Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

87. To ask the Minister for Housing, Planning, and Local Government if he will suspend planning applications for onshore wind turbine developments until the planning guidelines for such developments are updated; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11921/23]

Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A very large number of applications are being made for onshore wind turbine projects but the planning guidelines were produced in 2006 and need to be updated. Will applications for these planning permissions be suspended until the guidelines are updated?

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My Department is currently undertaking a focused review of the 2006 wind energy development guidelines, which the Deputy referenced. The review is addressing a number of key aspects, including noise, set-back distance, shadow flicker, community obligation, community dividend and grid connections. I am aware there are a great many applications throughout the country. Guidance on the noise aspect is currently being finalised by my Department in conjunction with the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, which has primary responsibility for environmental noise matters. In this connection that Department is due to procure an acoustic expert shortly to inform any amendments to the noise aspect of the guidelines. This is quite a technical piece of work and I appreciate it will take some time. Following this, my Department will be in a better position to provide an update on the expected publication date of the revised guidelines. It should also be noted that the review of the guidelines has been included as a specific action in the recently published Climate Action Plan 2023.

Proposals for wind energy developments are subject to the statutory requirements of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, in the same manner as other forms of proposed development. As such, I have no plans to place a moratorium on planning applications for wind energy developments pending the finalisation of the revised guidelines.

It is also important to state that the existing 2006 guidelines are still in place and are still used for the purposes of consideration of individual planning applications. The planning policy in the legislative framework is already in place. We await and obviously are all eagerly anticipating the revised guidelines coming forward.

Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State. There are two projects in my constituency at the moment where the size of the turbines is far beyond anything that was contemplated back in 2006. Further information has come from research on the noise. It is called sonic noise, which is a silent noise that affects people. There is also the question of the proximity to residents. All of this information is coming out in the vacuum. Where there are hundreds of houses within 1 km of one of these projects, the Minister of State can just imagine how communities are rising up against such projects. The promoters of these projects are not actually communicating other than dropping something in a letterbox. They are also being slick with the landowners when talking to them. They are not doing any public consultation or actually engaging with communities.

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I stress that, whatever the project, be it a wind energy project or any development, it is critically important and there is a need for the proposers of a project to engage in a meaningful way. There is an obligation to do so under the public participation directive in the Aarhaus Convention. It is important to stress that it is no longer good enough just to drop leaflets in letterboxes. It is important to engage through public meetings and public events at the preplanning stage. Certainly, to my understanding, the new guidelines will reference that, as do the existing guidelines. In developing the new guidelines, we have a challenge with the noise aspect issue, which is technical in nature, and it is important to get that right. We have existing guidelines in place which include elements around public participation, as do county development plans. It is important there is meaningful engagement and that it is not tokenistic and not box-ticking consultation.

Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I can assure the Minister of State that, on the two projects I am dealing with at the moment, it is a box-ticking exercise. The first that people knew about it was when a letter came in the door. There was a public meeting coming up, and the day before the public meeting, another drop was put into letter boxes. Any engagement with the agent has consisted of comments such as “I do not know” or “I will come back to you”. I rang the agent for one of the projects about six months ago. I posed six questions and still await the answers. Effectively what is happening is that what should be a good thing, creating green energy, is being turned into projects that divide communities. We are handling it wrongly. We are ceding control to investors. I am not talking about vulture funds but investors. We do not know who they are. They will not attend a public meeting or make their case. They are playing mind games, trying to divide communities, setting people against one another and causing division. That is the last thing we need. That is what is happening right now in Clonbern and Belclare, where both these projects are taking place. Farmers are also being hoodwinked. It is wrong and needs immediate action.

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

While I will not go into the specifics of any application, the three Ministers here are in full agreement that it is unacceptable that there is this lack of engagement. It is critically important, and I will stress this again, that engagement is meaningful, timely, done at preplanning stage and in a way that is participative and inclusive. Any proposer of any project needs to adhere to this. I will say as a general point that proposers on any project need to ensure they are in full compliance with the Aarhaus Convention and with the public participation directive and ensure engagement is meaningful with the whole community. As Deputy Canney said, in the absence of information, all sorts of speculation and rumours become rife. People need facts, to be informed to be able to make informed decisions, and to participate adequately and properly in the planning process.