PS 96: Peter Wright Is Granted The Right To JUDICIAL REVIEW.

PS – 96:


(PS 96: Peter Wright Is Granted The Right To JUDICIAL REVIEW.)

Hi All,

just to let you all know that it really is A Happy New Year –

Peter Wright has been granted a Judicial Review of the vexatious and undemocratic decision of the Forest of Dean District Council Planning Committee, who voted by a majority, against the decision of the elected effected local Parish committee and against the wishes of the effected local community:

The Community Against Severndale Wind Turbine Group which includes 35 members of the immediate ‘effected community’ who are on the record as objectors:

  • ASHBY, Leah, Stroat Hill Cottage, Stroat,, approximately 1.3kms from proposed turbine

  • AVERY-BROWN, Elizabeth-Avery & William – Wibdon Cottage, Stroat – approximately 700m from proposed turbine

  • BOLLEN, David – High Hall Farm – within 750m from proposed turbine

  • BOLT, Lisa – Everene Philpots Court within 700 m from proposed turbine

  • BROOKES, Tracey & Andy – Underwood Farm – within 800m of turbine

  • BROWN, Louella & David – The Waldins – within 650m of the turbine

  • CARPENTER, Garry, Stroat Hill Cottage, Stroat,, approximately 1.3kms from proposed turbine

  • CROSS, Nigel and Samantha 3 Philpots Court – within 700m from proposed turbine

  • DAVIDSON, Pam – The Garstons – within 750m from proposed turbine

  • ELSBY, Nigel & Linda, Stroat House, within 1.5km from proposed turbine

  • FORD, Claire & Roger – The steps – approximately 500m from proposed turbine

  • GOATMAN, Fiona & Robert – Beverstone Farm – approximately 1km from proposed turbine

  • HILLMAN, Robert & Alison Philpots Court Farm – within 700m from proposed turbine

  • HOLLIES, Lindsay & Mark – Chapel House, Hanley Lane – within 1km from proposed turbine

  • LANCE-WATKINS, Lee & Greg – Home Cottage Stroat – within 1.5km from proposed turbine

  • MAYO, Molly & Keith – Wibdon Farm – within 650 to 700m from from proposed turbine

  • NAIRNE, Andrew and Sue 4 Philpots Court – within 700m from proposed turbine

  • REES, James & Clare  – Greystones within 775m from proposed turbine

  • SMITH, Pam & David – Old Post Office within 900m from proposed turbine

  • WRIGHT, Sue and Peter – Little Wibdon, Stroat, approx. 500 – 550meters from proposed turbine

Minded that it is a relatively sparsely populated rural area, where numerous properties will be level with the blades on the overlooking slopes and clear visibility will be from Aust, Littlehampton, Thornbury, Rockhampton, Hill, Oldbury, Berkeley, Sharpness and beyond as it stands 50% taller than Gloucester Cathedral, undisguised by trees or other obstacles.

There would seem to be few if any supporters of the imposition of this turbine from within the community – other than those who have signed standard letters provided and vigorously solicited, by the applicants, either as potential direct beneficiaries in the scheme, tenants or employees of the applicant!

Also the many objectors from the wider local community.

!! Whoopee.


Peter heard from his solicitors Buxtons’ (specialists in such issues) yesterday; his case has been duly considered, by the relevant National authorities, and there is a reasonable case which the FoDDC has to answer.


Peter has not as yet received court dates & times yet and will keep us informed when he does.


As we all know Peter still has a long way to go and so your ongoing support is greatly appreciated.


Particularly when you consider just howmany different donations have been received through ‘Crowd Funding’, no responsible Councillors, Council or Court should remain unimpressed by the ratio of donors and effected local committee who seek democracy and that their opposition to this wind turbine is upheld – indeed wind turbines in general seem particularly unpopular amongst those armed with the facts of just how damaging to the environment thwey are and how ineffectual they are at producing consistent power output!


Peter believes he is now definitely going to need a barrister alongside Buxtons and being practical this will need some further funding, through the Crowd Justice site, for which he hope to start a new campaign shortly and secondly he really need to get his case together against the Severndale wind turbine, in detail.


This is not for the present action but should democracy prevail and the guidance of the Council Officer be shown to be correct and the initial decision of the FoDDC planning committee be quashed (one would hope), then Resilience may put in another application which will need to be challenge from day one.


A significant aspect of this will be in proving the local community is strongly against the wind turbine, particularly the effected local community  – so – please, in your time with neighbours and local people, please help to spread the facts accurately and truthfully of the catastrophic damage done by wind turbines and their abject failure as producers of reliable power not to mention their gross inefficiency in cost terms, do generally encourage friends and neighbours to become an active part of the campaign defending not just the tax payerts and environment but the local area particularly.


Similarly, should you come across any information/research which will increase the body of factual knowledge regarding the harm done by wind turbines particularly if it identifies problems with or created by wind turbines, we should like to know.


Feel free to come back to Peter or myself with anything you find or if you require further information.  Peter doesn’t anticipate a further meeting is needed at this point but should you consider a meeting would be beneficial let us know.


If Resilience start again, however, we shall definitely get together then.


Below is a copy of the letter received from the High Court.


Any assistance that you can give Peter, either in cash terms, knowledge terms or just as numbers ahowing support for his stalwart efforts on behalf of the effected community, the environment and common sense will be greatly appreciated.


This latest step forward is a geat leap forward I believe and even if we fail to get justice, which Peter’s lawyers consider unlikely, we still have further opportunities for redress both through appeal procedures and failing all else to the European Courts who now take precedence over many areas of national law!


One must also take into consideration that increasingly people are beginning to understand the folly of the climate change / global warming argument in terms of the anthropogenic input. It is not just the sound arguments of many independent scientists not dependent on Government and grants who have spoken out so strongly against the IPCC report but also numerous well publicised books by eminent earth scientists and climatologists such as Prof. Ian Plimer but also the new findings of the eminent mathematician Dr. David Evans who has  ‘unpacked’ the algorythms, mathematics and formulae underpinning the IPCC and conventional climate modelling and shown it to be packed with errors providing completely unreliable results for predictions!


For more details of Dr. David Evans’ work CLICK HERE


I believe I am justified in thanking you all for your continued efforts in support of Peter and wishing you, after this goos news, a very happy new year where we have every hope of seeing justice being seen to be done – regardless of any vested interests of iondividuals or political parties regardless of their donors!



Greg Lance – Watkins

PS I hope you have a glass of something left from Christmas to raise to Peter’s success so far and may it continue – I’m told elderflower is very good!

HIGH COURT re JR 01 P1 07-Jan-2016

HIGH COURT re JR 01 P2 07-Jan-2016

Onward & Ever Upwards, to a viable green solution to the problems of energy which, unlike wind turbines, does not polute the area, produce a vaste amount of CO2, doesn’t slaughter birds, bats and wildlife, does not create a dangerous distraction on what is claimed to be Europe’s most dangerous road (The A48), does not require deisle generators for back-up when they stand idle, does not polute the scenery/amenity for miles around, does not generate constant noise flicker and vibration when they do work and which does not lead to so many accidents [see this web site: 05-Jan-2013
(PS 88: The shocking environmental cost of renewable energy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s