Editorial: Pylon project delay a political contrivance

Opinion

Waikato residents opposed to Transpower's string of giant transmission pylons were caught in two minds by the Government's decision to delay the project. On the one hand, there was the hope that this represented a dent in the grid company's plan. And that the residents' concerns were finally hitting home in the Beehive. On the other, however, it was impossible not to be highly cynical, such was the obviousness of the Government's desire to suppress a potentially damaging general-election issue.

This motive was, of course, denied. But as much was confirmed by the hoopla surrounding the announcement that the Electricity Commission's deadline for approving or declining Transpower's $500 million project had been extended from September to the middle of next year. Energy Minister Trevor Mallard sought maximum publicity when releasing a letter to the commission outlining the Government's expectations, which include looking more closely at alternatives.

The extra time is the only new factor in this equation. The commission's lot was always to examine Transpower's proposal, the strong opposition of Waikato landowners to it, and to set this against the alternatives. The most sensible notion was that, while the commission was doing this, Transpower would continue planning its transmission line. That will not alter, a fact which throws cold water over landowners' hopes that the Government was signalling a change of course.

It is logical for Transpower to push ahead, even if a thumbs-down from the commission would mean the waste of a considerable amount of money and energy. This is an issue of urgency. Even the most bitter of Transpower's critics cannot deny that Auckland's electricity supply must be guaranteed - and as soon as possible. Or that any delays in a transmission decision are also postponing the development of much-needed new generation. The Government's role should have been to create as much certainty as possible; for purely partisan reasons, it has created a climate of doubt.

Already this year, Auckland has once almost run out of electricity capacity because of high temperatures in the Waikato River. That was a reminder of the need for the maximum pace and sense of purpose. Additionally, there has been no indication, in public at least, that the commission was feeling rushed and needed more time to reach a decision. If such were the case, Mr Mallard would surely have mentioned it, thereby deflecting total responsibility for the extended deadline from the Government.

It seems the commission was comfortable that it could decide on Transpower's proposal and the alternatives by September. That it could examine relatively quickly whether it was feasible to build new power stations near Auckland, increase the generating capacity in existing ones, or recommission the Marsden B station. Or whether there was potential in energy-efficiency programmes, or the placing underground of Transpower's proposed transmission line.

Nor can any delay be justified by the Government's other instructions. The commission has been told to consult widely with affected parties. That introduces a feel-good factor but little else. Landowners have made their opposition, and their case, well known during a series of stormy public meetings with Transpower executives. It is unlikely that wider consultation will achieve much. Similarly, the commission's brief to take likely environmental costs into account is not about to add months to the exercise. In sum, the commission is probably going to take an extra eight months to reach the same decision.

The delay is a contrivance. It serves the Government's interests but can give no confidence to residents of the country's biggest city and offers no real change to thos fighting against the pylons.