Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have been sent a copy of a letter that the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, sent to Westmeath County Council on 15 February last. Basically, the letter informs the council that a democratic decision made by councillors will be overruled. The vote in question relates to the locations and set-back distances for wind turbine developments in the county development plan. The councillors voted that industrial wind turbines should be strictly limited to cut-over or cut-away bogs. They agreed on a set-back distance from occupied dwellings of ten times the height of the turbine. The letter that was sent by the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, basically tells the members of the council that the democratic decision they took was not in line with national policy, as set out in the Planning and Development Act. Perhaps I am naive, but I believed this Government's promise of a so-called democratic revolution when it first came to power. So far, it has delivered an all-out attack on local government and local democracy. That has been my experience.

I do not need to remind the Minister of State that the wind turbine issue is a very controversial topic, not least in the midlands area. It has been proposed that industrial wind turbines will generate large volumes of energy to be exported to Britain. Sinn Féin will soon introduce legislation to provide for minimum set-back distances for wind turbine development.

I ask the Minister of State to take heed of local concerns over wind turbine projects. The local people are better able to identify whether an area is suitable for such developments than somebody sitting in the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, who does not know the lie of the land. Local people know local areas best.

I am concerned over the letter the Minister of State sent. It looks like the Government is trying to steamroll through these developments without paying heed to local democracy through the votes of those who represent the concerns of local residents. It is not acceptable in a modern democracy. It is not just bad planning policy. It is bad policy, full stop. I ask the Minister of State to change her mind on her decision to block the democratic voices of Westmeath County Council. I believe all parties were represented in this vote. I ask her to respect the wishes of the people of Westmeath and the people of Ireland because it is time for a total rethink of our national energy strategy.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy raised as a Topical Issue the very general issue of set-back distances. He has now specifically raised an issue in Westmeath. While I will answer the general point, I wish to point out that the directive is a draft directive and not a final directive. As there is an ongoing process with the local authority, I will not comment further on that specific issue at this point.

I thank the Deputy for raising this Topical Issue. As he will recall from our previous debate, I commenced a public consultation on 11 December 2013 on proposed draft revisions to the existing 2006 wind energy development guidelines focusing specifically on the issues of noise, set-back and shadow flicker.

The draft revisions propose the setting of a more stringent absolute noise limit, day and night, of 40 decibels for future wind energy developments. This limit is an outdoor limit - in general the reduction of noise levels between the outside of a dwelling and inside would be approximately 10 decibels. The draft revisions propose a mandatory set-back distance of 500 m between a wind turbine and the nearest dwelling for amenity considerations. The draft revisions propose that a condition be attached to all future planning permissions for wind farms to ensure there will be no shadow flicker at any dwelling within ten rotor diameters of a wind turbine. If shadow flicker does occur, the wind energy developer or operator will be required to take necessary measures, such as turbine shut down for the period necessary, to eliminate the shadow flicker.

It is important to emphasise that the mandatory setback of 500 m is for amenity considerations, including visual amenity, and is not proposed as a noise control measure. To ensure an evidence-based approach to this issue, Marshall Day Acoustics, which has previously assisted the Australian and New Zealand governments in their reviews on wind energy, was commissioned to prepare a study on wind noise, which was a significant input into this review. Marshall Day Acoustics recommended that an absolute noise limit be strongly considered as a noise control method rather than set-back. On the issue of set-back, Marshall Day stated:

The relationship between distance from a wind turbine or wind farm and noise effects is significant, and there is little means of future proofing when specifying minimum set back distances. In this respect, setbacks therefore have the potential to either over-protect or under-protect wind farm neighbours. It is therefore recommended that setbacks are not used as a control method [on their own].

Therefore, on the basis of the technical advice received, the draft guidelines address the issue of noise control through a more stringent absolute noise limit, day and night, of 40 decibels for future wind energy developments, combined with a minimum set-back distance requirement of 500 m for amenity considerations, including visual amenity. The proposed noise limit takes into account both the World Health Organization findings on night-time noise and the review of international practice undertaken by Marshall Day Acoustics.

More than 7,000 submissions have been received in my Department on the draft revisions to the wind energy development guidelines during the public consultation phase, a substantial number of which were on the issue of set-back distances, and I will certainly give these views careful consideration prior to finalising the revisions to the guidelines.

Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are three elements to the issue. The first element is the planning guidelines and legislation for the wind turbines. The second element is the wider planning and critical infrastructure policy, procedures and legislation. The third element is the Government's view of what local government and local governance should mean.

The Minister of State has said this was a draft directive and that she will not comment on it. That is like the HSE west-north west hospital group suggesting it is only a proposal to remove maternity services from Sligo General Hospital and that a decision has not been made. It is like saying the Environmental Protection Agency is considering only hydraulic fracturing and that a decision had not been made. They are both considering something that should not happen anyway. It would be the express opinion of the people in the affected areas that these things should not happen and should not be even discussed.

It is foolish to process wind farm planning applications when the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, has indicated that he will shortly publish a Green Paper on energy and when we have been told that no financial arrangements have been discussed with the British Government for our midlands being used as a giant British offshore wind energy farm.

Similarly elected members of Leitrim County Council, representing Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Sinn Féin and Independent, voted by a large majority to have fracking banned in the county development plan, yet the EPA is spending its time and taxpayers' money on continuing research into something that anybody, who cares for the next generation, would know should not be allowed under any circumstances or any regulatory regime.

This is not reform of local government and whatever it is, it is not democracy.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The current guidelines remain in existence. The draft guidelines I have proposed are from the Deputy's perspective an improvement. Existing guidelines call for a 500 m set-back, but it is not mandatory. I am proposing that it would be mandatory. They also provide for an improvement with regard to noise and the eradication of shadow flicker. These draft guidelines would improve the existing situation. I cannot say what will be in the final guidelines. I have received 7,000 submissions by last Friday's closing date. I expect we will be able to publish the final version of the guidelines by the end of June. It is not true to say that if I were not doing this, things somehow would be better. In fact what we are proposing represents an improvement from the perspective of local people.

On the Deputy's point about democracy, I remind him about the Mahon tribunal. Some local authorities made planning decisions that gave rise to a tribunal of inquiry resulting in a recommendation for a planning regulator. We need to have planning policy side by side with local democracy. We need national guidelines to guide decisions made locally. Nobody would want us not to have any national guidelines. For example, I issued a directive to a local authority that wanted to change its county development plan to allow for building on a flood plain. I believe I was right to do that.

We need balance between national policy, good planning and local democracy. I am quite happy to stand over that balance. In this case we need a balance between national policy on reducing our dependence on fossil fuels through using the natural energy we have and the needs of local communities. That is what I intend to ensure when we publish the final guidelines on wind energy.