Unbelievable. Just unbelievable

I’ve just seen the decision of the government inspector on an appeal regarding the Lyveden New Bield wind farm proposal.  Predictably, the Inspector has accepted the appeal  (Appeal Ref: APP/G2815/A/11/2156757). Too may of these men from Whitehall simply look at the objection and say “Government renewables policy overrides local objections”, and that’s that. Months or years of work by local protest groups, the long grind of fund-raising, tens of thousands spent on representation and lawyers, all swept aside in a few hours.

It’s heartbreaking.  I know, because it happened in my local village in Leicestershire with the Low Spinney application, and now we have four intimidating 400-ft monsters louring over the village.  It’s also happened with regard to the Brigstock application in Northamptonshire.  This case is particularly egregious since it is close to the National Trust’s historic Lyveden New Bield site.   But government inspectors have no respect for landscape or heritage.

One observation of the inspector broke new ground for extraordinary, crass, pig-headed ignorance and prejudice.  The Inspector’s report says:

11. Some concerns were raised about the capacity factor of the scheme, based around the perception that the area is not especially windy. However, that is not borne out by the appellant’s analysis. I fail to see why a developer would be prepared to make the significant investment required to gain permission for, or indeed seek to implement, the wind farm if it was not going to operate in an efficient or cost-effective manner. In that context, it is reasonable to assess the potential capacity of the wind farm as up to 10 MW”.

“I fail to see why a developer would make the investment … if it was not going to operate in a cost-efficient manner”.  Honest.  I’m not making it up.  This is what the Inspector wrote, officially in his report.  I’d like to grab him by the lapels and give him a good shaking and ask “What about the subsidies?”.  None of these turbines is efficient or cost effective on any definition.  They are only there because they are subsidised, at the expense of consumers, including poor pensioners in fuel poverty who are at risk of hypothermia in the winter because they can’t afford the electricity bills.

That’s the reason — the only reason — why wind farms are being built.  So that rich landowners like Cameron’s father-in-law can profit from the misery of the poor.  They’re not farming wind.  They’re farming subsidies.   Words fail me.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Unbelievable. Just unbelievable

  1. I am old enough to remember other scandals – remember the ground nut scheme?

    The huge difference nowadays is that the EU is a superb shield for the mingy little bureaucrat to hide behind. All they have to say it this: “It is illegal.”

    End of argument.
    Next time, I shall not be voting for M. Rumpuy.

  2. fenbeagleblog says:

    ‘Unbelievable?’ Surely not?……For the Green Treens control the hearts and minds of the people. For they have ‘the hard headed reasons’….


  3. Andrew Shakespeare says:

    Just unbelievable, Roger? I’d believe anything about this government.

  4. Three6t says:

    “Words fail me” – apparently not…

  5. Tony says:

    I bet you’re glad you made the jump. Part of you piece would not be possible if you were still in the Conservatives.

  6. David C says:

    I hope you will alert the inspector to your blog entry. These people need to know that their idiocy is being noticed.

    • Great Idea David. I was told that the Inspector, Mr. Paul Griffiths (the same one who allowed the egregious wind-farm within a mile of my home) was hearing an appeal in Thrapston, Northants, and I very nearly went there to accost him. But thinking better of it, I contacted the Planning Inspectorate and asked for Mr. Griffiths’ e-mail address. They refused to give it to me. It’s against the rules. So as an elected MEP I can’t contact a public official on a matter of concern to a constituent. Unbelievable again. But I did send an incandescent e-mail to the Planning Inspectorate’s complaints line. I’ll let you know if I hear from them.

      • Norfolk Dumpling says:

        Roger, a good article/blog, and perhaps you could find the time to send it to all unpersuaded MPs. Like Carolines Lucas and Flint; that’s two out of some 500 or more!
        I tried having a go at the Planning Inspectorate but, as previous LieBore Government and now Con-Liedagin placemen for exes Ed Miliprat[tle] and EcoLooney Hooney, you will be lucky to even get an acknowledgement if you are having a go at them.
        The main problem with the Inspectorate is that inspectors think they know it all, misguidedly think they are doing a service for the community but, because they are mostly technical illiterates, sophistically academically deprived of practical experience, do not realise that their pro-renewables decisions are destroying the industrial, economic, energy, environmental and democratic platforms of the UK.
        With respect to retribution, this organisation and individuals should be the first in line when the wind and solarPV con is de-constructed by the evidence we can all quote but which is not acceptable to our scientifically challenged political castes.

  7. David W. says:


    As I have said before, and I know you’re skeptical about my idea, but I can’t help but bring this back up.

    It’s all about defining who makes money, and who pays, by force;

    1. Create the perception of crisis.
    2. Proffer your own pre-determined, convenient solution.
    3. Lobby your solution into law (via committee, legislative body, executive order, etc…)
    4. Profit by force at the expense of the masses.
    5. Repeat.

    Be it global warming, healthcare, transportation, education, general welfare, energy, etc., the government, the well-healed and the corporations label themselves as stakeholders, and the form committees and governing bodies by which they profit and empower, driving our debts and increasing the misery by which we live.

    I told you so ; )

    • Not sure which bit of your idea I’m supposed to be sceptical about. I agree that bureaucracies tend to develop an agenda and a momentum of their own, and are therefore dangerous. Look at the EU.

  8. John Twidell says:

    As a member of the National Trust and often going to our local site of Lyveden New Bield, I am delighted there will be a small windfarm nearby. The National Trust is rightly concerned with conservation, i.e. sustainability, which renewable energy strengthens.

    The Lyveden New Bield site is thick with trees between the unfinished house and the wind turbine locations. It is totally incorrect to say as you do in your article ‘the turbines will be clearly visible from almost everywhere on the site’.

  9. Paul says:

    Roger recent reports in the press state that the National trust is concerned about wind turbines on their land and the effect they will have.
    Now call me old fashioned but either they are terminally stupid or there is another completely separate organisation which goes under the same name. Check out the link from the National trust website:


    So either they are for wind farms or they are against them. Can anyone explain what’s going on here? What a mad world we live in.

  10. Mike Stallard says:

    Norfolk Dumpling – This dismays me.
    I am totally on your side in this. Totally.
    But calling people silly names is unworthy. It gives the impression that these people are just daft. They are not.
    It must also be very unpleasant for them to receive letters obviously written from on high.
    It could mean that you – and the rest of us – are dismissed as loonies.
    I go on Labour List a lot. Once there, of course, I am a troll. When I am abused and dismissed as a prat it is so easy to deal with the perpetrator and make him (it’s always a him) look really stupid.

  11. Pingback: Barnwell Manor: The District Council strikes back! | Roger Helmer MEP

  12. alan.sloman says:

    You might find this link interesting, concerning Paul Griffiths, Planning Inspector: LINK

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s