Page 3312 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 18 September 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
the opportunity for public comment and my directorate will process the development application in the normal manner. In this regard, any concerns raised by residents during the public notification process must be fully considered prior to any decision being made.
It is worth highlighting too that the government did not allocate, nor identify, any parcels of land for proponents involved in the solar auction process. The identification of suitable land and associated risks in obtaining development approval for a solar facility were and remain the responsibility of the proponent. In making a favourable assessment through the solar auction neither the territory, nor I as the minister, have made any warranty or representation about the successful implementation of the proposal. The proponent carries all financial risk associated with the success or failure through the development assessment process. It is a matter for the proponent to identify their optimal location, or alternative location, for a solar generator, not the government.
The grant of the feed-in tariff entitlement is entirely separate to, but dependent on any related development application submitted by the proponent. Under the feed-in tariff legislation, as the minister I can consider a variation request from a proponent regarding their grant of entitlement or deed of entitlement, which may include a request for a revised location of a successful proposal. Relocation of a proposed solar generator may have implications for the proponent’s project costs and planned implementation time frames. If a proponent were to make a variation request, there would be probity and other risks that would need to be explored and managed appropriately.
If the developer does not meet the agreed project milestones, including the achievement of a development approval, the minister has the power to cancel the grant of entitlement, subject to certain make-good processes being followed. In this circumstance the amount of generating capacity could be awarded to another party in the auction.
Let me be very clear about the development assessment process. Public consultation is yet to commence on a notified development application, because no application has yet been lodged with the Planning and Land Authority. Projects of this nature are permitted in the applicable zone in the territory plan and have been for many years. It is the right of a lessee or their representative to seek approval for the development of a solar farm in the zone irrespective of whether or not they are successful under the solar auction process. The Planning and Land Authority has the power and the obligations to decide such proposals independently and without ministerial direction.
I cannot, and must not, commit to ensuring that a solar farm is not developed in this location at this time. It would be quite wrong for me to purport to dictate any such outcome. For me to do so would risk compromising the ability of the Planning and Land Authority to discharge its statutory obligations in relation to the matter. If a satisfactory development application is received by the Planning and Land Authority it must be publicly notified for 15 working days. This is effectively three full weeks, during which time any member of the community is able to view details of the proposal and make a written submission.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video