Energy Minister Penny Sharpe has publicly criticized EnergyCo for its controversial recruitment practices, which involved referencing a newspaper article about a terminally ill man during the selection process for a media and communications advisor. The incident centers around Ian Barry, a landholder suffering from motor neurone disease, and his ongoing struggle against the acquisition of his property for the Hunter Transmission Project.
Mr. Barry, who is 79 years old, has been at the forefront of a community campaign to prevent EnergyCo from taking a significant portion of his 51-hectare property located at Cedar Creek. He and his wife, Vicki Barry, have garnered support from the local community as they navigate the challenges posed by the statutory authority. It has been reported that the stress of dealing with EnergyCo has exacerbated Mr. Barry’s health condition.
During a budget estimates hearing on Friday, Mark Banasiak, a Member of the New South Wales Parliament, revealed that candidates applying for roles at EnergyCo were shown a newspaper report on Mr. Barry’s situation. They were reportedly told, “If you can’t handle dealing with the bleeding hearts, this isn’t the job for you.” Minister Sharpe responded strongly, stating that the use of such an article in a recruitment context was “completely inappropriate.”
In light of the incident, EnergyCo issued an apology to Mr. Barry. An EnergyCo spokeswoman stated, “EnergyCo apologises for any distress caused to Mr. Barry and we will change our recruitment process to de-identify any individuals listed in a work assessment task.” The organization has expressed its commitment to engaging with landowners respectfully and sensitively.
In addition, Ash Albury, EnergyCo’s executive director of planning and communities, has agreed to meet with Mr. Barry to discuss the situation further. The urgency of this meeting is compounded by EnergyCo’s insistence that the Barrys agree to the terms for the acquisition of their property by September 19. The property has been independently assessed as containing biodiversity credits valued at several million dollars—credits that EnergyCo requires for the construction of the transmission project.
Despite their willingness to sell the biodiversity credits for a fraction of their market value, EnergyCo has reportedly refused to pay for them. Mr. Barry has stated that EnergyCo threatened to withdraw its offer, which includes covering legal fees, if he and his wife do not accept the authority’s terms by the set deadline.
Minister Sharpe emphasized her desire for a swift and sensitive resolution regarding the acquisition of the Barrys’ property. During the budget estimates hearing, she said, “I want the issues for the Barrys to be resolved as quickly and as sensitively as possible.” When pressed by Banasiak about EnergyCo seemingly ignoring her expectations, she remarked, “Well, I expect better.”
EnergyCo has maintained that negotiations with landowners are private and has refrained from commenting on specific cases. Mr. Barry has been vocal in his opposition to the project, having testified at an Upper House inquiry into the impact of renewable energy zones on regional communities. He has argued that alternatives to running high-voltage power lines across his property exist.
The situation has become increasingly challenging for the Barrys, who have expressed concerns about the proximity of the proposed infrastructure to their home. Mr. Barry remarked, “Effectively, easement doesn’t mean renting your land. It means you no longer own it.”
As this situation unfolds, the impact on the Barrys and their community remains significant, highlighting the broader tensions between renewable energy developments and the rights of landholders. The outcome of this case may set important precedents for how similar projects are managed in the future.
