Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
ENVIRONMENT MINISTER ALAN Kelly has admitted that he would not want to live beside a wind turbine.
The Labour Party’s deputy leader questioned who would want a wind turbine beside their house as he answered questions about the government’s renewable energy policy on local radio this morning.
Several wind farm projects across the country have faced opposition in recent months with local action groups opposed to wind farms and electricity pylons in their area aiming to change the government’s energy policy.
Kelly recently told councillors in Donegal to drop changes to the county plan which had been aimed at increasing the minimum distance between pylons and homes.
Speaking on WLR FM this morning, Kelly was asked specifically about plans for 12 wind turbines to be constructed in Dungarvan and was then asked if he would have a turbine near his house. He responded:
“Personally, you wouldn’t want a turbine beside your house, of course not. Who would say that they would?,” he told the station.
He said that the government has laid down renewable energy targets and that it is his job to ensure the planning process for any turbine construction is “fair and balanced”.
He said that the Department of Environment will be releasing guidelines in relation to how and where turbines should be placed in the coming months which he claimed would “bring some clarity” to the matter.
Kelly also insisted that the planning process needs to be independent of the minister and that the rules around planning permission need to be clear, adding: ”That clarity will be brought into place in the very near future.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Never in all the years I’ve been on medication for depression has it made me covertly film me having sex and then upload it to the internet. Depression doesn’t make one a sex offender so stop blaming it.
@DaisyChainsaw: just thinking that. Coward of a man.
@DaisyChainsaw: I have never had either so wouldn’t know. But regardless, it’s a fairly cruel act, he’s a very lucky boy to get off like that!
@DaisyChainsaw: He is not a sex offender!!! He has been convicted under s10 of the Non-fatal Offenses Against the Person Act 97, which is harassment. You have just defamed this person and The journal.ie has published this defamatory comment. As they take, and respond to, complaints they are acting as more than a mere conduit. Let’s hope they don’t get sued.
@Darren Gray: Don’t worry Darren – I’m guessing that whoever posted that comment has a whole heap of perfectly reasonable excuses to explain their actions.
@Darren Gray: Glad to see you’re on the side of the pervert Darren. Says a great deal about you. Not a word about the poor woman. He uploaded the video twice. He got lucky. Should have been jailed in my view. I hope she’s sues him and gets everything. Pathetic human being and you defend his “reputation”. You’re a disgrace.
@Darren Gray: I imagine that filming someone without their consent, engaging in sex with them presumably on the basis that it was not being filmed and then putting it out there for the world to see could arguably be considered sex offending.
@Noirin Kavanagh: It is not a offence that is covered by the Sex Offenders Act 2001. You do not get put on the sex offenders register. Saying that someone is a sex offender is a serious accusation, especially with the level of stigma that is attached. Of course if feel for the complaint but people have to be very careful when they comment about criminal justice, especially when they don’t know what they are talking about.
@John R: Well, if you think that I’m a disgrace, then you are a coward. If you are so sure of your convictions, why do you hide behind a fake profile?
“Defence counsel said the 26-year-old offers no excuse for his actions.”
After which, the defence counsel proceeded to give a large number of excuses for his actions. Also, the whole totally out of character thing could not be forgiven, seeing as he did it twice!
Disgusting crime. Can’t imagine the torment and shame this woman has experienced. Hope things improve for her.
He should be jailed. Disgusting act.
The fact that he uploaded it twice shows how malicious his actions were. Total lowlife!
@Yvonne Nic Gabhann: to be sure, to be sure.
“had a profound affect”? I think mean effect!
@Rui Firmino: God I love a nice bit of irony on a Thursday afternoon
@Rui Firmino: Not to mention “The victim…. wrote a letter to Judge Dermot Dempsey to explain the untold damage..” How can it be ‘untold’ if she has just told him?
The defense council would have you believe the victim was wrong for abusing a vulnerable adult.
Pathetic justice system
Bit of a dope
Hysteria always goes into overdrive on here. It was poor form and has been dealt with accordingly. If he does it again he should be dealt with in a harsher fashion.
@Flip off: He did it twice
@Flip off: “poor form”. Words elude me. I hope you don’t have a daughter, a wife or sisters. Poor form! Yours so up your own ass you should live there.
I’m sure that sentence has really taught him a lesson. Complete bull$hite. No deterrent for future tools.
Ha ha ha, only ten minutes? Scarleh for him!
Define Porn
@_doesnotcompute: it says sexual intercourse (f#cking) not hugs and kisses!
@Clare Maurer: Nope, try again
@Steve Hardy: When a man and a women love each other very much….
@Steve Hardy: Why do you require a definition of porn? Doesn’t say offender made “porn”. It states he uploaded a video onto a porn website.
@Clare Maurer: Didn’t realise I’ve been a porn star all these years!
That poor woman. You trust someone enough to literally let them inside your body and then they do something cruel and humiliating like that. Hope he feels 100 times what she must have felt now that everyone knows he’s such a creep.
have your say