A written Tynwald question that had gone unanswered for more than six weeks has now been answered by the Department of Infrastructure.
This was hours after Onchan MHK Julie Edge raised concerns to Manx.News about the delay.
Ms Edge submitted the question on June 15, asking the Department to set out the legal power it relied upon when signing the 2015 Agreement for Lease with Ørsted, then DONG Energy, and whether the terms had been approved by Tynwald, the Council of Ministers or Treasury.
She also sought confirmation on whether legal advice had been taken and whether the agreement was considered a strategic policy measure or a constitutionally significant disposal of rights over territorial seas.
Speaking yesterday, Ms Edge said the lack of a published answer had fuelled public uncertainty. She said she had been told on July 20 that the response was “ready to go” and with the Minister and Chief Officer, but questioned why it had still not appeared.
“All it’s going to do is make the public more unsure as to what is in this agreement in 2015,” she said, adding that delays undermined expectations of open and transparent government.
Full Power & Lawful Authority
The Department’s response, released today, states that its authority to enter the agreement came from its ownership of the territorial seabed, which it considered gave it “full power and lawful authority” to grant leasehold and associated rights.
It confirmed the agreement was signed with full Treasury concurrence and approved through internal Government committee processes, but said there had been no requirement for separate Tynwald approval.
Legal advice was provided by the Attorney General’s Chambers, and the agreement was structured in line with Crown Estate arrangements used for UK offshore wind projects.
The Department said the agreement formed part of Tynwald‑approved policy direction on offshore energy production, but was not considered a constitutionally significant disposal of territorial seas.
It said the agreement did not transfer ownership and only created a conditional framework under which rights could arise if milestones and statutory consents were met.
The full written question and answer can be found here.
