“Public Consultation” under Ontario’s Green Energy Act

PART 1 PARTS 2, 3, 4 –>
PART 2
PART 3
PART 4

21 thoughts on ““Public Consultation” under Ontario’s Green Energy Act

  1. So what’s next? The wind company can demand that all members of the public entering these meetings must hop on one foot or they cannot enter, and will the police enforce this arbitrary demand as though it was part of the criminal code? Have we gotten to the point in this province when wind companies make the law and the OPP do their bidding? WHERE ARE THE BLOODY LAWYERS?

  2. There’s a new type of farming in (Ontario Liberal) Ontario….It’s called ‘Farming for Subsidies’….

  3. Local municipalities should only rent facilities to these wind companies on the condition that these heavy-handed tactics will not be tolerated. Has the Municipal Council for this Millbrook meeting sent a letter of protest to the Premier’s Office, the MOE and the MEI over the treatment of their citizens? Where are the civil rights and human rights organizations now?

  4. At public meetings company staff can say whatever as nothing is binding. It means these open houses are no more than an opportunity for someone to see what the company wants to display. If there is a problem, unless it is against the law, the company staff will provide lip service only. Without the great footage captured by local people no outsider would have a clue. Where is the media? Why are they not reporting on this scam? Who is keeping reporters from telling the truth? Regardless of what a reporter may know or not know about wind turbines, you would think they would figure something must be horribly wrong for a company to walk into Ontario with a guarantee of money providing a useless product.

  5. Lynne,

    The wind turbine industry employs many contract and environmental lawyers and more would probably like to work for them.

    As soon as a party rents a facility then the rules are on their side.

    Same as a party renting a facility for a reception or for an informational meeting.

    When you rent a facility for a wedding reception you expect to have control over the facility during the time you have rented it.

    If municipalites just allowed the wind turbine companies to use the facility free then the municipalites can set the conditions of use for an informational meeting.

  6. So I guess it’s Official!…we now live in a POLICE STATE!
    What are WE going to do about it?

  7. From the website of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

    http://www.priv.gc.ca/information/02_05_d_08_e.cfm

    “After all, control over your personal information is key to preserving your privacy, an important right that is tied to personal autonomy, freedom of thought and speech, and liberty of movement and assembly.

    The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada has prepared this overview of PIPEDA, and how it can help protect your privacy.

    Your Rights under PIPEDA
    PIPEDA requires private-sector organizations to collect, use or disclose your personal information by fair and lawful means, with your consent, and only for purposes that are stated and reasonable.”

  8. I agree with you Lynne but it’s always smart to first protect yourself if you can.

    Perhaps it would be best before one attends Wind Operator informational meetings to determine if the premises is a rented or donated/free and if it is a public or private premise.

    The rules are different. Expect the wind turbine operator’s lawyers know what they can and cannot do in the various venues they use for their informational meetings.

  9. I’m not sure where Mr. Pennie is getting his figures on the range of electric cars.

    “The cost of $2.50 for charging a car for a 400km trip is a real win… ”

    The range of a fully-charged Chevy Volt is 64km.

  10. Barbara, according to PIPEDA, organizations must disclose why they need the information and what they intend to do with it. These are federal laws. I don’t think that is being done here. Companies will do whatever they want unless they are called on it by another attorney or judge.

  11. Lynne,

    You are right but the companies get away with this because the “little” people can’t fight them in court.

    Only thing we can do is try to protect ourselves.

  12. What about conducting “information pickets” just off the premises, so that our word can get out to the same people attending these so-called “open houses”?

    And what about employing a new generation of protest signs? Anyone with a shred of curiousity would surely wonder what “Stop Vascular Impacts”, “Assaults With a Deadly Weapon” or “Industrialization Without Representation” signs are referring to? The old “Stop Wind Turbines” signs simply get dismissed as NIMBY chatter. Throwing the real issues in peoples’ faces might just get them and the press to do some hard thinking for a change.

  13. I would like to thank David for not losing his cool or focus and letting us see how we are being treated by our own gov paid employees ie the OPP .Are any of our elected representives going to step up to the plate and stop this travesty???

