RE: Deviation of a deputy

[jacquin]

I intervene on this forum because it seems to me that our democracy is deviating. Indeed, some elected officials do not hesitate to propose laws that will severely limit our current ability to defend ourselves against abuse, damage to our heritage, in short, our freedom to express ourselves! They are trying to use the renewable energy mode to achieve their ends.


MP Roland Blum has tabled an anti-democratic and most likely anti-constitutional bill! It aims to ensure that private projects, whatever they are, are no longer questionable by the people.

However beyond his writings, it is more generally, the absolutely detestable atmosphere that generates the lack of money in the coffers of the state that is the problem. Everything is "almost" allowed for the state to make money on the backs of the French! It is true that the woolen bottom of these is attractive: almost 7000 billion euros ...

It is through pseudos works like, so-called great challenge to have 22% of renewable energy by 2020, that the state recovers part of this woolen bottom, thanks to the CSPE, to the future increase in the electricity tariff, increase in local taxes etc.…

Indeed, the dialogue is simple and unstoppable ... Do you like the principle of renewable energies? It's not free !

As it turns out that French people oppose this dictate which consists in undressing Pierre to dress Paul, the deputy Blum, in his great leniency towards promoters, and who is a lawyer ... not specialist in renewable energies ... decided fix it!

http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/pr ... on1500.asp

MP Blum wrote as an explanation for his bill:

- “In recent years, we have witnessed an increase in abusive litigation exercised by private and certain legal persons, most often environmental protection associations, of which we can doubt the sincere and disinterested concern for the environment.".

How can a deputy who was elected on his charisma and certainly not for his skills in safeguarding the environment, write such nonsense? It is obviously for pure pleasure that men and women form an association to fight projects which in their eyes endanger their environments, their heritage, or… their health!

This deputy, who probably has never been confronted with the harsh realities of life, perhaps thinks that it is simple and not expensive to create an association… Perhaps this deputy lives in a cocoon where the environment is not his problem ... maybe this member did not understand anything about it!

- “It is sometimes very complicated to initiate public or private projects, however meeting the needs of the community of citizens".

This member seeks to mix projects that would be important for the whole community with others that would be important only for a small group of insiders! He therefore relies on general interest so that his bill favors private projects!

Example 1: RTE wishes to create a 63 KV overhead line. This project is of public utility since what passes through the electrical wires serves the entire community served. We can dispute its implementation but not its usefulness.

Example 2: A promoter wishes to build a wind field in co-visibility and within 1000 meters of housing… This project is only private and not useful to the community because the energy produced by these wind turbines is not essential for the community as soon as it replaces energy produced by large power plants whose cost is much lower and which do not produce GHGs. Consequently, its usefulness and its location are largely questionable.

- “The consequences of abusive actions are extremely heavy for the community and the economic activity: Baseless disorganization of the projects, stop of the building sites, mistrust of the purchasers, useless procedural costs, congestion of the jurisdictions, very long delays to obtain a decision confirming the legality building permits, almost useless compensation for builders, blackmail when proceedings are discontinued", ...

It is clear from the list of consequences he describes that not a word about all the populations affected by these projects! He could have talked, for example in the case of wind projects, massacred landscapes, public inquiries which are only private one-way inquiries, the decline in heritage values ​​when a wind turbine is in joint visibility of 'a house, implications for health, the fall of tourism and consequently, all the economic activity which results from it….

The list of grievances against projects which go up to the detriment of the populations, is obviously longer than the consequences of an appeal against bad projects studied!

But what makes MP Blum move forward?

- “To limit abusive recourse against building permits, associations which wish to take legal action against a permit should be required to have the same approval as that required for the establishment of a civil party before criminal courts, that is to say -to say to justify three years of existence and the exercise of disinterested activities for nature, the environment or the living environment".

The deputy Blum is a clever… He understood well that 3 years is a period which does not allow associations to defend themselves since the majority of questionable projects, as soon as they are known, obtain this building permit within 6 months ! So well below the 3 year timeframe! Consequence: impossibility for associations to initiate a procedure.

If deputy Blum "demands" something, we remind him that we, the People of France, demand respect from our elected representatives! it starts with the duty of a deputy to protect the property of his constituents! not the opposite.

