LOCAL rural communities have slammed the state government’s plan to accelerate renewable energy projects with the Victorian Farmers Federation (VFF) saying the policy is "a slap in the face after years of sham consultation with farming communities".
In a bid to advance $90 billion worth of developments held up in red tape, Premier Jacinta Allan announced renewable energy projects are eligible for an accelerated planning pathway under the Development Facilitation Program (DFP), with the plan coming into effect on April 1.
Under the change, all new renewable projects in Victoria will be treated as a “significant economic development”, removing the planning panel process and third-party appeals at Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) and opening a pathway for decisions to be made on applications within four months.
This fast turnaround is intended to provide investment certainty for the renewable energy industry, yet overlooks community concerns.
VFF President Emma Germano said the green-lighting of major renewable projects adds to a poor-track record of consulting landholders set to be impacted and risks further alienating already frustrated farmers across Victoria.
Latest Stories
“The Victorian Government has decided to steam roll Victorian farmers and regional communities, with little regard to how it impacts their livelihoods and countless generational family farms.
“We’ve heard that vast parts of Victoria’s farmland will be needed to reach our renewable energy targets.
“If we can’t get this right now, our ability to produce the food and fibre needed to feed people will be severely inhibited.
“For years the VFF has been pleading with the government to introduce a fair framework that guides the transition to our renewable energy future.
“Not only have they failed to do this they’ve now hit the accelerator and it’s farmers and our regional communities that are set to pay the price,” she said.
Ms Germano added the VFF is not against the transition to a renewable energy future, rather taking aim at the complete failure of the government to plan accordingly.
“This move is a serious regulatory and planning failure,” Ms Germano said.
“There remains a lack of any regulatory safeguards for landholders who host renewable energy generation, transmission or storage and we must not lose sight of the people neighbouring this infrastructure.
“It’s completely unacceptable that there remains no proper planning processes to make sure it is the right project in the right place with the right safeguards.”
“It is disappointing that rather than improving the regulatory and decision-making framework, the government has instead decided to further erode the limited rights of landholders.”
Under the new changes, Planning Minister Sonya Kilkenny said communities can still raise concerns through the usual consultation submissions process and appeal decisions to the Supreme Court.
With the removal of necessary checks and balances as the state scrambles to meet its net-zero targets, an appeal to the Supreme Court now represents the only means of redress.
However the Biodiversity Council is pushing for the state government to adopt a policy that would protect high value natural and agricultural land from the installation of renewable energy facilities.
Academics want the government to roll out mapping and analysis of regions across the state that will determine places that have low agricultural and natural values rather than areas that are simply close to transmission line infrastructure.
Biodiversity Council member and Professor in Conservation Ecology Brendan Wintle from The University of Melbourne said agricultural values would include the land's proximity to rivers, irrigation, and soil fertility.
He said the mapping would look at the natural values and look at where the critical habitats such as wetlands are for the most threatened species.
“The University of Melbourne is leading a rapid analysis to help identify ‘green-light’ zones where renewable energy projects could be rolled out with the lowest impacts on agriculture, nature and culturally important species and places," Prof Wintle said.
“For example, ‘green-light’ zones are likely to include degraded cleared land that is no longer being used for agriculture and, in the case of wind farms, well away from the flight paths of vulnerable bird and bat species.
"This would be a map-based exercise, but it also has to be community based and at times there will be cultural values in certain areas that aren't well-mapped and people need to be consulted as well so those values are brought forward."
Under the mapping of high agricultural areas land would be protected if it could be established that it has high natural, agricultural or cultural values.
Prof Wintle said there needs to be a greater move towards low greenhouse gas emission energy sources, but it needs to be done in a way that keeps food production areas and biodiverse areas protected.
"We are not convinced at the moment that energy development companies or the government are taking seriously the need to really carefully manage where and how we do this, and we feel there needs to be more effort to do that," Prof Wintle
He said society agrees we need to reduce carbon emissions, but it means the onus has to be put on developers to do it right.
"It might cost a bit more for developers to site facilities away from these high value biodiversity or high value agricultural lands but that's the price we have to pay to still have functioning ecosystems or agricultural systems."
Prof Wintle said the Biodiversity Council has called on the State Government which is responsible for a lot of the land management decisions to invest properly in the mapping of the biodiverse land that has high natural, agricultural and cultural land values.
"We need those resources in place so we can make informed decisions about where we should site renewable energy projects and we need to do it quickly," he said.