  14. I nearly killed myself laughing at the end of Part 3 when the turbine rep says, “We would NOT do anything unethical…” and the smart general public chap says, ever so tongue-in-cheek, “that’s reassuring, that’s EXTREMELY reassuring”! Way too funny…and judging by all the other comments made by wind reps in this movie, I’d have to say I’m pretty darn sure the windy is-a-lying! Kudos to the good folk in the movie and the person who took the time to film/edit and post! I love the boldness.

  15. These wind-reps look extremely young .. as if they’re still in school for gosh sakes. Maybe they are the wind-entrepeneurs’ own kids, eh? I hope they have the guts to read-up on the wind-victims’ experiences and not just take their money-grubbing elders’ word on it all. Its so depressing to think that people so young might be without scuples. But money can sway all ages I guess!

  16. Most of the ‘company’ people in these videos — i.e., the people supposedly ‘answering’ the questions from members of the public — are representatives of M.K. Ince & Associates rather than Energy Farming Ontario Inc.

    There were two EFO representatives in the video clips whom I recognized: Brian Crosby and Gordon Wambach.

    Brian Crosby is the EFO representative in the first video clip (see approx. 3:03 into the clip), who stated, “My role is doing wind studies and land security for the company”.

    Gordon Wambach is the (non-Canadian) EFO representative in the second video clip who stated, “I do not have to answer your questions. This is an open house. I do not have to answer your questions.”

    When asked about the WHO 1,500m setback, Gordon stated (see approx. 5:25 of third clip), “It just won’t work here” and goes on to say that is because of the “concessions and houses”.

    I will be certain to add some of the direct quotes made by both Brian and Gordon from EFO Inc., and a number of other comments made by the M.K. Ince & Associates representatives to my “Evaluation Form” I will be mailing to M.K Ince & Associates.

    It is imperative that attendees of the ‘Public Open Houses’ do take away the ‘Evaluation Form’ and mail it in later.

    I type out my feedback, then mail a copy to the person named on the ‘Evaluation Form’. I also email a copy to the appropriate MOE official(s), MPPs, members of Council, etc.–to be certain that my comments and concerns are included as part of the process.

  17. If you feel that the public was misinformed or mistreated in any way, it always helps the cause to express your concerns directly to the Energy Minister Brad Duguid: bduguid.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org, as well as Doris Dumais from the MOE: Doris.Dumais@ontario.ca
    Of course writing to Dalton doesn’t hurt but the two above mentioned people are more likely to respond. I have received a response from Ms. Dumais in particular.

  18. Thank you for the video tapes. We can see the fine examples of questions that our Ontario public has put forth. Thank you again for exposing the dismissive behaviour that these Industrial Wind companies use against the public they are supposed to consult.
    The police need to understand that it us who need them. Not the Industrial Wind Turbine companies who are using them as a shield to the public.

  19. This is a terrible company (EFO) I went to thier first meeting in August of 2009, they like to stonewall attendees by not giving any information on the location of the turbines due to ‘privacy concerns of the landowner’. They like to host frustrating meetings with no organization, no formal question and answer, just a bunch of frustrated people firing questions at company reps milling about. They demanded we sign in at that meeting too. Have hope! We will stop these turbines!

  20. This is all so depressing. I was uplifted when I saw some other articles about protests in Canada. We in the US are still sitting on our hands. I believe the media at least here in the U.S. have absolutely no interest in reporting anything that brings up facts or issues “wind energy”. “It’s green it’s got to be good”. Give me a break… A lot of the news media just don’t have a clue. If we can get the mass media to look at the problem we may have a chance. I think there is a so much money floating out there and we.. the ordinary citizens don’t have anything to say about what’s going on.
    The only thing that will stop it is shutting off the valve of money that goes to these companies and this industry.

  21. Bette: Stopping the taxpayers’ money would stop Industrial Wind Turbines in their tracks. The tax base is the only money pot big enough to interest these companies. They have formulated a way to tap into that money pot and are having a feeding frenzy, paying others, with our tax money, to help keep the pot open. The problem is these companies are such a large drain there is a limit to the money pot as countries in Europe are finding out. Other programs suffer and people realize they are getting nothing in return, not even additional electricity as conventional power plants will continue to be needed and built. Politicians are the source to get at the money. So one has to ask why a politician would support a development that has a bad track record in other countries. Even the media is having a hard time covering the mess IWTs have caused in Europe.

Comments are closed.