HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2013-02-20 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

WIND FARMS

Mr GRIFFITHS (Goyder) (15:29): I wish to talk about a local issue, if I may, taking up five minutes of the house's time. It is about the wind farm development proposed by REpower, entitled the 'series project', which is some 199 turbines, each being 150 metres high to the tip of the blade when fully extended, with a total value of $1.3 billion. There are 36 different farming families who have agreed to host the turbines, but it is not universally supported, I suppose, is probably the easiest way to express it.

I convened a public meeting in the community at Minlaton last Sunday. Even with the extreme warm weather—and it was very hot in the hall—there were still 250 people there. I did so on the basis that I wanted to inform the community. The company behind the development had a series of three information days, which were controlled in such a way that 25 people were able to go in at a time. They listened to a presentation and the effort was then made to have small groups discussing things. I always thought that we were better off having a larger-scale meeting with an opportunity for everyone in attendance to hear every question posed and every answer given so that there was a level of understanding that was uniform amongst the group. So, not out of frustration but out of an effort to communicate to the people what the issues were, I convened this meeting.

It was really important to me that there were some key groups there. I had the CFS there and my appreciation goes to Mr Greg Nettleton, the Chief Officer of the Country Fire Service, for coming in at very short notice. It had been arranged that Mr David Pearce, the manager of aerial operations, would attend. Mr Pearce was on Kangaroo Island assisting with the operations there on the weekend with their woodchip fire. Greg rang me at 25 to 12 and said that he would be attending and asked what time I needed to leave. I said, 'Right now', to get there on time and he was good enough to be there within 15 minutes of the start of the meeting.

I always thought it important to have the Development Assessment Commission there also because it is a section 49 application under the Development Act, under the sponsorship of the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure, and because it crosses two councils and the Department of Transport because there is a HVDC line that goes underneath the gulf back to the market point in Adelaide. Unfortunately, the Development Assessment Commission was not able to be there, but they gave me several letters that outlined the process from their point of view.

I also invited the Minister for Planning (the Hon. John Rau) to be there to outline the wind farm development plan amendment that he put into law in October of last year. The minister was unable to attend, which was not necessarily a surprise to me. My efforts then went into getting somebody from the Department of Planning to be there. It was not until Friday, two days before the meeting, that I found out that that was not an option.

So, it was a little bit frustrating in some ways, but we still had the CFS there and the Yorke Peninsula council was there to present the issues as they understood them to be and the concerns that they might have. I had a local community group called Heartland Farmers also in attendance and they represent, as they tell me, some 200 farming families who are concerned about issues.

The clear intent is that there is a lot of concern about the positioning of the turbines as it relates to buffers between noninvolved homes and townships. There is a clear difference in policy between the wind farm DPA that the minister has in place and the opposition's policy on that. The wind farm DPA states one kilometre and two kilometres respectively to noninvolved homes and townships and for the opposition it is two kilometres and five kilometres.

I have always had concerns about adjoining properties and the impact of the positioning of the turbines on the management practices of those noninvolved farms. I will certainly take this up to the absolute end because it is important to me that these people be not affected by the turbines' location. By that I mean, if they still want to have an aerial spraying operation or an aerial baiting operation, they should be able to do so without the turbines' locations impacting on the ability of planes to actually operate in those areas.

I have always been concerned about firefighting too. There was a reasonably serious fire in the first week of December between Minlaton and Curramulka. The ground support was magnificent and aerial support made a real difference to the control of the front. I am concerned though that, after meeting with the CFS on 17 January, I was told that there is a CFS principle in place that no aerial support comes within 500 metres of the turbine. By my equation, that means that it takes out of support opportunities aerial support over 18,000 hectares—that is an enormously large parcel of land that will not have aerial support.

The issue was also raised about property valuation impacts. There is a Victorian ruling where up to 32 per cent dropped. I am respectful of the need to diversify the economy. I am pro-development in that regard, but there has to be a case where the development brings the community along with it and the development is deemed to be appropriate.

There are still enough issues here that need to be resolved. That means that there has to be a really serious look at this. The Development Assessment Commission has opened it up and they are inviting comments by 28 March. I hope that all impacted people put their thoughts in.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT