Minutes of Public Meeting organised by Fenland Landscape Against Turbines Committee

Date: 18 May 2007, 7.00 pm

Venue: Tilney St Lawrence Village Hall

Present:

Chairman: Lyndon Mason
Guest Speakers: Jane Davis, Sue Cooper, Barry Ayres, Dr John Lilley, Philip Potts
Local villagers: Approx 300
Flat Committee Members:
Vice Chairman: Hugh Langston
Secretary: Janette McGuffog
Treasurer: Jamie McGuffog
Fundraising: Terry Hills
Minutes: Janet Henson
Committee Members: David McGuffog, Liz Langston,  Ruth Mason, Sally Woodward

Purpose of Meeting

The meeting is an opportunity for all those who attended the Marshland St James event on 19th April 2007 to be updated on the development and find out how they can be actively involved in opposing the plans.

For those who did not attend this will be their chance to find out what an adverse impact this wind power station could have on them both personally and their local community and landscape.

1.  Introduction

The Chairman for the meeting was Lyndon Mason.  He is also Chairman of the Fenland Landscape Against Turbine Committee (FLAT).

7.05 pm start of meeting.

The Chairman opened the meeting by advising all of progress to date. 

The committee has only been running for a few weeks and we have achieved the following:

1. Public meeting on 19 April 2007 raised awareness of proposal
2. Web site launched to keep everyone up to date with developments (www.flat-group.co.uk)
3. Mershe Lande Borough Council has a new Borough Councillor – David Markinson.  The Borough Council had been aware of plans for over 3 years and had not informed local people.  The previous Borough Councillor had been in the post for a number of years. 
4. We have started to raise funds to fight to ensure wind turbines do not blight our landscape

The Chairman then went on to clarify some press inaccuracies over the last few weeks.

1. Their have been quotes about poor conduct of FLAT members that was being investigated by the police – FLAT have liaised with the police on specific allegations and there is no police or CID investigation under way as there is no foundation to the stories.
   
   
2. There has been comments that we have harassed the farmers involved with the wind farm consortium – FLAT does not condone violence of any kind and has not been involved in any criminal actions.  We are a peaceful group wanting to inform people and let them know what is happening.  We have not been involved in this type of activity.
   
   
3. One member pulled out for personal reasons – Mrs Diddwell pulled out for personal reasons and not intimidation as reported in some press.
   
   
4. The consortium stated that Information given out by FLAT was hysteria not facts. We will show facts at this meeting.  Ask yourselves what facts have been forthcoming from the other side.  We have been consistent with the information we have supplied.  The proposal will affect people outside of the Marshland St James area.  Note inconsistencies from consortium members.
   
   
   • They stated that they had scaled down plans in one press release, in another they were in polite talks with other landowners.
     
     
   • It was reported by the consortium that the wind mast would not be replaced as they had all the data they needed.  Following on from this they advised they had lost a lot of data so they will be replacing this.
     
     
   • The consortium has given out incorrect facts re scoping option and explaining what they intend to do.  We have a document dated August 2006 that refers to this.  We obtained this via the Freedom of Information Act because we asked the consortium for data and they refused to supply it.  We also have another document dated March 2007 that refers to this scoping survey from Kings Lynn Council.  In this document it refers to discrepancies of numbers of turbines in one section referring to 26 in another 28.  Do we assume this to be a typing error? 
     
     
   • We asked Ian Robinson (Consortium consultant) how many turbines and he stated less than 26 at the Marshland Meeting.  Why then does this document state 28?  Notes in this document refer to Vibration saying that infrasound is not an issue and  that no assessment  is proposed.  (Listen to Jane later in this meeting and decide what you think)
     
     
   • It was stated by the consortium that the Map we obtained dated August 2006 re draft proposal was incorrect.  How then when we obtained an original copy of the map, which is dated 27.4.07, does this show the same turbines and quantity as on the draft map?

You will see that there are many inconsistencies in the quotes given by the consortium. Please listen to facts and decide for yourselves who you think is telling the truth.  Our aim is to give facts.

