New Environmental Commissioner: Wind Turbine Lover Dianne Saxe

saxeToronto Star: “MPPs did agree on Dianne Saxe, a veteran environmental lawyer, as Ontario’s new environment commissioner, replacing Gord Miller, who retired last spring after three terms.


I suppose this is just one more pig for Orwell’s barnyard. Most of you are too familiar with Dianne – she loves turbines and trashes anyone who dares to object to them on her blog. So much for an unbiased Commissioner.

I was listening to the legislature today (okay, don’t fault me for that, I won’t make a habit of it) and when they announced her for Commissioner I choked, then they asked if there were any objections. Oh you better believe I was yelling at the computer, “YES!!! Dammit, I OBJECT!!”. To no avail because apparently we don’t get to vote these people in, or shoe them out.

Oh yeah, and have a look at what she presents to the American Bar Association: A Short History of Wind Litigation in Ontario. Amazing, she’s an expert on this litigation and I highly doubt she ever attended a single ERT hearing.

I went to one of her pro wind meetings in Clinton (I think) a few years back. My dad and I sat down with our notepads near the front. Soon our friends the police found us and said “Hi”, probably a tad embarrassed that they had been asked to attend when it was only us. Turns out the group was worried they (or she) would be mobbed by us bad anti wind people. I guess she was ramping security in practice for her future fame…

39 thoughts on “New Environmental Commissioner: Wind Turbine Lover Dianne Saxe

  1. Ms Saxe is President of WindShare Co-operative, a for-profit wind power co-operative.
    If this is not conflict of interest what is?

    • She has shares/ownership in this wind-co-op. So is not independent in her opinion about wind turbines.

  2. OWR Homepage is still down using Google Chrome, Bing and DuckDuckGo search engines.

    Got here via the “backdoor”.

  3. This woman and all judges who preside on cases concerning wind turbines and their negative impacts need to be forced somehow to spend several days surrounded by turbines and their infrastructure…preferably on days when the atmospheric conditions and wind speeds are such that the wide variety of sounds and the infrasound radiation are peaking.

  4. What is going on here??? How did “nature groups” suddenly get access to the appeal courts, while citizens have been blocked for years? Remember that same Ontario court of appeal refused to hear Juilian Falconer’s Charter Challenge.

    Can anyone please clarify the process going on here? Is there a paper trail? Any documents to or from the courts?

    • In the OP affair, the first ERT decision was appealed to the court which overturned the ERT and that decision was then appealed to the court again which was then sent it back for another ERT.

      Now at the 2nd ERT. Along the way through this process other environmental organizations also were involved in the legal process and participated in this process.

      1. First ERT.
      2. First ERTdecision appealed to the court.
      3.First court decision was appealed and sent back for another ERT.
      4. Second ERT now in progress.

      Yes, there is a huge legal paper trail.

  5. Barbara,

    The specific question I have is how does the “appeal court” grant a new hearing (presumably hearing new evidence, as well) when they have just told the ERT to decide? Don’t they have to wait for the ERT (re-hearing) first, before a fresh appeal can be granted?

    • Probably expect this 2nd ERT decision to be appealed as well. There is a lot at stake here in just considering that pension fund money is invested in this project which could be lost if this project goes down.

      • Barbara, do we know which pension fund(s) are invested in OP? This it turning out to be an ugly thing for a public sector group to be invested in.

      • Ostrander Point Wind Energy LP

        OPTrust + Gilead Power

        OPTrust is OPSEU/Ontario Public Service Employees Union

        It’s a No-No to lose employee pension funds in failed investments/ventures. Consider the back-lash in such a situation?

      • HighBeam Research, June 25, 2015

        “The third-biggest wind farm in Australia, costing $A 450 million, will be built near Ararat in south-western Victoria, and will supply 40 per cent of its output to the Australian Capital Territory.” The project shareholders include Canada’s OPTrust.

        http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-419324394.html

        Subscription required for full text.

    • The appeals court ordered the 2nd ERT. This was the decision of the appeals court to do so.

    • At Enron, they thought they were so smart.

      Andy Fastow was awarded “CFO of the year”, and then shortly after served six years in prison.

      They were so “out-of-control”.

      They didn’t even have control of the basics.

      Like, at any point in time, they didn’t know how much cash the company had or when their debts were due.

      Their accounting was so “creative” (so “brilliant!” they said) that some people couldn’t understand it. Really, it just made no sense.

      And now it’s 2015.

      And you have an idiot from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment in charge of OPTrust funds, investing in wind turbines in Australia.

      Sounds explosive!

      ——————————

      ‘[excerpt] July 1, 2015
      Former Enron chief financial officer Andrew Fastow says that following accounting rules to the letter contributed to the infamous collapse of the US energy trader and landed him in jail.

      In a candid and wide-ranging presentation at the FT Camp Alphaville summit dubbed “The Smart Guy in the Room”, he cautioned that modern accounting methods could be legal while still presenting a misleading picture of a company’s health.

      “There may be a fundamental difference between a company following the rules and a company presenting a true picture of its financial position,” he told an audience assembled for the annual get-together for the FT’s financial and markets bloggers and its readers.

      Clutching a trophy he won after being named CFO of the year in the early 2000s, Mr Fastow said he had won it for services to off-balance sheet financing, adding that people did not win awards for that any more.
      In his other hand he held his US Federal prison ID — which he said he was given for exactly the same deals that won him the CFO award…’
      ft.com

      • Now the UN is busy changing the accounting requirements to make them provide less public company financial information than the present U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission requires.

        And the U.S. is complying with this. Said to make financial reporting information uniform across the world but with less public financial information required. Canada is going along with this as well. Guess who will benefit from this!

