Forest Wind Farm Development Bill 2020
Bill Story
The journey of this bill through Parliament, including debate and recorded votes.
Referred to State Development, Natural Resources and Agricultural Industry Development Committee
Vote on a motion
This division was NOT on the Forest Wind Farm Development Bill but on an unrelated disallowance motion moved by Mr Purdie (LNP) to disallow clause 7 of the Corrective Services (COVID-19 Emergency Response) Regulation 2020, which dealt with supervision of dangerous sex offenders. The motion was defeated 43-48.
The motion was rejected.
A formal vote on whether to accept a proposal — this could be the bill itself, an amendment, or another motion.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (43)
Noes (48)
▸22 members spoke17 support5 mixed
Supported the bill as committee chair, highlighting its contribution to renewable energy targets and economic benefits for regional communities including up to 516 jobs.
“I commend this bill because I see it as forward thinking and I see it as focused on the future.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
As Minister, moved the second reading and defended the bill as facilitating a major renewable energy project that will create jobs and investment in Wide Bay-Burnett region while also ensuring the effective administration of the Springfield Structure Plan.
“This bill is an absolute game changer. The bill facilitates the tenure pathway for the wind farm project, which is set to generate opportunities for employment and skill training, utilise renewable energy that will contribute to lowering Australia's carbon emissions and is critical to the economic recovery of the Wide Bay-Burnett region.”— 2020-08-11View Hansard
Acknowledged the LNP supports the project but raised concerns about lack of consultation with local landowners regarding transmission line impacts and potential effects on property values.
“The LNP is supportive of this project, but I understands the concerns of the residents who will have high-voltage lines going through their properties.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Announced the LNP will not oppose the bill but raised significant concerns about three years of secret government discussions with the proponent while local community consultation only began in early 2020, lack of transmission line details, and uncertainty about forestry production offsets.
“As I said, the LNP will be supporting this bill, but we must raise a number of concerns. It was revealed during the State Development, Tourism, Innovation and Manufacturing Committee's consideration of the bill that the government had been in secret discussions with the project proponent for three years, yet the first in-person community consultation session with residents was held only at the start of this year.”— 2020-08-11View Hansard
Supported the bill as demonstrating the government's commitment to renewable energy and job creation, noting the project would represent 12 per cent of Queensland's installed generation capacity.
“This bill is vital for Queensland, demonstrating the Palaszczuk government's commitment to renewable energy and job-creating opportunities for the future.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Supported the bill with focus on the Springfield Structure Plan amendments, emphasising the importance of planning certainty for the master-planned community of Greater Springfield which is home to over 43,000 of her constituents.
“Securing the integrity of the Springfield Structure Plan, as proposed by the amendments before us, will allow Springfield City Group and its many development partners to have continued certainty around planning provisions to allow continued financial investment in Greater Springfield.”— 2020-08-11View Hansard
Supported the bill as a committee member while acknowledging community concerns about turbine impacts, consultation processes, migratory birds and fire management that need to be addressed in the development application phase.
“As this inquiry has demonstrated, the destination towards renewables, achieving Queensland's renewable energy target and reducing our reliance on coal is not without significant challenges. However, it is a road that we travel together.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
As a committee member, confirmed the LNP will not oppose the bill but raised concerns about inadequate community consultation (only one public meeting over three years), lack of details on transmission line location and compensation, no firm plans for offsetting forestry production losses, and questions about commercial arrangements between the proponent and state.
“For there to be only one open public meeting about that really does not stack up in terms of having good public consultation. I think the government and the proponent need to be called out on that lack of consultation.”— 2020-08-11View Hansard
Strongly supported the bill as Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy, highlighting its contribution to the renewable energy revolution, job creation and downward pressure on electricity prices.
“Let me assure the House that this is not a bill you would ever see under an LNP government.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Supported the bill as making a substantive contribution to renewable energy in Queensland while creating green jobs in regional Queensland, and defended the market-led proposal process citing the Logan Enhancement Project as a success.
“It has been interesting to hear the contributions of those opposite in relation to this bill, which not only will make a substantive contribution to renewable energy in Queensland but also will create investment in green jobs in regional Queensland which is vitally important.”— 2020-08-11View Hansard
Raised serious concerns about the government's three years of secret discussions, lack of genuine community consultation and the predetermined approval process, while also defending the timber industry's need for certainty.
“Gympie residents know about the EPBC Act; that is why the Traveston Dam failed. They are naturally sceptical of someone from government coming in, undertaking no genuine consultation, riding roughshod over them, and telling them what is good for them.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Supported the bill as a positive step towards another large-scale, renewable energy, job-creating project that complements Queensland's existing legislative requirements.