They are telling us other landowners want to go ahead.

The Chairman then passed over to Barry Ayres our first speaker of the evening.

2.  Barry Ayres

Barry is a member of Borough Council for Kings Lynn and West Norfolk for St Lawrence.  His wards are Terrington St John Parish, and Tilney St Lawrence Parish.

Barry explained he had met an engineer from the consortium at Warboys to look at the turbines.   His aim is to represent the best interest of the St Lawrence Ward.  He has a conflict of interest as he also serves on the development control board on the council and as such he needs to stay as neutral as possible.

Barry started the meeting by explaining that there are many government guidelines that are used when considering planning.  The Government 1945-47 rev planning permission is followed by all local councils and PP51 of this states that devaluation of properties cannot be taken into account when deciding planning.

However, FLAT need to consider that

• Loss of view and spoiling a view can be a valid objection.
• Environmental issues can also be taken into consideration.
• The European court for Human Rights could help, although this is yet to be tested,  i.e. anything that can detract from quality of life, could be a valid objection

PPS 2004 amendment.  This guidance states that the suitable land should be made available to improve Quality of Life, assist economic growth and contribute to protecting the nature, character and communities. 

These could all form valid objections and could support any opposition to the plan for the wind farms.

To conclude Barry informed the meeting that personally he needs to conform to a middle way so he can still stand for the people on the Borough Council but he will help in any way he can to meet the needs of the community.

At this point Jane Davis asked Barry the following Question:

Question – When you visited Warboys were you introduced to Lyn Harlock.  She lives 650 metres from the turbine.  Shadow flicker stops use of her lounge and other rooms for 3 hours a day. 

Answer – No he did not meet her.

Comment from Jane Davis — Get as much information as possible from Huntingdon District Council.  They are investigating Environmental Health issues.

3.  Lyndon Mason – Chairman

Our Mershe Lande Councillor, David Markinson, sends his apologies.  He cannot be here tonight but has given a short statement to Lyndon to read out.

"It was with shock and anger a few weeks ago, when information was made available about the wind turbines, that FLAT was formed to fight the wind farms.  Press, TV, and Radio coverage has allowed previously unknown information to be put in the public domain.  Where you offered the chance to ask about the Wind Farms.  NO.

"Look for truth…

"Question what the motives of the Wind Farm Consortium members?

"What are the motives behind FLAT?

"The evidence worldwide is that wind turbines are not green; they have impact on wildlife, the environment and prices of houses fall.  This impact is unacceptable."

David Markinson – Borough Councillor for Marshland St James and Walsoken.

4.  Dr John Lilley

Dr John Lilley was an MD for a company who made wind turbine generators and many of the generators his company made are in wind turbines in California and Denmark.

Dr John Lilley asked the meeting how many attended the Marshland St James meeting and the response showed that a significant number had attended this meeting.

Dr John Lilley told the meeting that Dr Lesley McDonald from the QE Hospital has spent time on researching health issues caused by wind turbines.  If you get the opportunity look at her research on the Congham website it will open your eyes on health problems.

Many supporters of wind turbines seem to suffer from what has been termed Galtieri Syndrome.... in other words they repeat their own propaganda so often that they start to believe it themselves (Galtieri was the Argentinian General who still believed he was winning the war even after the British had raised the flag in Port Stanley)

The fact that so many people have attended again tonight means that the acronym used in the industry i.e. NGA’s (Naïve, Gullible, and Apathetic) cannot be used to describe the people here today.

Dr John Lilley then gave out some of the facts he had presented at the previous meeting including:

• 26 x 2 kilowatt turbines - the decision for 50kw or above is made by the Secretary of State.  If the local council objects it will go to Public Enquiry.
  
  
• Average wind speed data which is available on DTI website states that the average speed in the area is as follows:
  • 6.0m sec at 45m high
  • 5.8m sec at 35 m
  • 5.0m sec at 10 m

The wind turbines are pretty useless at wind speeds less than 4m sec i.e. about Force 3 .  The wind turbines have to be so high to make best use of the wind at the higher levels.  To achieve the full rated output about a Force 7 wind is required which doesn't happen that often.

