Power alliance loses appeal

173239_01

The fight against “Labor’s Towers” has been dealt a major blow, after the Supreme Court of Victoria rejected an appeal made by those in opposition to two major transmission line projects.

On Friday, September 13, the Court of Appeal made the decision to dismiss the appeal lodged by the Moorabool and Central Highlands Power Alliance (MCHPA).

In August, the MCHPA, trading as the Regional Victoria Power Alliance (RVPA), sought a judicial review of a December 2023 judgment which dismissed its original case heard in September last year.

In this case, the alliance claimed Energy and Resources Minister Lily D’Ambrosio had ‘flawed reasoning and incorrect application’ of the National Electricity (Vic) Act 2020 when it came to making two ministerial orders for major infrastructure projects Western Renewables Link (WRL) and Victoria to New South Wales Interconnector West (VNI West).

The result means the WRL and VNI West will continue to go ahead as planned.

MCHPA chair Vicki Johnson said while the result was unsatisfactory for all involved, they would not be disheartened by the setback.

“This was obviously a deeply disappointing outcome for the RVPA and its more than 2,450 members,” she said.

“Whilst the decision brings to an end this particular part of the fight, it does not end the broader continuing fight by thousands of landholders and their communities against the high-voltage transmission line projects.

“In one form or another, we will all continue to take action along both project corridors to stop these projects.”

Ms Johnson said the RVPA would continue to advocate for landholders and represent the voices of regional communities who maintain they will be impacted by the installation of transmission lines.

“Behind the complexity and depth of the legal arguments are individuals, families and businesses,” she said.

“We still seek a proper and fair process in the interest of all Victorians.”

The appeal did not ‘challenge the merits’ of either projects but questioned the interpretation of Ms D’Ambrosio’s actions when it came to use of the relevant law, which were judged to be correct.