Political storm threatens to sink undersea cable as Marinus Link backs “open public scrutiny”

The future of the $5 billion Marinus Link project is embroiled in a political storm of epic proportions, as Tasmania’s two major parties fight for support to form government in the wake of a snap election in which neither won a clear mandate.

At the centre of the debate is the fate of the 750 megawatt (MW) undersea power cable linking Tasmania to the Australian mainland, which is being proposed as part of a plan to better link the electricity markets of the mainland NEM with the island state.

On the one hand, Marinus Link is pitched as a once-in-a-generation opportunity to power Tasmania’s next era of growth – and also providing a new high powered fibre optic telecommunications cable – and on the other decried as is “an expensive risk” for the state’s energy consumers with little overarching local benefit.

To address these concerns, a Treasury-led assessment of Marinus weighing up the benefits and impacts in a whole-of-state business case was supposed to have been made public at least 30 days before a final investment decision, in a pre-election deal brokered between the Rockliff Liberal government and state independents.

But in a truly bizarre move for a party fighting for political survival – votes are still be counted from the July 19 election – the incumbent Liberal government on Wednesday announced it intends to back Marinus Link, and then called on Labor to do the same, just 24 hours after being provided a limited parliamentary briefing on the whole-of-business case.

This move has enraged the Tasmanian Greens and independents such as the member for Braddon, Craig Garland, who on Thursday described it as “a terrible look” and “absolutely disgraceful” approach to negotiations on the biggest infrastructure project in Tasmania.

“They’ve stated on numerous occasions, we would have 30 days before any decision is made to go over this, this whole state business case, and to have it shown to us yesterday afternoon for three hours – and we can’t take a copy with us, we cannot talk about it – how can anybody make a decision based on that?” Garland told ABC Radio on Wednesday.

“This is the biggest infrastructure project in the state’s history. The impacts are substantial. Power prices are going to go up for the heavy industrials and your mum and dad households … and they’re keeping it in secrecy.

“It wasn’t released during the election cycle so people could make an informed decision and then vote on it. This is a terrible look. It is absolutely disgraceful.

“It sets a terrible precedent for the start of any government …and it’s making it very difficult for me to even approach working with the Liberals.”

Whichever way the cookie crumbles politically, the current state of play is likely frustrating the team at Marinus Link, too, not least for creating the impression that the project is shrouded in mystery, when in fact a great deal of information – including on costs – already exists in the public domain.

This information includes the publication on its website of the Initial Feasibility Report, the Business Case Assessment and the recently updated Regulatory Investment Test for Transmission (RIT-T).

Marinus says the latest update to the RIT-T included two sets of independent modelling, which found significant benefits in a future with Marinus Link for Tasmanians and Victorians, as well as the broader energy market – albeit boosted by the failure of previously planned hydrogen projects, and the possibility of a slower green energy transition.

Marinus also contributed to the state government’s whole-of-state business case.

“We have worked closely with all shareholders to support their various assessment processes, and we welcome open, transparent, and evidence-based public scrutiny of Marinus Link as a significant infrastructure undertaking,” the company said in an emailed statement on Thursday.

“As a proud, committed, and passionate group of professionals, it should come as no surprise that we take these conversations to heart,” the statement adds.

“Our team is getting on with the work. And we’re doing it with the best people – experts from across Tasmania, Victoria, Gippsland, and around the world – who are deeply proud of where they come from and even prouder of the work they do.

“They’re out there right now, doing the work, meeting with communities, young people, business and industry leaders, because we know that a future with Marinus Link is a future worth building.”

Beyond being embroiled in a political drama, there is acute time pressure on Marinus Link, with a series of critical project milestones required to be met since the board made its recommendation to stakeholders on May 30.

Looming largest is the end-of-August deadline for Marinus to issue notice to proceed to its cable contractor, Prysmian, which has been underwritten by the federal government. With huge global demand for the sort of cables the project will use, missing this deadline could set the project back by years.

Before that milestone can be met, however, Marinus has to reach financial close, which will secure the $2.8 billion in debt funding from the federal government’s Clean Energy Finance Corporation. And before that can happen, it needs a FID from the Tasmanian government.

“Marinus Link acknowledges the work being undertaken by all our shareholders as they move through their respective Final Investment Decision (FID) processes, and the complexity and challenges given the status post-election in Tasmania,” the company says.

“Tasmania’s Whole-of-State Business Case is another one of these important inputs as part of an extensive assessment process.”

Garland, meanwhile, is calling on Rockliff to release the whole-of-state business case for the general public to look over and to give Tasmania’s MPs the document so they can examine it thoroughly and seek expert advice.

“I’d like to see [state Labor leader Dean Winter] ask for a continuation for another 30 days so this document can be released, so we can all go over it and make an informed decision about it,” Garland told ABC Radio.

“You need to be clear in your mind what exactly this project entails and the consequences of it. …You know, this is terrible governance, and things have to change.

“If anyone’s after my support, they need to be open, transparent and not lie to us… What are they hiding? You know, this is the question, what is the reason for withholding that from all of us in this state?”