- “Likewise, the procedure provided for in criminal matters to rationalize the initiation of proceedings or avoid those which are simply intended to save time could be adapted to administrative disputes: the investigating judge may indeed fix the amount of the deposit that the party civil must file with the court office and the time limit within which it should do so on pain of inadmissibility of the criminal complaint. This deposit is adjusted according to the resources of the civil party (the judge can dispense with it or fix a substantial amount). In order to perfect this system, it would also be desirable for a decree to be issued requiring that any fine for abusive action be of a minimum amount of 3 euros".

MP Blum gives a second layer by imposing a high “entry fee” for access to justice in this country. We had understood for a long time that there is indeed a two-tier justice in this country but it remained informal ... With this text of law, everything becomes clear! If you have the money, you know a knowledgeable lawyer and the subject doesn't offend the judge's susceptibility, then maybe chances are common sense will prevail!

- “Far from limiting everyone's right to take legal action or to form an association, these measures would limit the exercise of systematic requests to the administrative judge by residents for whom respect for the environment is only an excuse".

Mister Blum, your performance is a joke! How can you make such shortcuts? write that an aggrieved person who initiates proceedings is only a “pretext”! and that therefore, it takes away the right to defend itself !!!

Will the French people be surprised to see this proposed law? It seems that, whichever side you turn to, the power locks the actions of the French! The only problem is how it will end !!! Let us count on certain enarchs and certain lawyers so that, as usual, they do not have the right answer.

[gegyx]

MP for Marseille ...

More beautiful life...

[elephant]

Welcome Jacquin and thank you for this beautiful subject of debate.

Who is this Blum riding for?

In fact, there is no public inquiry in France? In Belgium, for the slightest GSM tower there is

1 °: impact study
2 °: public inquiry

[jacquin]

Hello, Elephant,

Of course, there were public inquiries in France (for wind turbines) ...
But in fact, France in this particular, is that the surveys are paid by the promoters of projects. Suddenly, they are in 99% of cases, favorable to promoters!
I attended 7 different public inquiries where precisely the public was mainly against and yet, the investigating commissioner gave for the 7, a favorable opinion !!!
Which makes me say that these surveys are not public but private!

[Flytox]

Hello Jacquin

Of course, there were public inquiries in France (for wind turbines) ...
But in fact, France in this particular, is that the surveys are paid by the promoters of projects. Suddenly, they are in 99% of cases, favorable to promoters!
I attended 7 different public inquiries where precisely the public was mainly against and yet, the investigating commissioner gave for the 7, a favorable opinion !!!
Which makes me say that these surveys are not public but private!

Is there really no legal counter power?

[jacquin]

Hi Flytox

It is not a problem of counter power but simply a problem of procedure!

Take the case of a wind project ...

If the majority of the population does not agree with the conclusions of the investigating commissioner concerning the establishment of a wind farm, there is nothing we can do!
It is necessary to await the continuation of the procedure which will generally be the delivery of the building permit by the prefect, which will allow to go to the administrative court in order to try to convince the judges !!!
In other words, it's almost lost in advance.

What it would take:

1) It is already redefining the contribution of wind power in the French context! (this sentence alone would allow me to write a book).

2) Make sure that if a wind project can only be implemented in an area where residents are against it, that these are heard by the investigating commissioner, the mayor or others and that the project stops naturally!

3) If it is not the majority that is against, at least that the justified arguments be taken into account. What amounts to perhaps, compensate them for the nuisances that generate wind energy! And let it be, of course, the wind developers who finance this compensation.

4) Above all, it should be clear as to the definition of ZDEs in France !!! Today, as it is done, it is anything. The philosophy of a ZDE is already to group the wind turbines so as not to mimic the landscape, but it is also the obligation to switch to HTB voltage level in 63 or 90 KV. and therefore to have only one line which goes from the wind turbines (delivery station) to the source station.

We can see today that within a ZDE, several zones have been defined, trying not to exceed 12 MWe which allows us to stay in 20 KV. and we make as many zones as necessary and therefore as many trenches to pass the 20 KV lines. But above all we remain at medium voltage and RTE cannot intervene on it since they are on the distribution network and not on the transport network!

We are not going to remake the world but bills like that of MP Blum will prevent any recourse whatever the merits of the challenges!

The consequences are clear! who will accept to lose hundreds of thousands of € without reacting (case of a fall in the heritage value following a co-visibility of wind turbines at less than 1000m) !!!
And how to react if all the legal devices are inaccessible?

This deputy takes us straight to dramas which unfortunately will be inevitable if this law passes !!!