It has been interesting to read the media coverage of the recent announcement by Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) with regard to the Belmont and Puketiro wind farms.  I admit to being as guilty as most of believing what I read and hear in the media.  That was until I started becoming involved in learning more about the Puketiro wind farm and GWRC.

I was absolutely stunned to read the Dominion Post headline "Council calls halt to Belmont Wind Farm" on Tuesday morning.  I was at the Council meeting of the 29th Sept where the report was presented recommending a 5-year moratorium on wind farming in Belmont Regional Park.  But despite much debate from Councillors the only decision made was that the report "lie on the table".  So why a headline that implies a decision was made?

And why was the Belmont wind farm report tabled at this Council meeting when usually reports such as this go through the relevant committee first, in this case the Parks, Forests and Utilities Committee?

Was it anything to do with another item on the agenda "Puketiro commercial issues"?  This was within the Public Excluded part of the agenda and presumably was where Council decided to "revoke" permission for three wind turbines within Battle Hill Farm Forest Park.  The reason given was because of boundary errors - with the implication that this was the reason for the legal challenge to GWRC by Pauatahanui Futures Society.

The legal challenge was because due process was never followed in granting RES (the wind farm developer) access through Battle Hill Farm Forest Park.  So why suggest it is to do with boundary errors? and why does this become hidden in media coverage about Belmont Regional Park?

Was the desired effect what has happened? that people have believed the implications presented in the media i.e. that a halt has been called to Belmont wind farm and that the Puketiro wind farm is out of Battle Hill and further back in the forest where it will have less effect?  that in believing what they have read people are relaxing and thinking that one wind farm has gone away and the other one won't bother them?

Unfortunately this is not true and one wonders why GWRC presents such a simplistic, and incoorect, view and why the media have been happy to accept this?