  6. Richard, if you are finding that the legal process is absurd, you may (or may not) take solace knowing some of us have taken a stab at some alternatives.

    For example, Dr. Mahtab Kamali, an engineer and researcher at University of Waterloo wanted to do some sound study of the wind turbines at Clear Creek, Norfolk County in late 2011, as part of the RETH research group. (These wind turbines are located only 350 metres from homes.) As part of that process she wrote to victims asking “what bothered you most, audible noise, low frequency or vibration?” However, since at that point she hadn’t provided any written description about her research, nor ethics approval, the victim objected to this request for personal information.

    But then Kamali denied that she had asked for “personal information”! and even stated that it would be “inappropriate” for her to do so! Complaints were made to the Office of Research Ethics, eventually finding its way up to Vice President George Dixon, and they all denied that it had been ‘a request for personal information’.

    (They even attempted to minimize the relevance of the Nuremberg Code!)

    But consider the situation. Here’s an engineer, recognizing that people were being “bothered” to the extent of having to flee their homes. But from the perspective of the UW researchers, they perceived they didn’t have any responsibility to extricate the victims. Kamali had been asked to state, before going any further, whether she felt it was “safe” to live within these proximities, given what was already known, but she declined to answer the question.

    And then there’s the issue of whether her question was even valid, from an engineering perspective.The victim thought that the answer to the question was the purpose of her research! (and said so!) At 350 metres, it’s awfully hard to differentiate what’s MOST bothersome, audible noise, low frequency noise, or vibration. What could have been the repercussions of answering the question, particularly when research ethics, confidentiality, etc, had not been represented?

    On the issue of whether it was “personal information”, consider that the answer to the question “what bothered **YOU** the most”, is not available in a textbook, and that it’s a question about a very traumatic, personal experience, relating to that person’s health status. But the researchers, the Office of Research Ethics, and even the VP-Academic, all denied that it was a request for personal information.

    It seems beyond absurd, to me. Maybe fraudulent, or at least, delusional. But it’s interesting to ponder where we might be now if university researchers had viewed their ethical obligations in a different light.

    This is not an attack against you, obviously. It’s just an observation about our culture and the high standards that some of us expect of publicly-funded universities in Canada.

    Be thankful for your tenure.

  7. Google search engine still does not have the OWR Homepage as of Wednesday evening Sept.16th.

  8. ERT tribunals which have a 98% approval rate, and are appealed to a court if they do not get it right first time. Just keep repeating the hearings till they get the answer wind companies desire.
    An “Environment Commissioner” who is a dedicated industrial wind plant enthusiast.
    Welcome to Ont of 2015. For political bias and corruption nothing comes close.

    • The MOE has designed an extortive process
      and the Ontario Ombudsman will be damned-
      sure it’s followed!

  9. Forbes, Sept.14, 2015

    Subject is the new North Carolina IWT Project.

    The new Desert Wind IWT project, North Carolina, is only 14 miles from the U.S. ROTHR site at Hampton Roads Naval Base.

    Government studies concluded that any IWT project within 28 miles from ROTHAR would severely degrade ROTHAR . ROTHAR is involved in U.S. national security.

    http://www.forbes.com/jamesconca/2015/09/14/amazons-jeff-bezos-parachutes-into-north-carolina-to-save-wind-power

    Can’t let radar or national security issues interfere with IWT projects.

  10. My God. Who decided to post that picture. Makes KW look like princess Fionna durrng the day. Lol. Who would even want to approach her. The hiddious thing. Gonna spew all night and have nightmares. Ugh

  11. South Branch Wind Farm, Brinston, ON

    EDPR project and the parent company is Energias de Portugal, Lisbon founded 1976 which owns EDP Renovaveis S.A.

    ‘Avoiding Tax in Times of Austerity’ Sept., 2013

    “Energias de Portugal (edp) and the Role of the Netherlands in Tax Avoidance in Europe”

    http://www.eurodad.org/files/pdf/523c4e96e92c0.pdf

    • KidWind Org., St Paul, MN

      In 2014, EDPR sponsored/funded teacher training.

      KIDWind has K-12 programs/projects on renewable energy.

      EDPR furnishes information to schools where they have built or are building wind farms.

      http://www.kwind.me/future-of-renewables

      KidWind is now RE Charge Labs.

      Visit the website for more information.

  12. NEWS

    GreenPac, Canada, Sept.29, 2015

    Candidates: Announcing the “Green 18”

    See the list @ http://www.greenpac.ca/candidates

    Includes candidates for the up-coming election from Ontario and across Canada.

    GreenPAC Canada is a U.S. style political PAC created in March 2015 in Canada.

  13. “The Volkswagen emissions scandal: A case study in corporate misbehaviour”
    Tima Bansal, Michael King, Gerard Seijts
    Contributed to The Globe and Mail
    Published Saturday, Sep. 26, 2015

    ‘[excerpt] The news that Volkswagen rigged its diesel engines to falsify emissions tests is shocking. Business leaders may not always get it right, but how VW got it so wrong is truly baffling. This corporate misbehaviour is unacceptable from any of the perspectives we teach in our classrooms…

    The financial sector has seen a string of scandals: mis-selling of mortgages, fixing market benchmarks, aiding tax evasion and money laundering, illegal insider trading, to name a few. A minority of unscrupulous people is to blame. Most people are decent, hard-working, and well-intentioned – society needs them to speak up when they witness unethical behaviour. When one voice speaks up, others will follow…’

    • And perhaps as much as $20 trillion “trading CO2 paper”?

      Don’t even need a pick-axe to participate in this gold-rush!

Leave a Reply

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