There have been a significant number of turbine failures over the years.  Your own website lists many of these. The BBC website contains details of the blade failure at Crystal Rig in Scotland.  Here the regulation system failed and bits of the blade which weighs several tons were found over ¼ mile away.  At the Nissan site the turbine caught fire.  The Fire brigade attended but said they could do nothing - all three blades fell off into a field.  Closer to home the Scroby Sands turbines have been plagued with bearing failures.

The space required by a wind turbine

The acceptable figure is 8 –10 rotor diameters down wind and about 5 diameters across wind.  At 85 m diameter this determines the size of the area needed.  The ideal size works out at about ¼ sq Kilometre per turbine.  You should be able to work out how much land is needed for 26 turbines.

A 1gw power station takes up about 2sq kilometres. 
For sufficient wind turbines to have same power rating would take up 500sq kilometres.

A sensible developer will avoid turbines in straight rows as this increases the noise risk where one turbine may reinforce the noise from its neighbour.

Dr John Lilley then went on to explain how the ear responds to noise and how noise can be felt sometimes rather than heard due to the frequencies.

The noise standard used for onshore turbines is ETSU-R-97.  This was written in 1997 by a committee where 60% of the members were associated with the turbine industry.  It is the only standard in western Europe which allows for higher noise levels at night time.  It also bears no relation to any other UK environmental noise standards.

Dr Lilley then explained that when you talk about decibels there is sometimes confusion on the meaning.

The decibel scale is logarithmic which means that 10dB is about a 10 fold increase in sound energy levels and 15dB about a 30 fold increase.

The world health organisation states 30 db at night is acceptable.

ETSU night time limit is about 43dB.  This is an extra 13dB above World Health recommendations.  If the night time level is as low as 18dB then 43dB has 30 times more sound energy.

The consortium want to go for a direct drive system and this is much quieter than the mechanical noise from a gearbox.

Infrasound is acoustic energy you cannot hear but can feel.  It is difficult to measure however Professor Styles of Keele University has carried out work for the MOD in Scotland and he has been able to measure the sound of the turbine 10 km away from a turbine.

The types of turbines being proposed are the ones that were originally designed for use at sea.  However there have been various reliability issues and so they have migrated to land to make servicing easier.

Dr Lilley then went on to explain a phenomena called AM or aerodynamic modulation.  It is AM that has turned into a PR disaster for the turbine industry.  The problem the industry has is a simple one in that:

1. They don't understand what causes AM which is the whooshing or thumping caused by some turbines.
   
   
2. Since they don't understand the cause they can't therefore predict the likely noise levels.
   
   
3. If noise levels can't be predicted any assurances given at the planning stage are effectively worthless.

The meaure used by ETSU is LA 90 10 mins.  LA means that sound energy levels are adjusted to take account of the response of the human ear.  Measured levels are averaged over 10 minutes.  The 90% factor means that high intensity noise levels which occur in short pulses and last for less than 1 min or 10% of the time are not included in the average.

He then gave an example to explain the rule...

If I went out with friends at night  to shoot some rabbits in a rural area the background noise might be as low as 18 to 20dB.  If I stood outside your bedroom window and fired say 500 cartridges over a 10 minute period it would probably wake everyone in a 2 mile radius.  These 500 rounds would not last for more than 1 minute in total and therefore LA 90 10 min would probably record the average noise at around 20dB.

People in the audience were astounded to realise the problem when it was explained in this simple way.

Dr Lilley then spoke of...

Health Issues

Dr Lesley McDonald has carried out a lot of research into health issues related to noise, these include sleep depravation, causing increased sickness level in children, and the elderly.  Depression increases, tiredness, headaches, breathing problems, heart rhythm changes, problems with concentration, children in schools have difficulty solving problems and therefore tend to be lower achievers.  Health issues are real.

