In Part 1 STT readers learned of an effort by Collector’s locals to take back their pumpkin festival which had been purloined by a local (proposed) turbine host, Gary Poile, with the help of his benefactor, the Thai wind farm developer, RATCH.
Well, on the big day, to Gary’s horror, the locals turned up in numbers wearing T-Shirts proclaiming their hatred of giant industrial wind turbines.
A key organiser of the event, Poile was none too happy with the vocal crowd; and more than just a little surprised at the size and strength of the backlash. Seems Gary is happy to dish it out, but can’t take it when it’s coming back hard and heavy in his direction.
Gary must have been living under a rock to think that Collector’s true locals would join him singing the praises of these industrial monsters, over a plate of pumpkin scones.
Instead of celebrating, Gary had to suck up Collector’s victorious defence of its Pumpkin Patch and wire in his defeat to GHQ. Realising things had gone badly off the rails, the developer’s crack spin doctors were called in to try and hose things down.
Set out below is a taste of the developer’s “charm” offensive. But we pause to note the use of the word “concerns”.
It’s a favourite of the industry and its apologists – whether greentard bloggers or the government “enablers” – EPA and health department lackys, for example.
It’s a word deliberately used to diminish and downplay the seriousness of the charges levelled against the known and proven consequences of sticking giant industrial machines in closely settled rural areas, like Waubra, Waterloo and Macarthur.
It also comes straight from the developer’s legal department, which makes sure the goons never let slip anything that could be taken as an “admission” of liability to their victims.
Oh, and health and planning departments, EPAs etc all get the same advice – hence their overweening use of the same term. They have been squarely warned about their potential liability and have been told to spruik from the same “play-book” used by the industry’s goons.
What people stuck with industrial wind turbines, or desperately trying to avoid that prospect, are expressing are perfectly rational responses to a set of facts adverse to their lives, health, well-being and economic worth. None of which warrants the term “concerns”.
“Concerns” are what little old ladies have for the safety of their pet cat, “Tiddles” when he has managed to get himself stuck in a tree.
No need to be “concerned”, Granny – Tiddles is safe!
As George Orwell – a bloke who knew a thing or two about the way words are employed by the powerful and corrupt – put it:
If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought. A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation even among people who should and do know better.
Here’s the developer’s spin. Points awarded to readers for spotting the number of times he employs “think-speak”, as Orwell would have put it.
Dear Ms Granger
I’m not sure if we have met previously; however I expect you are aware that I am the Project Manager for the development approval phase of the Collector Wind Farm proposal.
From recent media it is clear that you have concerns about the project. As we have not met, and you apparently have not attended any of our previous information sessions, I wanted to extend an invitation to you to meet to discuss your concerns.
It would appear that you are Canberra-based. I am down in Canberra early tomorrow morning (Monday) and have a limited window in which I could meet you in the city between 8:30 and 9:30am after which time I will be in Collector (until early afternoon).
Would you please contact me on XXX XXX XXX should you wish to meet?
Kind regards
Nick Valentine
APP
Don’t you just love wind industry “smarm”?
Here’s local Collector lass, Lizzy Granger’s response. Lizzy, clearly not worried about upsetting the “thought police” lets rip with a cracker!
Good morning Nick
I’m a proud resident of Collector who does not want 150 metre high wind turbines anywhere near where my son and I live. I love Collector and the surrounding land, it’s very close to my heart. I’d like to ask you a question. Would you like to have 63, 150 metre high wind turbines within 3km’s of where you and your family live?
I doubt it!
I feel sorry that you are project managing a government scheme that will potentially ruin Australian communities and relationships within those communities. You guys talk about renewable energy, but at what cost? The property values of honest, good, hardworking Australian people loosing up to 50% value over 10-15 years?? – come on!!! Surely there’s another way!! … Put them somewhere else.
I have no interest in attending your meetings, I think you are blind siding rural communities with information that is unfounded or not well researched!!
Wind farms are uneconomical, cost millions in tax payer funds to run and ruin the landscape. Environmentalists complain when developers cut vegetation to build roads etc. Who’s fighting for us? Are you??
Do you know how much concrete goes into each one of these turbines, it kind of cancels out the whole clean energy debate. Concrete is one of two primary industrial producers of carbon dioxide.
Unless you’re prepared to listen to the people of Collector, then I have no interest in meeting with you.
Collector doesn’t want them, that’s the bottom line.
Regards
Lizzy Granger
Well done, Lizzy – let ‘em know what we all really think. STT is no fan of mincing words, so to Lizzy, we say: “hats off”!
So next time one of the industry’s parasites tells you they are keen to “discuss your concerns” give them a little taste of Lizzy’s medicine.
About stopthesethings
They never discuss anything, they just tell you what they have been told to tell you – lies and more lies. They have no interest in knowing what you are afraid off, they have no interest in seeing, reading or listening to evidence you have showing this industry is devoid of any ability to reduce Carbon emissions, provide efficient cost effective energy, safe guard the lives and environment of people and districts where they want to install their monsters.
The letter is full of contradictions, firstly he says he doesn’t know if he has met her before – is he meeting her now? He then says they have not met, and that she has not attended any previous information sessions – is there one going on when he wrote the letter?
He is being very considerate and will roll over to accommodate her with an appointment – but only offers a ‘small window’ of 1 hour on one particular day – how accommodating. That he ‘wanted’ to extend an invitation suggests he doesn’t now want to. He says the unattended sessions were ‘information’ sessions which says they were not question and answer sessions. So consultation is not a process they are willing to undertake.
It’s all a matter of this is what they are going to do and that’s that – a done deal, no opposition will be accepted, we don’t care to listen to questions about things we are not willing to talk about, they have to be only questions we can answer from the material we have put before you.
In other words you are stupid so we have to keep repeating what you have been given to read.
We are not so silly to provide full disclosure of all information we have which could reinforce opposition to our project. We know we are going to cause peoples lives, health and welfare to be turned upside down and ultimately destroyed, so we cannot give you the information you want and the information we have had hidden away in a vault for years.
That’s why all companies in this industry speak from the same book, act and treat people the same way, they are protecting themselves by shutting everyone outside of their circle off.
Honest and True..You go Girl!!!