Councillors contrary views – Pitlochry Sainsburys

Dec 14 2010 by Alison Lowson, Perthshire Advertiser Tuesday

Dear Editor, – Perth and Kinross Council’s development planning quality manager recommended refusal of the Pitlochry Sainsburys edge of town application on the grounds (amongst others) that the plan was contrary to retail impact studies.

Are councillors not in favour of official policies?

The coherent explanation seems to be that they do not trust the technical advice of professional planners. Why were councillors facilitating supplier relationships with Sainsburys while the application was pending planner’s assessment?

I am much perplexed. Could Sainsburys’ Jeff Wilson explain how ‘it would encourage viability and vitality of the (Pitlochry) town centre and Highland Perthshire’?

Could John Pearson explain how the supermarket will create 150-200 full or part time jobs unless we are all to eat more? Would he estimate how many jobs and livelihoods will be lost in the places we currently shop?

Could Ken Lyall explain what he sees as the ’huge economic benefit for having a supermarket in Pitlochry’ and why it is ‘a positive move which will have knock-on benefits for local businesses’- exactly which local businesses?

I am concerned about the contradictions and ambiguities and lack of consideration of the wider picture and complexity of the situation.

We live in an over complex, over uncertain and over connected world and it all too easy to defend our decisions and hide our motives in simple narrow certainties.

Are we so beguiled with the idea of shopping in a Sainsburys that we don’t care about no-end of local and wider impacts?

The resulting impacts will, after all, never make the press – they are too indirect and scattered upstream and downstream.

Pitlochry is on the road to becoming the supermarket hub of Highland Perthshire – there are some positives but let’s not pretend that there are no negative issues, not just locally but also on a wider geographic scale.

Pitlochry resident.