House prices

This is a very contentious issue but people should use their common sense… Would you pay full price for a house overlooked by a wind farm or more importantly where noise and health issues are a possibility?

There is a paper on the BWEA and RICS websites by Dent and Sims of Oxford Brookes University.  This work was indirectly funded by BWEA.  One conclusion is that turbines affect the value of terrace property but not detached.  This paper has caused huge embarrassment to professional members of RICS many of whom regard it as complete rubbish.

Saving the planet from CO2

Dr Lilley asked the audience how much Carbon Dioxide was in the atmosphere.  The consensus was 5-10%.

All human activity produces about 6.5 G ton of CO2 per year which is about 2% of the total.  Most of the CO2 comes from the ocean and rotting vegetation.  The actual CO2 level is around 350 parts per million ie 1/30 of 1%.  2% of 350 ppm is around 7 ppm so it is likely that all turbines currently installed have modified the composition of our atmosphere by less than 1 ppm.

Dr Lilley received a round of applause for his informative speech.

5.  Jane and Julian Davis

Jane and Julian share the experience of living in the shadow of a wind turbine and how this has affected their family’s lives.  Jane and Julian are from Deeping St Nicholas.

Jane explains that their house is just 930 metres from the nearest turbine in Deeping St Nicholas.  They did not object to the turbines as they did not think there would be a problem.  They started to experience problems within 3 days of them starting up.  The noise is with them 66% of the time. 

They had mole problems for over 25 years and even they have moved out.

Infrasound bounces sound around the buildings around their farm and amplifies this.  She explains that our scoping survey states infrasound is not a problem and it will not be investigated.  She has been invited to Lyon in France to attend an International Wind Turbine Noise Conference to speak to a group of internationally renowned acoustic experts.  The paper is on infrasound and there will be speakers in attendance from all over the world. 

If you stand directly under a turbine it is not as noisy as from further away.

There are no laws to protect your house price or your ability to sleep.  To give an example of this type of loss Jane explained that their house was valued at £180,000 and they had planned on spending a further £100,000 on modifications, which they had saved and planned for over 5 years.  Today it is worth about £35,000 i.e. about the value of the land.

It is worth noting –The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors research regarding house prices was carried out on 900 homes around a small wind farm in Cornwall and bears no relationship to what is currently happening.

They have slept away from home for 142 nights over the last year in a house they rent and call their sleeping home.

The sound of the turbines when the wind is in certain directions is like a helicopter circling their farm.  The harmonics causes the sound to bounce off barns.  The sound is always there and even experts do not understand the full impact of the harmonics, what causes them and how to prevent them.

Maximum noise tolerable is usually 35db at its peak the noise is 55-60 db and the average is 40 db.

The Davies have kept a log for almost 365 days.  “Sleep deprivation is a form of torture” is a quotation that Cherie Blair has stated.  Yet the government approve the turbines.

Lynn Harlock is in the same position at Warboys.

During the talk Jane played a tape of the sound of the turbines to show what they will sound like.

A PowerPoint slide show gave details of where her farm is, location of turbines, etc.,

The picture shown on her power point slide shows their local church spire at l mile and the picture was taken at 600m from the first turbine.

The picture graphically shows the visual impact the turbines make as the church is lost in the distance and is dwarfed by the giant turbines.

The next slide showed a picture of the area around their farm.  No noise readings were made and predicative estimations were made so they have no proof of readings before turbines.

Regulations state you should not be able to see one wind farm from another.

Julian then went though various slides showing the extent of the noise problems.  This showed photographs of test equipment that was placed in their home to check levels of noise from the turbines.

The local council has decided due to problems with noise they do not need to pay rates on their house and only use this during the day.

Due to worries about their child’s education they have decided to move house completely before the next term starts. 

Walking away from your home was a big decision.

The audience gave Jane and her husband Julian a round of applause in appreciation of her spending the time to talk to us about what living near a wind turbine can be like.

Chairman: Lyndon informed the meeting that the Consortium behind the wind turbines had stated they could not see why Jane had problems.  He then handed over to Sue Cooper to explain about the impact on Wildlife.

