In an article written by Garth Manning*, QC, human rights lawyer Julian Falconer says that Ontario’s Green Energy Act violates human rights, due to the potential health effects from wind power generation projects, encourage and subsidized by the Ontario government through the act.

 Toronto human rights lawyer Julian Falconer argues that the GEA and the government’s approval of wind projects “implicates their right to security of the person” as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights, in view of potential health impacts. These health impacts were noted on Oct. 17, 2013 when the Ontario government’s Research Chair for Renewable Energy Technologies and Health at the University of Waterloo reported a statistically significant correlation between proximity to industrial wind turbines and sleep deprivation, tinnitus and vertigo. The government of Ontario has been widely criticized, even by its own agencies, for its roll out of the GEA four years ago. Ontario’s Auditor-General reported in 2011 that a cost-benefit analysis was never done and there was no impact study of the effects on property values, tourism and health. Ontario’s Environmental Commissioner and Ontario’s Environmental Review Tribunal opposed the effect of industrial wind turbines on wildlife at Ostrander Point. Economists, health care providers, mayors, and those affected have consistently made their views known, but concerns have fallen on deaf ears. 

Read the full article here.

Garth Manning QC is Chair of CCSAGE, the County Coalition for Safe and Appropriate Green Energy. He has had a long and prestigious career in the law and was awarded the Louis St Laurent aware by the Canadian Bar Association for his contributions to the profession. He resides in Prince Edward County.

Comments

David Robinson
Reply

These health impacts were noted on Oct. 17, 2013 when the Ontario government’s Research Chair for Renewable Energy Technologies and Health at the University of Waterloo reported a statistically significant correlation between proximity to industrial wind turbines and sleep deprivation, tinnitus and vertigo.

It’s interesting that this site and this group is now quoting the U of Waterloo study as if it should be taken as gospel. This group and other groups dedicated to fighting (useless) wind power are clamoring that this study be “listened to”.

Fair enough.

However, it seems you want it both ways. You and others fought this study tooth and nail and recommended non-participation. Now you want to use the results to further “the cause”.

Would it not now be reasonable to reverse your participation and recommend participation?

The study simply did not have enough participants to be “conclusive” — even though the results are “suggestive”.

Will you be making an official statement one way or the other.

Do you intend to now support the study?

Leave a comment

name*

email* (not published)

website