Ørsted wants the Isle of Man to believe it is a responsible, transparent developer bringing a once‑in‑a‑generation opportunity to the Island. But its behaviour has been criticised by those opposing the Mooir Vannin Windfarm.
Speaking to Manx.News, campaigners have accused the Company of selective engagement, curated audiences, and a charm offensive aimed squarely at the Island’s most influential voices rather than the people who will actually live with the consequences of the Mooir Vannin Offshore Wind Farm.
The Company Shows Up for Power — Not for People
After declining to attend a public drop-in sessions in Onchan, where residents gathered hoping to ask questions directly, Ørsted has sent out an invitation to an “exclusive briefing” at The Food Cellar. Not a public meeting. Not an open forum. A private reception.
In an email seen by Manx.News to invitees, Ørsted’s IOM Project Director Jamie Baldwin describes the event as “an exclusive briefing and networking opportunity at The Food Cellar, Douglas, on Thursday 23 July 2026, starting at 17:30 until 20:00.”
Invitation Only
The guest list? Business leaders. Individuals with influence. People whose support can shape political climate, commercial sentiment, and public perception.
Campaigners told Manx.News that the message is unmistakable: “Ørsted is willing to talk — but only to those it believes matter most.”
A Sales Pitch Disguised as a Briefing
The invitation reads like a corporate prospectus. £2 billion in economic benefits; 30 long‑term jobs; A £22.5 million community fund; Reduced wholesale electricity costs; New supply chain opportunities
“lobbying”
Ørsted is not wrong to promote its project. But promoting it selectively in private rooms, over drinks and canapés to a hand‑picked audience.. campaigners say this is not public engagement. It is lobbying.
The campaigner said “Ørsted’s line about explaining “why it is important for the business community’s voice to be heard” during the Examination raises an obvious question. In a private, invitation‑only setting, is this simply an update? — or is it a quiet attempt to recruit influential attendees to speak up in support of the project? When the audience consists of people whose views carry weight with decision‑makers, the phrasing naturally invites speculation about whether Ørsted is hoping those present will use that influence at a critical moment.”
A Developer Managing the Narrative, Not the Dialogue
Ørsted’s absence from the Onchan meeting matters. That was a space where fishermen, residents, environmental advocates, and coastal communities could ask about seabed disturbance, visual impact, transmission infrastructure, ecological risk, and long‑term consequences.
Those questions are harder to answer than “How many jobs will this create?”
So is this why Ørsted chose not to attend? The Company claimed at the time they had declined because it would not be ‘appropriate’ in light of the ongoing and independent public examination.
Instead, it is bringing in its UK Country Chair, Benji Sykes, to impress a select audience with expertise and authority. It is emphasising discussions with the Manx Utilities Authority and Government. It is highlighting economic upside while avoiding the messy, democratic part of public consultation.
A spokesperson for a campaign group who does not wish to be identified for fear of reprisals said, “This is not balanced engagement. It is strategic influence‑building.”
Corporate Playbook
Ørsted’s behaviour fits a familiar corporate playbook: Avoid unpredictable public forums – Engage privately with influential figures – Present economic benefits in controlled settings – Build elite support ahead of Examination outcomes
None of this is illegal. But it is political. And it is happening during a statutory process that depends on public confidence, not private persuasion.
trust is not built in exclusive rooms. It is built in public ones.
Wind Farm Objectors
A Charm Offensive
The Objectors say that “major infrastructure projects require legitimacy. They require developers who are willing to face the public, answer difficult questions, and engage openly with communities, not just with those who can help shape the narrative.
“Ørsted may believe its private wooing over wine and canapés at the Food Cellar will smooth the path for Mooir Vannin. But trust is not built in exclusive rooms. It is built in public ones. Right now, Ørsted is choosing the former.”
“If Ørsted won’t face the public, then the public may decide to face Ørsted.”
Campaigner
Protests?
As Ørsted prepares for its private event, some campaigners say they are considering making their concerns ‘peacefully’ visible outside the venue. One local campaigner told Manx.News, “If Ørsted won’t face the public, then the public may decide to face Ørsted.”
And businesses attending the private soiree have also been put on notice; the message being voiced by a campaign group is equally clear: “brands choosing to associate themselves with this project at such a sensitive moment should expect their stance to be remembered and scrutinised by the wider public. We are watching you”
