Tuesday March 17th 2026
Artists impression shows walls and embankments which will be built as part of the Musselburgh Flood Protection Scheme (credit: ELC)
Written by Local Democracy Reporter, Marie Sharp
A public hearing into a controversial £54 million flood scheme for Musselburgh is set to start in September with one of Scotland’s top legal advisers in charge.
Paul Cackette, CBE, has been appointed as the Reporter for the hearing into the Musselburgh scheme, which was called in by Scottish Ministers after East Lothian councillors asked them to take control of the final decision.
A former solicitor for the Scottish Government and chief planning officer, Mr Cackette was more recently Director of Outbreak Management in Scotland, responsible for coordinating responses to local outbreaks in Scotland, developing policies and second wave planning, including Covid restrictions.
Now retired he is called in to help Scottish Ministers with planning appeals and environmental judgements and will hear the case for the scheme as well as opposition to it.
The Musselburgh Flood Protection Scheme was referred to Scottish Ministers after council officers said they had been unable to resolve nearly 500 outstanding objections to their plans after months of talks with protesters.
The scheme has sparked controversy in the town after costs soared from the original £8.9m in 2016 to a current estimate of £53.9million.
Opponents of the proposals, which includes the introduction of high walls through the town centre, want it paused claiming not enough work has been carried out to find ‘natural solutions’ instead of walls.
In a letter issued on behalf of Mr Cackette to the council and interested parties it has been confirmed that he is hoping to hold a hearing in September/October this year and is asking for a council building to be available in Musselburgh if possible.
It adds: “The scheduling or timetabling of the hearing.public local inquiry will
be decided once the topics are determined, in accordance with an agenda to be provided in due course and once the balance between a hearing and a full inquiry can be more clearly anticipated.
“The aim is to minimise inconvenience for objectors so that they only need attend at times when specific issues of interest to them arise.”
All parties involved have been asked to respond with their views on the dates and plans for the hearing.
Tweet Share on Facebook
