Fish factory for Kilravock
An issue not really discussed in Nairn itself, but bound to become a topic in future, is the approval for a fish plant to replace the chicken farm at Kilravock.
The objections reported in the P&J seem sometimes petty – “increased traffic” and “potential for vermin, gull and crow predation” hardly seem major issues, especially as the chickens are already sitting targets for the local predators. And traffic on the A96 is increasing whether we like it or not.
The real objection seems to be focused on disposal of waste to minimise pollution, but there’s nothing in the report suggesting concerns about the look and smell of a new factory along the A96.
Either way, though, we’re in the worst economic crisis for nearly a century, and the chances of a double dip recession look pretty certain. I’m sure whatever actual concerns come up in future, there will be a number of people simply happy for the new job opportunities.
Comments
8 Responses to “Fish factory for Kilravock”
Leave a Reply
Visited 385 times, 1 so far today
My Nairn Blog- Time for one community council in Nairn?
- Joe gets things done!
- How many empty buildings does the HC have?
- UHI to apply for university status
- Doctor Who comes to Inverness!
- Researching Property Prices in Nairn
- Fake blog comments
- Sandown enquiry starts today
- Councillors delay Sainsburys – incompetence?
- Charlie Chaplin walk in Nairn?
There are already those who complain that intensively-reared chicken meat tastes of fish (because of the fish-meal in poultry-food). Maybe we’ll soon get processed fish that tastes of chicken, and we won’t be able to tell the difference between a fish finger and a chicken nugget.
But seriously, why have a fish-processing plant in the heart of an agricultural region, miles from ports and the sea? That’s not rational planning nor sensible economics. The fish are presumably going to be trucked in from the West coast, Aberdeen, or further afield. So much for concern about “food-miles”.
Why is it that decisionmakers are mesmerised, and commentators go soft in the head, as soon as a developer mentions the magic word “jobs”?
The problem is that fish processing is low paid so no one wants to do it.
It will end up like the salmon process plant in Inverness and the fibreglass plant at Dalcross it will be 100% manned by hard working Polish workers and will not effect the local unemployment figures in the least.
Perceptive comment by Allen. His observation ought to be put in front of all the members of the Council’s planning committee. Creating poorly paid menial jobs is not the way to stimulate lasting growth.
The planners’ strategy should be to encourage higher value-added economic activity to the Highland region. Increasingly this has to be in high-tech and services rather than basic processes and industrial manufacture. This shift will drive the upskilling of the workforce (which in turn generates higher wage-levels).
To do this, the infrastructure – communications, transport, utilities and services – and the environment-quality, have to be good enough to attract business and investment. Get the basics right and entrepreneurs will respond. That’s why California’s Silicon Valley and Berkshire’s IT corridor thrive, and why Pittsburgh and Detroit, and the UK’s Teesside and Northern industrial towns, are struggling and in decline.
Jobs are jobs – if it keeps a roof over your head and puts food in the mouths of your kids, it’s all that’s needed. I’m sure there’ll be a number of people working there who are thankful for being able to provide for Christmas!
If it’s only Poles who want to work there, that’s more damning of modern benefit-culture society – certainly the north of England and Scotland has a long and proud working class history.
Even still, I very much agree with the comments on encouraging high-tech industry to the region as well – I’ve already emailed planning officers a few times suggesting that the former community centre’s almost immediate proximity to the phone exchange could make it an ideal location for high-tech offices with fast broadband if the site is redeveloped.
This is as opposed to current HC chatter about demolishing it and having flats built on the site.
It’s also why I’m supportive of the airport business park and business park element of the Sandown application – anything that can help bring employment, especially based around modern technology, can only be welcomed in my opinion.
However, it may need some understanding from the HC that residential developments are not the solution to everything.
2c.
Dead right, “residential developments are not the solution to everything.”
But I beg to differ with the comment “Jobs are jobs – if it keeps a roof over your head and puts food in the mouths of your kids, it’s all that’s needed.. That’s the sort of simplistic view that seems pragmatic, and might win applause. But it doesn’t justify the suspension of critical analysis when project proposals are put on the table.
To pick up on a remark in a recent letter in the local Nairnshire Telegraph, quoted in the Gurn: “The crucial point is the right kind of development. Nairn also needs the right kind of business, the right kind of jobs.
Sustainability matters. Low-pay, low-skill jobs are ephemeral and vulnerable (to Polish labour, Indian call-centres, declining fish stocks, whatever). Look how even the employment windfall McDermotts yard delivered (for a while) later melted away. The skilled workers went with the industry. What’s left of that in Whiteness, Ardersier and Nairn now?
What is the “right development” for employment, though, when jobs are no longer for life, and any large business can relocate due to more attractive labour costs, tax breaks, or grant funding? Sustainability isn’t a realistic concern because commercial interests are so fluid these days.
And what high-skilled labour force is Nairn currently able to offer? To begin at which location in Nairn?
Jobs are jobs, and in the current economic crisis, opportunities should surely be welcomed? After all, even a business mainly employing low-paid workers no doubt requires management and administration staff as well?
Lack of employment opportunities locally resulting in commuter leakage has long been identified as an issue to address in Nairn – and yet it seems any time employment opportunities are offered, they are objected to.
