Government and green energy in court showdown over solar subsidies
The Government launched its plans to end RO for big projects with a consultation in May 2014
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Government will clash with green energy companies at the Court of Appeal tomorrow about claims it acted unlawfully over the sudden, “cynical” ending of solar subsidies in 2014.
The London-based Solarcentury and Lark Energy, in the East Midlands, are furious that the Department of Energy & Climate Change (DECC) withdrew the solar renewables obligation (RO) two years early. The RO supported the construction of large-scale wind farms.
The two companies are now appealing, having lost a court case in conjunction with two other energy businesses, Orta Solar Farms and TGC Renewables, in late 2014. Around 6,500 jobs in the solar industry were lost between the summer and Christmas last year, fuelling criticism that the Government is not living up to its clean energy responsibilities.
The Government launched its plans to end RO for big projects with a consultation in May 2014. When the closure of the scheme was later confirmed, it was decided that solar companies which had not met certain criteria by the time the consultation started – such as having planning permission – would not qualify for the remaining subsidy, even though this was to run until April 2015.
The claimants allege this lack of grace period for firms that had spent money and built business plans based on the subsidy was retrospective and unfair. These businesses, they argue, were not given sufficient warning to get their paperwork in order so they could still qualify.
However, the High Court ruled in late 2014 that the changes were fair and refused a judicial review.
Lark’s managing director, Jonathan Selwyn, said the Government’s timing was a “calculated, cynical ploy”. He added: “It’s designed to create the maximum disruption in the market and with immediate effect, which is why we pursued the case in the first place.”
Seb Berry, Solarcentury’s head of public affairs, said: “Without investor and stakeholder confidence in policy, risky projects will cost a lot more or not be built at all.”
A DECC spokesperson said: “We continue to support the low-carbon sector but this needs to be driven by competition and innovation, not subsidies.”
Read more on solar panel grants
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments