UPDATE #14 - NSW Planning Meeting

THE DETAILS ...

Turn up to ask your questions directly, at the meeting.

NSW Planning are coming to Walcha to explain their Draft Energy Policy Framework,  including their wind and transmissions guidelines, that have been in development for 6 years, updating from the 2016 version.

This is also our chance to tell the NSW Planning Department that there is a lot of resistance to Wind Farm development in Walcha. They have been told that our community is friendly to development – by a developer. We need to have them hear the community voices. 

They need feedback, and we need to provide it to them.

These issues need to be raised in this meeting if they are going to be addressed. NSW Planning need to hear and see our community speak their voice.

Following are some issues that we have identified, that we feel are patently unfair to regional communities.

Decommissioning - there is no bond to protect landholders or communities. It is a private deal between the host landholder and the developer. The decommissioning responsibility is for above ground infrastructure only. So at best the developer pulls down the tower but leaves the concrete and steel and the cables in the ground scarring the landscape forever. Why are renewable developments not required to provide a bond for decommissioning, as other resource developments are?

The map change as a result from pressure from developers. On the 16th November, the New England REZ was shown clearly as “Less Suitable” on the scale ranging from “Less Suitable” to “Desirable”. This gave confidence to regional communities that restraints and community concerns were being noted.

What followed was a collective tantrum from developers and pro renewable politicians, placing pressure on the Planning Department. After 7 years of finalising and presenting update to the Wind Guidelines, within 2-3 days of this pressure and lobbying, the region was re-rated from “Less Suitable” to “Suitable”

How have we gone from “Less Suitable” to “Suitable” without consultation? How can the Planning Department claim to be independent? How can they claim to have maintained their integrity through this developer friendly backflip?

Where is the clear definition for social licence? With 79.5% of our surveyed community clearly indicating that they are concerned and objecting to the Winterbourne Wind development, there is a breach of this undertaking from NSW Planning that projects will not proceed without Social License. What is Social License – as a definition?

Forced Acquisition of your land. The guidelines point to a scenario where a project designed with a significant energy storage system, can be deemed Critical State Significant Infrastructure (CSSI). If this is the case, landholder consent is not required, and forceful acquisition would take place, as per section 5.13 of the EP&A Act.

In areas such as Walcha, that are highly unsuitable areas for wind development due to tightly held land holdings and multiple neighbours to project sites, this gives free reign to an overly ambitious developer, to cause unfettered harm to the community. Where are the protections for the community in this scenario?

Winterbourne Exemption. These guidelines have been updated as a result of larger turbines being used in projects, and the impacts they have on community and the environment. Winterbourne have snuck through the gate and are not subject to this update – purely by timing. If approved, Winterbourne will be in place for 20 years, and should be subject to updated guidelines. Why is it that projects like Winterbourne Wind will not be subjected to these upgraded guidelines? 

We advocate for project licensing and developer accreditation, to avoid situations like at Walcha where an inexperienced developer is simply accumulating contracts, putting pressure on community, and selling these contracts as soon as they are signed. A promoter of projects at Walcha is not even planning to take these projects to EIS stage and has no care for the success of the project, or the impact on the community. Why is there not a developer accreditation process in place, to ensure against this behaviour, that is harmful to the community, and harmful to the renewable industry.

We want the planners to give us faith in the process. We are continually told to trust the system, and have faith in the Planning Department. Given the recent backflip on the “Desirability” map, how can we have any confidence that the Planning Department is acting with any integrity or independence? How can we transparently understand why this backflip occurred?

Other links for interest: NSW Planning links to the Policy Framework process and 12 page document

Follow the link and fill in a submission. 

(If you need, reach out and VfW can help with this).

The various documents on display can be found by clicking on the sections under 'Exhibited Documents'  and your submission can be started by clicking on the section called Make a Submission under the heading Submission.

Your submission can be prepared prior to clicking on the link, and attached, or copied onto the submission page. The questions above can be a start.

If you want to have an input into the process, you have an opportunity to do so at Thursday evening’s meeting, and through the submission process, through the link above.

Please feel free to share this email with others who may be interested.

Regards to all

Voice for Walcha

Copyright (C) 2023 Voice For Walcha. All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website.

Our mailing address is:
Voice For Walcha PO BOX 230 Walcha, NSW 2354 Australia

Reply to this mail with the word "unsubscribe" to be removed from our mailing list