6.  Sue Cooper

Sue has been a keen wildlife observer for almost 30 years, she was born and educated in Norfolk and has lived n Middle Drove since 1980.  At the last public meeting she read out Jane Davis report that appeared in the Daily Mail – Gone with the Wind.  Sue is a committee member of FLAT.

Rape of the Countryside

24 hours before the meeting Sue was given a document which was submitted by Marshland Wind farm Consortium called a request for scoping opinion.  This has laid out certain concerns regarding wildlife, which may or may not affect the place of wind turbines in our area.  Needless to say it is her opinion as someone who has lived locally since 1980 that some of the information she has seen is correct, however some of the other facts and findings she disagrees with.  A closer study will be needed before further comment can be made on this.  However it is even more important for her speaking tonight about the affects of wind turbines on our wildlife.

Sue and her family have recorded 98 species of birds in the immediate area and she is appealing for people to come forward with any information they have on the number and different species of birds, bats, moths, animals, rare wild plants they have in their gardens/area.  Please report all findings to by emailing to - sightings.flat@virgin.net   All information will be treated in confidence.

We have many all year residents as well as others such as Dotterel and Osprey that pass over almost unnoticed from Africa and other climes, to breed in the north of England and Scotland.  At the end of the breeding season they fly back.  We also have huge flocks of Lapwing and Golden Plover resting in the fields, and Starlings producing amazing flight patterns as they look to roost and skeins of swans and geese flying in and out to feed.

The RSPB and other conservation bodies have produced a document called The Population Status of Birds in the UK: Birds of Conservation Concern 2002/2007.  This assesses 247 different species of birds and we have recorded 98 different species.  Of these we have recorded 10 are on the Red List and 34 on the Amber.  That means we have 44 bird species in our area, which have falling populations and therefore must be protected. 

Note - This fact did not appear in the Wind Farm Consortium report I read last night.

The turbines construction and use will affect the habitat; eco systems will be disturbed and in some cases destroyed.  It may never recover.  Wild flowers and grasses which are birds, butterflies, moths and insects depend on will be crushed and broken.

The Turbines affect Birds, Bats and even Bees. 

3 ways presence of turbines can affect our birds:

1. Direct loss of Habitat – feeding and nesting sites
2. Collision – direct impact birds killed or injured
3. Disturbance/Displacement – birds go away and do not return.

We need as much information to fight the cause.  All information will be treated in strict confidence.  We particularly need information on any sightings of the following, which will be invaluable to our cause:

Marsh Harrier, Hen Harrier, Sparrow-hawk, Buzzard, Kestrel, Hobby and any other raptor. 
Barn Own, Short Eared Owl, Tawny Owl, Little Owl, Long Eared Owl. 

The reason for asking for these in particular is that these are the birds most vulnerable to Turbine strikes.

We also need information on bats – if you have bats in your patch let me know and I will come and assess the numbers and the species.

The audience was very attentive during Sue’s speech and gave her a round of applause at the end.  Sue’s full speech on the Rape of the Countryside is attached to these minutes.

Chairman

Our organisation is in its infancy.  I now hand you over the Philip Potts whose organisation has been involved in stopping 3 wind turbines in the area.

7.  Philip Potts

As explained by the Chairman, Philip has been involved with fighting Wind Farms for a number of years and has successfully stopped 3 wind farms in the area.  Philip will be talking to us to give facts we need to be aware of and to dispel some of the myths.  Philip introduced himself.

As an ex military man he learned that the eyes take in information and the brain translates it.

Recently on returning from a trip he found himself at Waterloo station.  He walked out and then realised that the beggar he had seen has an army blanket across him.  As an ex military man he decided that it could have been one of his men in that position and decided to go back and make a donation.  The notice on his bowl said “Disabled Falkland – please help” This man could have been his driver or one of his men.  He opened his wallet and only had a £20 note.  He thought for a minute and then placed this in his bowl.  The man looked up at him and said “Gracias Senor”.

