Hi,

it is interesting to note from the aparent PRESS RELEASE by those who stand to gain the most from this environmentally damaging, inefective & clearly resoundingly rejected concept that requires obscene amounts of subsidy considering the near total failure of Wind Turbines to produce a viable output of electricity to feature on the local or national grid reliably enough to permit the switch off of more sensible methods of production such as nuclear..

Be minded that there is no balance to the Forester’s article of the 21-Feb-2018 in that it merely published the statement of the ambitions of the profiting company with no apparent fact checking!

You will of course be minded that the Local Government Officers, trained in such matters and having researched the proposed planning application reported to the Council and strongly recommended against the application being granted leave to proceed.

In my opinion and having listened to the matter at the planning committee the Council acted in palpable ignorance of any relevant facts and in a clearly vexatious manner when you consider the overwhellming preponderance of objection to the application, both by the professional Officers of their own Council and of the facts pertaining to the application, not least of which was the overwhellming opposition to the scheme from the residents within sight and sound of the proposed monstrosity right on the bank of the River Severn, visible from miles around.

Seemingly the only individuals in favour were those drummed up from out of the area and either family, tenants or employees of the land ower who aimed to profit from the subsidies + any potential income!

It was also worthy of note that the landowner herself was in a position to influence the application being a newly elected Counciller who had moved within days of the election onto the Planning Committee. Having nevert mentioned her application during the election nor having shown any talent, expertise or experience in planning matters!

The decision to appeal the questionable decision of the planning committe to grant the application made in Moira Edwards’ name with the commercial support of Resiliance, was made by the residents of the area effected in the name of Peter Wright and supported in his aims by the clear majority of effected businesses and residents who life and lifestyle would clearly be damaged by the instalation, which would likely give rise to a loss of jobs in the area.

The Appeal Judge upheld the appeal application & the vexatious Council decision was overturned. It was overturned on the limited list of reasons Peter Wright’s barristers felt needed to be fielded. There were many sound reasons for rejection of the plan, though few sustainable reasons in its favour have ever been put forward by the applicants – leading one to believe the matter was mainly being progressed for the personal; profit of a few wealthy individuals!

The latest appeal was granted to Peter Wright by 3 Judges voting unanimously against the scheme. Once again Peter Wright’s barristers felt they had no need of the many other reasons against the plan as Resiliance had failed to field any compelling reason for the application beyond seemingly that of their own profit, from which they undertook to pay what seemed to be a bribe, by way of paying back some of the subsidies and a portion of any revenue AFTER they had taken they management fees!

The repayment was beiguillingly deemed to be a ‘Community Fund’ and their highly profitable (for them) scheme was mastery of aesopian English calling it a ‘Community Wind Turbine’.

Here is The Forester’s unchallenged and seemingly unchecked Press Release by the applicant Resiliance: