Wednesday 27 May 2009

CAN'T THEY GET ANY FACTS RIGHT?

Exactly how much opposition to the proposed Lenchwick Windfarm is there in the local villages?

If you listened to VVASP, you'd be fooled into thinking that there's an 'overwhelming' majority opposed to the plans.

Yes, fooled is the word. Let's look at the actual surveys conducted in recent months by three parish councils: Church Lench, Norton and Lenchwick and Harvington.

In Church Lench, 563 questionnaires were sent out by the parish council. 395 were returned. Of those who cared enough to answer the simple questionnaire, 323 were against the windfarm proposals, 51 were in favour and 21 had no opinion either way.

VVASP concluded that 82% of the residents of Church Lench were opposed to the windfarm.

Now, hang on a minute. Opponents of windfarms aren't known for their coy refusal to keep their opinions to themselves, especially not in the Lenches. So the 168 questionnaires which weren't returned must be considered as abstentions.

Which means that 57% of the Church Lench residents were against the windfarm. It's still a majority, but it's not quite the 82% falsely claimed by VVASP.

The protesters used the same trick with the results from Norton and Lenchwick. 385 poll papers were distributed. 230 were returned. 169 voted against the windfarm proposals, 41 in favour and 20 had no strong opinions.

Brilliantly, by misrepresenting these results, VVASP were able to claim in the local press that 73% of the Norton and Lenchwick villagers were opposed to the plans.

The reality? 44% of Norton and Lenchwick residents voted against the windfarm. The remaining 56% were either in favour or couldn't be bothered to answer.

The results from Harvington were even more spectacular. According to the minutes of Harvington Parish Council, 1282 papers were distributed, just 558 returned. 399 were against, 117 were for and 42 were no strong opinion either way.

As usual, VVASP lied about this, claiming that the majority of the people of Harvington had voted against the windfarm. But how many had actually done so? 31%. That's right - 31% of the residents of Harvington cared enough about the proposed windfarm to vote against it.

So, VVASP rushed to tell the papers that the majority of local villagers were on their side. But they're liars. In Church Lench, only 57% of residents voted against the proposed windfarm. In Norton and Lenchwick, 44%. In Harvington, 31%.

Interestingly, that makes Norton and Lenchwick the most representative of the three parishes, because the aggregate total of local opposition to the windfarm works out at 44%.

Which means that THE CLEAR MAJORITY OF PEOPLE LIVING IN THE VILLAGES NEXT TO THE PROPOSED LENCHWICK WINDFARM ARE EITHER IN FAVOUR OF THE WINDFARM OR COULDN'T CARE LESS!!!

It's good to know that this blog is on the side of the silent majority, who don't go round intimidating people, creating an eyesore with their ugly placards and generally being boorish and ill-informed.

But where VVASP is concerned, their politically-motivated manipulation of the local surveys is symptomatic of something else - a compulsive, even pathological need to misrepresent the truth.

The VVASP website proudly announces that they've got hold of information regarding the precise locations of the proposed turbines.

The website tells you that this information was acquired from Wychavon District Council. Privately, members of the VVASP committee claim that the information came from the Ministry of Defence.

So, which is it? Even VVASP must be able to tell the difference between their local district council and the MoD. But why the need to tell different stories in different contexts? Can't they even get their story straight over something as simple as where they actually got their information? Why this constant need to mislead people? What's so wrong with the truth?

Could it be that, in their heart of hearts, VVASP know that they are in the minority, know that their protest is motivated by selfishness and intolerance, and know that, if they did admit the truth about windfarms, their cause would collapse?

No comments:

Post a Comment