“Whilst the LNP continue to deliberate the role of renewable energy and its contribution to the Queensland economy, only the Palaszczuk Labor government is supporting Queensland industries and business.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Welcomed the renewable energy investment but criticised the government for allowing private corporations rather than public ownership to drive renewables, and raised concerns about inadequate community consultation.
“What does concern me about this bill and more broadly is the fact that this government is allowing the bulk of new renewables projects to be built by private corporations, which means the revenue will continue going towards private corporate profit rather than public good.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Supported the bill as Minister for Agricultural Industry Development, noting the project's job creation potential and compatibility with forestry operations and fire management.
“What makes this bill stand up is the many jobs and economic benefits it entails, with no costs incurred; all costs associated with due diligence and subsequent delivery of the project will be met by Forest Wind.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Noted the LNP would not oppose the bill but criticised the exclusive transaction process that kept local communities in the dark for three years while the government dealt with the proponent behind closed doors.
“The fact that consultation with the local community did not commence until 2020 is a direct consequence of government policy, not due to an unwillingness of the proponent to engage on the issue.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Strongly supported the bill as Minister for Transport and Main Roads, highlighting the government's renewable energy track record with 25 operational large-scale projects and the Forest Wind farm's potential to increase Queensland's large-scale renewable capacity by 40 per cent.
“When we came to office, when I was the minister for energy, not one single, large-scale, renewable energy project had started under the Newman government.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Supported the project in principle, rebutting Labor claims about LNP opposition to renewables by citing the MacIntyre Wind Farm in his electorate as an example of good consultation, while criticising the government's lack of consultation on the Forest Wind project.
“If a proponent emerges with a project that meets all of the requirements, has community support and is a suitable business proposition, of course it will be supported.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Supported the bill as part of the government's renewable energy revolution and unite and recover plan, noting 39 large-scale renewable energy projects commenced or financially committed under the Palaszczuk government.
“The Forest Wind farm is another example of the innovative economic initiatives that we will be seeing more of under the unite and recover plan.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Supported the bill as delivering clean and cheap energy, praising both public and private sector investment in renewables and emphasising the government's commitment to acting on climate change.
“This project is delivering clean energy and it is delivering jobs, which is what we desperately need as we move forward.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Acknowledged wind farms have merit but advocated for alternative renewable projects including the Tully-Millstream hydro-electric scheme and cogeneration using bagasse from sugar cane, urging the government to consider these alongside wind energy.
“Renewables will play a big part in the provision of energy in Queensland.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Strongly supported the bill as creating jobs in the Wide Bay region, noting that Forest Wind had received over 800 submissions from businesses wanting to work on the project.
“This wind farm is fantastic for the region. Not only will it create jobs during construction but also Forest Wind have had over 800 submissions from businesses that want to supply and work on the wind farm.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Replied to the second reading debate as Minister for State Development, acknowledging opposition support, addressing consultation concerns, and noting the Gympie Regional Council mayor's strong support for the project.
“This will be one of the largest wind farms in the whole of the southern hemisphere.”— 2020-08-12View Hansard
Plain English Summary
Overview
This bill creates a special legal framework to allow a major wind farm to be built in Queensland State forests. It enables up to 226 wind turbines producing 1200 megawatts of renewable energy in the Toolara, Tuan and Neerdie State forests near Gympie, while allowing existing plantation forestry to continue. The bill also fixes unrelated planning issues in the Springfield development area in Ipswich.
Who it affects
The wind farm project could create up to 440 construction jobs and 50 ongoing jobs in the Wide Bay-Burnett region. Property developers and landowners in Springfield face new planning requirements.
State forest wind farm
Creates a new type of tenure (access licences and project leases) to allow Forest Wind Holdings to build and operate a major wind farm in State forests. The wind farm can coexist with HQPlantations' existing 99-year plantation licence for timber production.
- Allows wind farm development in State forests for the first time, exempting the project from Forestry Act restrictions
- Creates access licences for construction activities and project leases (up to 45 years) for ongoing operations
- Requires staged development agreements between the State, wind farm proponent, and plantation licensee
- No compensation payable by the State for enacting this legislation
Springfield planning controls
Fixes issues with the Springfield Structure Plan that emerged from court decisions, ensuring precinct plans must be approved before development can proceed and giving the master developer input into planning decisions.
- Reinstates requirement for precinct plans before development approval in Springfield
- Requires developers to seek Springfield City Group's views on plan applications
- Limits who can lodge planning disputes to applicants, landowners, the master developer, and submitters
- Extends timeframes for the dispute resolution process