The moral of the story is — Things are not what they seem.

Everyone thought that wind turbines were good.  They seemed good…  In real terms they are like the beggar at Waterloo Station.

German statistics show that they are only on average 14% efficient.  In the UK it is about the same.

People are drawing a lot of money for these projects – last year over 1 billion pounds from tax paid out as subsidies for wind energy.

Wind turbines cost a fraction of water turbines however water harnesses much more energy than wind as it is more constant. 

Information would have us believe that wind turbines help slow down global warming the truth is they are:

1. Inefficient
2. Cost a fortune
3. Stop efficient systems

As a group we have defeated 2 projects are well on the way to a 3rd and are looking at scoping reports on a 4th.

You cannot blame the landowner.  The developers are good salesmen.  If someone came to you and said you can help with global warming, help your local community and by the way we will give you £1 million over 25 years.  What would you say?

How many people would say no?

There has been a Parliamentary Select Committee set up to look intensively at the subject of  subsidies  for renewable energy.

The conclusion is that it is wrong to pay same subsidy to all systems and that it should pay on a sliding scale depending on the amount of reliable output.

1. Hydropower should get more.
2. The least payment should go to wind as it’s technology is inefficient and lacks output.

Philip then went on to say he was Chairman of Fenland Against Rural Turbines. Laughter could be heard from the audience – a good name that will not be forgotten.

Three years ago he was in a similar position to our own.

His advice:

1. Get together in a military fashion – this is a war and you need to ensure you work together and collect intelligence.
   
   
2. Get expert advice
   1. Use people like Jeffrey Sinclair.
   2. Give support and  provide local knowledge.  We hired the Royal Ornithology Society to write a report on the area for us.  Each county has a recorder of Bats.  With us being close to two borders different people could be involved.
   3. They employed a Queens Council
   4. Raise funds – experts are expensive but you need them.
   5. Work with other groups.  FART will help, just ask.

This area with the wind running predominately from West to East is wrong for wind turbines.  Why then place turbines in this area – the developers are running out of open spaces large enough for these turbines.

Send in individual letters as if you send in one petition it is classed as one letter even if thousands of signatures.  Send a copy to a central point so that they can be logged.  Some do go missing!!

You have 6 weeks after planning starts.  Individual letters are important.  Every letter for or against needs logging and viewing.  The more that is sent in the better.  Do not send same letter from everyone, each letter needs to be unique.

Split into intelligence groups so you can keep records easily i.e. Wildlife.  

At one meeting they had one lady asked what about the Gas pipe.  No one knew about this and as they investigated further the group asked to see correspondence about the Gas pipeline in the area.  This was one of 5 topics that crushed the decision.  Small snippets of information can be important.  Everyone can help with this and pass to the individual groups.

Philip then asked the question: Is anyone from the consortium here?

No answer from the audience.

When you get hold of information read it and check it.  We were warned at conventions that They lie. 

See for yourself how often the turbines run in other areas.

An example of misleading data supplied in the developers report was the ambient background noise test. The equipment was set up on the day before harvest started and took down on the day after.  This intelligence meant that the study could be called into question at the planning stage and checks made.  You need information like this.

Act in an impeccable manner, you will be respected. 

Regarding letters – they have about 310 houses in Gedney and 400 letters sent to local council, all from local people.

Due to high level of public opinion at a recent meeting of the Peterborough District Council they were given the opportunity to have as much time to put their case as the consortium because of the way they had handled the campaign.    Because of intelligence received they managed to stop the developers for 2 years and cause them to re-look at evidence they submitted before re-applying.

Prior to FART’s evidence being submitted the local planning department thought that the wind consortiums evidence was good.  Protesters filled the Council Chambers and the Council put speakers in other rooms so that people could hear the meeting.  Security was on site but not needed as people behaved very well.  Good behaviour does help and resulted in this co-operation by the Council.

You will do your committee an injustice by creating trouble. 

DO ensure...

