[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

News Watch Home

Full letter from MPs to David Cameron on wind power subsidies  

Credit:  www.telegraph.co.uk 5 February 2012 ~~

More than 100 MPs have written to the Prime Minister demanding cuts to the £500 million a year subsidies paid to the wind power industry.

The Prime Minister

10 Downing Street


As Members of Parliament from across the political spectrum, we have grown more and more concerned about the Government’s policy of support for on-shore wind energy production.

In these financially straightened times, we think it is unwise to make consumers pay, through taxpayer subsidy, for inefficient and intermittent energy production that typifies on-shore wind turbines.

In the on-going review of subsidy for renewable energy subsidies, we ask the Government to dramatically cut the subsidy for on-shore wind and spread the savings made between other types of reliable renewable energy production and energy efficiency measures.

We also are worried that the new National Planning Policy Framework, in its current form, diminishes the chances of local people defeating unwanted on-shore wind farm proposals through the planning system. Thus we attach some subtle amendments to the existing wording that we believe will help rebalance the system.

Finally, recent planning appeals have approved wind farm developments with the inspectors citing renewable energy targets as being more important than planning considerations. Taken to its logical conclusion, this means that it is impossible to defeat applications through the planning system. We would urge you to ensure that planning inspectors know that the views of local people and long established planning requirements should always be taken into account.

Yours sincerely,

Chris Heaton-Harris (CON), Daventry

Christopher Pincher (CON), Tamworth

Nadine Dorries (CON), Mid Bedfordshire

Karen Bradley (CON), Staffordshire Moorlands

Steve Baker (CON), Wycombe

David Davis (CON), Haltemprice and Howden

Matthew Hancock (CON), West Suffolk

Richard Bacon (CON), South Norfolk

David Nuttall (CON), Bury North

Bernard Jenkin (CON), Harwich and North Essex

Dr. Daniel Poulter (CON), Central Suffolk and North Ipswich

Anne Main (CON), St Albans

David Mowat (CON), Warrington South

Karen Lumley (CON), Redditch

Nadhim Zahawi (CON), Stratford-on-Avon

Natascha Engel (LAB), North East Derbyshire

Pauline Latham (CON), Mid Derbyshire

Sarah Newton (CON), Truro and Falmouth

Geoffrey Cox (CON), Torridge and West Devon

Brandon Lewis (CON), Great Yarmouth

Adam Holloway (CON), Gravesham

Damian Collins (CON), Folkestone and Hythe

David Morris (CON), Morecambe and Lunesdale

Graham Brady (CON), Altrincham and Sale West

Louise Mensch (CON), Corby

Robert Walter (CON), North Dorset

Aidan Burley (CON), Cannock Chase

Bob Blackman (CON), Harrow East

Nick De Bois (CON), Enfield North

Steve Brine (CON), Winchester

Robert Syms (CON), Poole

Caroline Nokes (CON), Romsey and Southampton North

Brian Binley (CON), Northampton South

Steven Barclay (CON), North East Cambridgeshire

Julian Lewis (CON), New Forest East

Lorraine Fullbrook (CON), South Ribble

Tony Cunningham (LAB), Workington

Christopher Chope (CON), Christchurch

Dan Byles (CON), North Warwickshire

Edward Leigh (CON), Gainsborough

Richard Harrington (CON), Watford

Jacob Rees-Mogg (CON), North East Somerset

Guto Bebb (CON), Aberconwy

Kris Hopkins (CON), Keighley

Iain Stewart (CON), Milton Keynes South

Mark Spencer (CON), Sherwood

John Stevenson (CON), Carlisle

Bill Cash (CON), Stone

Andrew Griffiths (CON), Burton

Simon Hart (CON), Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire

Peter Bone (CON), Wellingborough

Charlie Elphicke (CON), Dover

Justin Tomlinson (CON), North Swindon

Mark Pawsey (CON), Rugby

Stuart Andrew (CON), Pudsey

Marcus Jones (CON), Nuneaton

Alun Cairns (CON), Vale of Glamorgan

Richard Drax (CON), South Dorset

Martin Vickers (CON), Cleethorpes

Craig Whittaker (CON), Calder Valley

Bob Stewart (CON), Beckenham

Adam Afriyie (CON), Windsor

Jack Lopresti (CON), Filton & Bradley Stoke

James Wharton (CON), Stockton South

Julian Sturdy (CON), York Outer

Heather Wheeler (CON), South Derbyshire.

Nigel Mills (CON), Amber Valley

Simon Reevell (CON), Dewsbury

Mark Reckless (CON), Rochester and Strood

Paul Maynard (CON), Blackpool North and Cleveleys

Jeremy Lefroy (CON), Stafford

Jackie Doyle-Price (CON), Thurrock

Philip Hollobone (CON), Kettering

James Clappison (CON), Hertsmere

Sammy Wilson (DUP), East Antrim

David Tredinnick (CON), Bosworth

Roger Williams (LIB DEM), Brecon and Radnorshire

Nicholas Soames (CON), Mid Sussex

Graham Evans (CON), Weaver Vale

Douglas Carswell (CON), Clacton

Patrick Mercer (CON), Newark

Rory Stewart (CON), Penrith and The Border

John Glen (CON), Salisbury

Mark Pritchard (CON), The Wrekin

Caroline Dinenage (CON), Gosport

Neil Parish (CON), Tiverton and Honiton

Stephen McPartland (CON), Stevenage

Greg Knight (CON), East Yorkshire

David Ruffley (CON), Bury St Edmunds

Tracey Crouch (CON), Chatham and Aylesford

Priti Patel (CON), Witham

Karl McCartney (CON), Lincoln

James Gray (CON), North Wiltshire

Mark Williams (LIB DEM), Ceredigion

Andrew Rosindell (CON), Romford

Oliver Heald (CON), North East Hertfordshire

Andrea Leadsom (CON), South Northamptonshire

Ian Liddell-Grainger (CON), Bridgwater and West Somerset

Charles Walker (CON), Broxbourne

Andrew Percy (CON), Brigg and Goole

Andrew Bridgen (CON), North West Leicestershire

Andrew Turner (CON), Isle of Wight

Mark Garnier (CON), Wyre Forest

Andrew Bingham (CON), High Peak

Stewart Jackson (CON), Peterborough

Philip Davies (CON), Shipley

Source:  www.telegraph.co.uk 5 February 2012

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.



Wind Watch on Facebook

Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

National Wind Watch