By Claire Warrender

HOPES ARE still high that controversial plans for ship-to-ship oil transfers in the Firth of Forth can be scuppered following confirmation the process would be in breach of EU laws.

The European Commission has previously indicated that Forth Ports’ proposals to approve the transfer of millions of tonnes of Russian crude oil between ships just off the Fife coast, could contravene the Habitats Directive.

And yesterday, Fife-based MEP Catherine Stihler reiterated that Forth Ports must now prove the project would be carried out for “imperative reasons of overriding public interest or in the absence of alternative solutions.”

While the company has already said it is working to ensure it adheres to the directive, critics of the proposed oil transfers say there can be no such proof and have called for the immediate withdrawal of the proposals.

This follows a high profile campaign against the plan by Sunderland-based SPT Marine Services amid fears an oil spill would devastate the fragile environment of the Forth Estuary.

The issue was first raised at European level by SNP MEP Alyn Smith last year, and Mrs Stihler joined the campaign against the plan on behalf of constituents on both sides of the Forth.

Mr Smith, along with SNP MSP Bruce Crawford, discussed the matter with senior members of the European Commission’s environment department in October at a meeting they described as positive and productive, while Mrs Stihler submitted a petition calling for an investigation into the proposals.

The moves came amid confusion over who had responsibility for granting permission for the project when it became apparent the final decision could actually rest with Forth Ports, who also stand to gain financially from it.

However, it was revealed in February that even if the process did not breach the Habitats Directive, Forth Ports might still have to apply to the Scottish Executive for a licence.

Yesterday, Mr Smith told The Courier, “The commission has said the oil transfers plan would have to be important for the public interest, which clearly it isn’t.

“I think European rules will stymie this, which is much what we were expecting.

“We will continue to push hard on the matter but I think it’s dead in the water.”

He added that the recent sewage spill into the Forth had brought the issue back to the commission’s attention, and said, “The onus is now on Forth Ports to basically prove this is a matter of life and death.”

Mrs Stihler said, “The risks of oil spillage in the Forth must not be overlooked, considering the company carrying out these transfers has a history of spillage.”

The MEP said the commission’s investigation had led to confidence that the proposals were effectively sunk.

Meanwhile, Mr Smith has collected a dossier of evidence against ship-to-ship oil transfers which he and Central Fife MSP Tricia Marwick plan to present to the European Commission.

“I have no doubt that ship-to-ship oil transfers just aren’t going to happen,” he said.

“I think we’ve blocked it, and I think we blocked it many months ago.”

However, a spokesman for Forth Ports said, “As the statutory harbour authority for the Firth of Forth, we are aware of the requirements of the Habitats Directive and as part of our assessment of the proposed STS operations, we are liaising closely with Scottish Natural Heritage and taking legal advice.”