• You keep the group going – the consortiums rely on groups dispersing.
• Do assist with fund raising.
• Make the calls and supply intelligence where you can.
• Turn up at meetings

Do not harass the farmers.

House prices will fall

FART, as an organisation, will help if you need it.

ONCE YOU HAVE WIND TURBINES IN THE AREA THE LAND IS NO LONGER AGRICULTURAL IT IS CLASSED AS INDUSTRIAL AND MORE CAN FOLLOW.

Work together – get your funds moving

A rousing round of applause was given to Philip Potts for his informative speech.

8.  Chairman

Following on from the guidance Philip has given we do need help.  The committee was formed a few weeks ago with about a dozen of us working away in the background.  It is hard work and we have put our lives on hold to help.  The more help we have the better for us all.

If anyone can help with fund raising, have skills or time that can help the campaign please let us know.  If you can deliver just a few leaflets this will help.

We desperately need help for the following:

1. PRINTING – we have called in a few favours but it does cost money.
2. Contact points for information – website, telephone numbers etc.,
3. Anyone with time to help in any way
4. Fund raising assistance – anyone with experience or can help please let us know

We are talking to the police about organising a protest meeting and we will place details on the web site when known.  We want to keep legal and above board.

ALL DONATIONS GRATEFULLY RECEIVED – Buckets at end of hall or you can donate by web site if you prefer we have set up PayPal to allow this.

We will now move to the questions and answer session.

Questions And Answer Session

Question:  How will they get the power out?

Answer:     John Lilley – Not sure usually they transport the power underground however you have a good grid line system in the area and they may use this.

Chairman – Can we have a show of hands as to who opposes the wind farm development?
The majority of the audience put their hands up i.e. about 99%

Question:  This is not a question but a statement – The consortium stated that some of the people left for personal reasons.  This is not true.  They left because they did not trust the two experts who attended the last meeting.  They are friends of mine and they want this information stressed that it was not personal reasons.

Chairman – the newspapers stated that the police asked the consortium to stay away.  Police who called tonight as the meeting started and then left stated  “You cannot believe everything you read in the papers”.

Comment – At the Thorney meeting the comment was made that the money in the Consortium fund for local peoples benefit depends on how much the developers get.  The more money paid into the fund means more money made by the developers.  The government pays 70% of this money that is funded from taxes.  We are therefore getting back our own money. 

Comment - congratulated councillors on being elected.  The person was here tonight to represent Geoffrey Tiitford member of European parliament and member of UKIP he just wanted to say that you are being stitched up.  There is no need for these things.  Please write to you as one of your MEPs and he will support you with your concerns. The information that the DTI is using comes from the wind farm people.  I.e. you have people acting as judge and jury.

He then quoted an old Latin phrase from Queens College Cambridge.  Translated it states -you cannot be a judge in your own case.  When you need help we can get your help from Silks or QC’s briefing on this.  Write to your MEP remember you the people are the Masters.

Chairman – Individual letters need to be ready.  Currently we have nothing official to protest about as planning has not gone in. Let us have a copy of them.  Please use our web site as a point of contact to find out when planning will go in.

Question:  What are RAF Marham’s comments, have they been informed?

Answer:     From Chairman – we do not want to discuss at the moment, but this is being considered.

Question:  Does Jane get vibrations regardless of which way the wind is blowing?

Answer:     Jane Davis  - Yes 24/7.  It varies in tone depending on if it is wet or dry.  When the turbines did not go round on at Christmas for 4 or 5 days, as it was foggy a mole returned for a short period of time and built a molehill.

Question:  People in the Marsh Road, Upwell have a cluster of 7 will they get problems.

Answer:     Jane Davis – Yes up to 1500 meters away.  At the scoping survey exercise you need to get opinion on this.  See the chart if you are within this area.

Chairman – We will have information on the Scoping survey on our web site next week.

Also note that we have laminated posters at back of hall for going into garden or on fences.  If you want a poster from your window please print off web site.  We can laminate more if people require.

Question:  If we filled in a questionnaire last time do we need to do so this time?