Look at what we’ve had recently:
- Sainsburys, objected to because it brings competition to the town’s retail sector
- even though Nairn used to have a night life, heaven forbid anyone should set up a nightclub by the town’s central business district
- objections to 24 hour taxi companies setting up on and off the high street because of concerns about parking
- objections to Sandown (okay, on the residential property side, but it still means a delay to the business park)
- objections to the airport business park because it’s not properly mentioned in the current local development plans
While many of these cover the service sector, this is still one area of the UK economy that has a lot of core strength, not least because they serve local markets and so are not easily relocated.
I don’t think there is a development that can offer secure permanent employment, and will not be objected to somehow – so instead Nairn remains at the mercy of normal market forces, where entrepreneurs will seek to consider Nairn as a location for business – but there remains little control over the business types mooted.
All we can do is ensure that where plans are presented, that these do not have a detrimental affect on local people, services, and the town landscape itself.
Surely we shouldn’t be trying to control exactly what sort of employment should be on offer?
Some fair points about the impermanence of many – or most – jobs these days, Brian. But it’s not about trying to control what sort of employment, so much as figuring out what kind of jobs, and business, Nairn should be trying to attract, and then taking whatever action is sensible to encourage them.
That means looking objectively and creatively at what kind of town Nairn is, and wants to be. This isn’t a place for heavy industry (who wanted a cement works at Lochloy?). There’s no fishing in Nairn now – so why set up a fish-processing plant? A coherent growth strategy has to build on Nairn’s particular assets and strengths, not just endorse every proposal, however unattractive, that contains the word ‘jobs’.
Nairn evolved from a fishing town and farming-services centre into a Victorian leisure resort. Agricultural services still matter. Leisure could, and should, still offer jobs – from forest rangers to B&B providers, cafes and restaurants. Have an all-night taxi office where access is good and disturbance minimal (how about the bus station area?). By all means have a nightclub – but put it by the harbour, for example, not on a narrow street in a residential area off the High Street. Come to think of it, a nightclub where the Bridgemill flats now loom might have been a sensible idea…
Shopping diversity – and the novelty/quality of Sainsburys – offers jobs and should attract people to spend locally. The appeal of town centres is enhanced by specialist shops: Nairn has some, it would be good to see more. And services of all kinds ought to be encouraged to operate in and from Nairn. We have accountants, insurance agents, architects…even IT experts! It would be good to see the Highland Council decentralising its public services and administration to operate from towns like Nairn, rather than axeing jobs and closing offices in regional towns and concentrating staff in an Inverness central HQ.
If Nairn’s range of services and facilities is good, and the urban environment is attractive, people will visit, shop, spend, and want to settle here. If the place looks good and functions well, growth and jobs will happen. On the other hand, build bleak housing blocks, neglect historic buildings, and ignore assets like the green spaces, and people won’t want to come or to stay, and the town will continue to drift and deteriorate.
The empty bus station could make a good position for taxi office – but it presumes too much.
Firstly, the property isn’t currently offered for sale, and there’s no suggestion of a willingness to sell, especially now Tesco have noted an interest.
But even presuming it were for sale, you’d probably be looking at a sale price for the building and land of around £100,000-£150,000.
Presuming no demolition and rebuilding required, and that the property can simply be renovated, I’d presume costs for this would conservatively be in the region of £30,000-£50,000.
So already anyone looking to set up a business on the site is incurring a liability of £130,000-£200,000 as a starter estimate.
With banks lending up to 70%-75% on commercial mortgages at present, that means a minimum of £30,000-£50,000 in cash required to even consider developing a business there.
Compare that to the potential cost of a ground floor lease on the high street of around £10,000 per annum.
Immediately the economics of the situation means the high street is always going to be a more realistic first choice on issues of cost alone – especially when taxi offices tend to be seen as low margin businesses, with few such companies ever building their own premises to trade from.
It’s going to take an organisation with some financial muscle and a long-term business plan to even consider using the bus station.
The only saving grace would be if the Highland Council demolish the community centre (as they are currently suggesting once taken back from the Co-op) and build a property there that includes retail space on the ground floor.
Then we could see a more practical position for taxi offices.
Even still, there is so much uncertainty involved that it’s not something that can be planned for anything but the long-term.
Therefore it seems to make little sense to myself to force businesses that want to set up Nairn to sit and wait for the Highland Council to provide ideal premises for them, when potential remains to set up on the high street.
As for the nightclub – is there anywhere in Nairn that could not be described as having a residential presence? Even along the high street itself there are a lot of flats, and of course residential streets coming off from them. The harbour area is even more of a residential area, having a single cafe at the end to represent commercial interests – everything else aside from the sailing club is residential.
I think there is broad agreement in perspectives, though – we want to see sensible business investment in and around Nairn – but the bleak truth is that Nairn has a limited amount of choice in what seeks to locate here at present.
The stronger Nairn becomes economically, though, the more likely the HC can be forced to return a number of services it has already been withdrawing, and hopefully be even encouraged to move additional services in directly for residents.
In the meantime, it concerns me the attitude of some people who seem to think there’s some form of magic solution waiting to happen – even the new Sainsburys development had to go through a public enquiry and be decided directly by the Scottish Government.
We can object to obvious undesirable suggestions – you’re right, Nairn is not an industrial centre – so to push for that against a tourism interests (such as the concrete factory) makes no sense at all.
I just think we need to accept that not every business suggestion will be ideal, and that the more business develops within Nairn itself, the more the area needs to be taken more seriously as an independent entity in its own right by public bodies.
2c.