Fairfield will take appeal to next level if she has to

supremecourt_gavelGrimsby Lincoln News, By Amanda Moore
In September local residents undertook the mammoth task of proving to a tribunal that wind turbines are impacting their health and the environment.

Further toughening the task was the fact they were only able to argue on the amended application to the HAF Wind Energy Project — which was filed in February after residents discovered four of the five industrial wind turbines were built closer to property lines than regulations stipulate without the required reports or agreements. Anne Fairfield and partner Ed Engel, who live on Sixteen Road and in her words are “surrounded by the project”, filed an appeal to the original renewable energy approval shortly after it was granted in June 2013. That appeal was filed on the grounds the project will impact residents’ health, its impediment on rights granted to Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and its impact on air traffic and water wells. Read article

12 thoughts on “Fairfield will take appeal to next level if she has to

  1. Seems like a waste of time and money. When they asked her who her Dr. was, Fairfield replied, “I am my own Doctor. I really don’t see how the entire court did not erupt into laughter.

    • Clearly you are missing the point. This is a good thing – acknowledgement that MOE doesn’t do their job. Your own personal issues are clouding your judgement.

  2. By how much are these measurements off?
    Who did the survey work? In house or out-side survey contractor?

    Another submission allowed two years later. Original measurements false? Amended a contract that used false information to begin with? FIX the problem?

    There are both civil and criminal actions that can be taken for using false information to get a government contract.

    This reporter has done great work!

    • Issue is whether or not FALSE MEASUREMENTS were used to obtain a government contract to begin with.

      Then possible amendment to the contract terms two years later to fix the problem?

      Issues need to be separated out in this situation and where else has this occurred.

      • Good for our side that MOE had to admit they screwed up and just “trusted” the proponent.

      • The issue is did the company submit false measurements to get a contract?

        Later finds out that this has been discovered.

        Goes to government to fix the measurement problems. This is corruption because they are trying to correct/change the false information that was submitted to begin with.

      • It doesn’t matter if government employees looked at the information that was submitted or not. It’s up to the party seeking the contract that has to make sure the information they submit is correct or true to obtain a contract.

      • If government employees looked at information submitted to obtain a contract and knew that the information was false then they can become involved in contract fraud.

      • If I submit false information to get a government contract then I am the person that is to blame. What’s so difficult to understand about this?

        Some local lawyers do handle construction contracts so they can explain contract law. So at least there is a local source for information.

      • Local lawyers are likely related to people from the neighbourhood doing work for the wind companies or hosting IWTs and would be reluctant to comment on the matter.

        Better to gather that kind of info from an arms length source.

      • Right about local lawyers who might have a conflict of interest.

        And the most important issue is to sort out the different issues involved in this situation. Or who is responsible for what.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *