Richard O'Donoghue: Demands answers on wind farm health impacts

This goes back to when you were Taoiseach and we had a meeting over wind farms and you were asked five parliamentary questions which you responded to two immediately. You delayed the response to two more and they came to you on the 22nd of October and you delayed them until the day of the election to respond to the other two and you have never yet responded to one. To clarify for how many years wind farms applications have been approved without HSE oversight. Why onboard Panola ceased informing the HSE of such applications, whether onboard Panola was instructed to stop the practice and who is responsible for ensuring public health risk are properly assessed in the planning process. To ask the response to parliamentary questions published in October 22nd regarding HSE involvement in wind farm planning were delayed for five weeks, held by your department and only referred to the HSE on the day of the general election. And to request the outstanding question to be fully answered. To the Taoiseach to State, Government's official position on health impact on wind farms, given the absence of the HSE input in the planning process and growing concerns for affected communities. Planners lack the expertise to access public health risk, so why did ABP stop informing the HSE? Were they instructed to stop and who was liable? What is the State's position on wind farms and their health impacts? Finally, the High Court has ruled that wind turbine noise is a nuisance. So, Taoiseach, will you provide a written response confirming whether wind farms noise at 43 decibels LA90 is considered a statutory nuisance? On that basis, does the Government reject the High Court judgment on wind turbine noise as a nuisance? I want to go back and answer the questions. The guidelines for wind farms have not been updated since 2006. In 2013, I have video evidence from the now Taoiseach asking him for the guidelines to be upgraded. I have a full written part of his concerns at the time. Since then, Michal Martin and yourself have been in Government for a number of years and you have not updated the guidelines. Even though there are implications to health risks. If you could answer the question I have given you in writing and the other responses to me, please. Thank you Deputy. I want to thank Deputy O'Donoghue for the question. I want to thank Deputy O'Donoghue for the question. I want to thank Deputy O'Donoghue for the question. I want to thank Deputy O'Donoghue for meeting with me with now Minister Canney and bringing some of your constituents to see me in relation to this issue. Let me firstly say, it was very clear to me the stress and the anxiety, the worry that the people you brought to meet me were experiencing. I acknowledge that. Before we get into science and guidelines and everything else, I accept the bona fides of that, the worry and the stress, and they were talking to me about the impact that it was having on them. That is one of the reasons why in the Programme for Government, we did explicitly state the need to make progress in relation to updated guidelines on this matter. Let me also say this, I accept this has gone on far too long, I accept that, because this has been talked about for a long number of years. It is also my view, and yes, I will reply in writing to each of those specific questions, and thank you for suggesting I do that. But I also think this idea of the HSE being a notifiable organisation is common sense, so let me just establish that. I think that would certainly assist in closing the loop in terms of some of the issues that people are raising pending the guidelines. The factual position for the record of the House is that the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage is progressing the focus review of the wind energy development guidelines. The review is looking at a number of key aspects, including noise, setback distance, shadow flicker, community obligation, community dividend and grid connections. They are working in conjunction with the Department of Climate, Environment and Energy, because that has primary responsibility for environmental noise matters. They have been working to advance guidance on the noise aspect of the guidelines, which I am informed is highly technical in nature. These two departments have been engaging on proposals regarding the measurement and the assessment of noise from wind turbines to ensure that they are robust and fit for purpose, having regard to various targets that have been set. Further to this engagement, I am informed that the Department of Communications, Environment and Energy appointed noise consultants in May of 2023 to work on amendments to those aspects of the guidelines. I am informed that this work is now substantially complete. The Department of Housing in conjunction with the Department of Communications will make any further changes to draft guidelines which are deemed necessary in wake of this work. Once published, there will be an opportunity for people to engage on this. In advance of the work, the evolving policy, and this is also fair because we have had new planning legislation, including the new planning and development act and the national planning framework. This does need to make sure that the finalised guidelines are in line with both that piece of legislation and the new national planning framework as well. While the current guidelines do remain in force, the work and the acceleration of the work on new wing guidelines is underway. I will provide you with written answers to each of the specific matters you have raised. Thank you. I am now going to go back to what Michail Martin had said in 2013. You are taking health issues from producers and manufacturers and ignoring world health guidelines. In the words of Michail Martin of 2013, full absence of transparency, absence of consultation with residents, above all absence legislation framework, health implications in the terms of noise, shadow flicker, deduction amenities, negative visual impact. Michail Martin quoted from a Professor Alan Evans wrote in the British Medical Journal, sympathised in our plight, if this goes ahead it will ruin your lives. Michail Martin's words again, planning guidelines of 2006 are outdated and the framework for the new technology. Michail Martin requested in 2013 that we accelerate the process. We are 12 years down, people and their families have been health implications, communities have been devastated. With all due respect, an acceleration in 12 years, if that is what you consider acceleration, I have no vision for the future if that is acceleration. Thank you very much. I have acknowledged that this has gone on a very long time. That is true, there is no getting away from that fact. I have also tried to provide, which I accept, maybe call comfort to some of your constituents and people you have interacted with, some of the rationale behind that, including the evolving planning legislation, the national planning framework, and more crucially perhaps, the bringing in of experts to look at this whole issue of noise from a technical point of view to get the guidelines right. But look, I do take the seriousness of it. It became very apparent to me when I saw the people behind the stress and strain of this. I will ask the new Minister, Minister Brown, to provide you with a timeline and to write to you on this matter too. Thank you. Thank you.