Gillespie, NAPAW take on wind industry - Article in the Orangeville Citizen

Gillespie, NAPAW take on wind industry
By WES KELLER Freelance Reporter

"...industrial wind energy facilities are being driven by economic and political objectives; The health of individuals living in close proximity to industrial wind turbines is being compromised.."


The lawyer who represented Ian Hanna in a judicial review and appeal of a wind farm in Prince Edward County is now acting on behalf of North American Platform Against Windfarms (NAPAW).

In the Hanna case, Ontario’s Divisional Court found that Ontario’s Renewal Energy Assessment (REA) followed proper procedures in its approval of a wind farm, but also suggested that there needs to be more study of human health issues.
Now Toronto lawyer Eric Gillespie is saying that the desire for rapid deployment of wind energy facilities “appears to violate numerous Articles of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and United Nations Convention for the Rights of Persons with Disabilites (UNCRPD) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.”

In letters to all premiers and attorneysgeneral in Canada, Mr. Gillespie alleges on behalf of NAPAW that: “State and country decision-making processes for locating and operating industrial wind energy facilities are being driven by economic and political objectives; The health of individuals living in close proximity to industrial wind turbines is being compromised and the ability of families to care for their children and elders is being seriously undermined; The public lacks confidence that the science advice of state and country health authorities is credible; and further that this advice is based on a rigorous and objective assessment of all available information; The lack of full scientific certainty is being used as a reason not to take preventive measures; We conclude that the fundamental human rights of individuals living in close proximity to industrial wind turbines are not being protected, and further that the dignity and worth of the human person are not being upheld,” Mr. Gillespie says.

As part of a remedy, he asks “that immediate and careful objective study be undertaken with respect to wind energy’s economic benefits, which our client believes are net zero, and objective study of the impacts to human health also be simultaneously initiated; that the protection of human health be restored as primary, m all energy policy henceforth; and that the need for restitution and compensation be incorporated into the studies of the above two obligations, for those who have abandoned homes, lost income, property, and/or health,”

“We respectfully request: A complete and immediate moratorium on the new construction and placement of industrial wind turbines; an investigation regarding the apparent violations of the Articles detailed in this letter; protection of the population from the imposed intrusions; the restoration of democratic rights; National, State and Provincial Attorneys General investigations regarding the economic damages including net job losses, environmental damages, and societal and community degradation; (and that) remediation be established for the economic and social damages to humans, including loss of homes and jobs, future economic consequences such as decreased pensions and other negative impacts, and environmental damages.

“Failing this, we reserve the right to further legal inquiry including the UN Conventions and all local and national laws to protect life, property, liberty and rights,” he concludes, along with a request for responses by May 1.