted that this is just one element in the decision making process.

“As the competent statutory harbour authority for the Firth of Forth, we will allow no operation to go ahead if we feel it could impact on that safety we work so hard to secure every day.”

Forth Ports is still awaiting the findings of an independent expert panel it commissioned to carry out a risk assessment on the proposed operations.

The spokesman added, “Once we have the findings of the expert panel we will be communicating them to key stakeholders and taking their comments.

“Only then will we be in a position to make a decision as to whether STS transfer operations can commence.”

Scottish MEP Alyn Smith, who instigated the EU investigation, accused the MCA of terrible timing.

“It would have been sensible of them to postpone their announcement,” he said.

“They have not handled themselves very well at all and are really not listening. They give no impression of being concerned about anybody else’s opinion.”

He added, “There is pretty well united Scottish opinion at every level of government on this, yet they are ploughing on regardless.

“However, if the European Commissioner’s investigation finds STS transfers would convtravene legislation, they can’t go ahead. It’s as simple as that.”

Mid Scotland and Fife Green MSP Mark Ruskell stated, “The consultation has been a farce from day one and even now key information is being hidden from the public.

“This battle is far from over. Forth Ports—already in the public eye following the recent chemical leak in Grangemouth—could now face a huge legal battle, and investor confidence in a plc that has anything but a clean reputation could be shattered.

“It’s quickly coming round to D-Day for Executive ministers. They hold the licensing powers where protected species such as dolphins are threatened. They must now use them.”

Central Fife MSP Christine May pledged to seek an urgent meeting with Scottish deputy environment minister Rhona Brankin to establish the Executive’s responsibilities regarding Habitats Directives.

“All the parties were at the last meeting with Rhona Brankin and none of us can understand why, given there is no possible benefit to the Fife economy, this is being proceeded with,” she said.

Fife and East Lothian councils are also determined to continue their fight against the oil transfers and said joint legal action was still on the cards.

Councillor Mike Rumney, chairman of Fife Council’s environment and development committee, said, “We reserve our right to take this as far as it has to go.

“The organisations involved in these transfers have done little to boost our confidence with unreported incidents, biased consultations and secretive decisions and we’ll be looking at all means at our disposal to put a stop to this if we can.”