Answer:     Yes please some of the e-mail addresses were missing or incorrect.  We would appreciate if you can this allows us to know who has attended and can help.

Question:  Poster on web site is this the current one?

Answer:     Yes.  However if you want different ones let us know and we will produce for you.  You can if you wish amend the poster on the web site to personalise this.  We can organise to laminate in A4 size if you need.

Question:  Is it definite it will go to planning?

Answer:  Chairman passed question to Philip Potts.  The Scoping Survey is “the toe in the water”.  This shows what the consortium needs to put into the planning application.  Planners will look at this to see if happy or not.  The government is being put under pressure to approve.  When the planning application goes in you can then send off your letters of objection.  Make sure a copy goes to your committee, as it is not uncommon for some letters to go missing.    If the local council do not object - then no public enquiry.  If they have sufficient public pressure a public enquiry will be held.  Note that the decision is the governments for plans of over 50 mw.

Question: Norfolk CC Planning?

Answer: Philip Potts – If Kings Lynn turn down the plans the developers can go to public enquiry.   Dr John Lilley then quoted various acts that mean 50 mw or more approved by government.  This makes it easier for turbines to be built.  Jane Davis reported that two papers would be published next week.  One on Monday and a White paper on Wednesday.
Philip Potts  – information does need to go to the local authority first then to the Deputy Prime Ministers Office.

Look at your intelligence carefully and compare to reports.

Look at environmental impact study – the consortiums take short cuts.  One stated that the Bat Group had said no problems.  The local Bat counter was not contacted and the statement was untrue as they had one of the most rare breeds in the area.

Wildlife no problems – the Royal Ornithology Society gave damming report.

Projects have been delayed because intelligence has pulled holes in their arguments.  Use it well.

Local knowledge is important.

MP’s already saying too much money has gone into turbines.  Consortiums are trying to get as many OK’s before the rules change.

It is thought that in 18 months time there will be no further support for wind turbines.

Once they are up you are stuck with them.

SLOW DOWN THE PROCESS

Philip received a round of applause for his comments

Question:  I saw transports on A47 carrying turbines from Kings Lynn are these for Marshland St James.

Answer:     Chairman – No we would assume for Staggs Holt.

Question:  At the end of their useful life are they decommissioned and removed?

Answer:     Chairman - They could build another.  Philip Potts – they should dismantle and remove.  However, the 1000 tonnes of concrete does not have to be removed.

Question:  A young man was seen doing a soil survey near the pumping station is this significant?

Answer:     Chairman – there is a flurry of activity at present.  We do not know the state of play.

Question:  At the end of the life and they are taken down, if the land is classed as industrial is their more opportunity to build on this land?

Answer:     Chairman – this would be a reasonable assumption

Question:  Can landowners be stopped from putting up bird scarier to frighten birds off?

Answer:     Sue – do not know.

Question: Is it true that the local Borough Council has no problem with wind farm being built in the area?

Answer:     Chairman – The Borough Council had stated that no problem in building at Marshland as a Survey in 2003 identified our area as suitable for wind turbines.  I.e. any Inland Fen identified as suitable. The Borough Councillor who supported this is no longer on the board.  At recent elections another Councillor who does not want to see our countryside spoilt overthrew him.

Comment - The local Parish Council and Borough Council have known about the proposals since 2003 and have made no attempt to let the local people know.

Question:  Are they flood-proof.  If you build a house you need to take this into consideration will they?

Answer:     Chairman – this has been skimmed over and they need minimum of action to cover this point.

With no further questions the meeting closed at 9.40

The FLAT committee has worked hard to support you the local community and we thank you for supporting us and attending the meeting.  Our thanks also go to the speakers for the evening for taking the time to give us advice and guidance and for the factual information they have given us, which hopefully will dispel any myths you may have.  Please contact any of the committee members for further information or to offer support.

Thank you all for attending.

The minutes of this meeting have been prepared to record the main points as discussed, apologies are made for any omissions or errors caused through truncation of proceedings.  This is not a verbatim record.