Comments

<Back to Article

1. Peter is right.

   Tasmanians live in fear of the Gunns juggernaut.

   Wherever I go people tell me that they would like to do this, or should do that, but they fear losing their jobs or businesses, or they fear losing their homes, so they suffer in silence.

   What people must realise is that if this mill goes in, their homes won’t be worth a cracker anyway. Who wants to live in the shadow of a 100 or is it 200, or is it a 650 hectare pulp mill?

   The truth is that the proposed mill Peter speaks of is a dirty mill.

   The propaganda machine has been shown to be tainted and right now the whole sorry process is crumbling around them.

   Why can’t they get it right? Why try and sneak things here and there?

   What has happened to truth and community?

   Has the corporate world gone mad?

   This proposed pulp mill debacle has, in recent weeks, seen by all to be just that.

   If I wind up on the bottom of the Tamar or you see me begging in the street after writing this letter, you will know why it has happened.

   Posted by Dave Groves  on  28/06/05  at  07:41 PM

2. Methinks the ABC may have a problem on thier hands with Mr.Cundall.

   This space will be an interesting one to watch. What has Peter Cundall to lose by continuing to speak his mind.

   When will his behaviour draw public comment from the government? A tricky one for them too. A Tasmanian icon much loved by a large cross-section of the community, senior citizen, war veteran, national celebrity, Tamar local with cred and the right to protest on his own turf. Last time it was the schoolteacher and mother.

   Will Peter Cundall become Gunns’ worst nightmare?

   Posted by Rickpilkington  on  29/06/05  at  02:02 PM

3. I’m not sure the ‘Hagnote’ is entirely fair.  I think it’s come to be expected that organisations such as the ABC and other media outlets tend to get upset about their people expressing personal opinions through the media.

   Whether that’s right or wrong I don’t know.  But I can’t really follow the inference that the ABC is hopping into bed with Gunns.

   Posted by Geoff Rollins  on  29/06/05  at  08:44 PM

4. I am in full support of Peter Cundall after all we are all supposed to have the benefit of free speech, or is that only allowed for the gunnerment?

   I can see the day coming when we will start having ASIO raids on the houses of “dissenters” here in Tasmania for having the temerity to speak out against the leader.

   Posted by Bob Manton  on  30/06/05  at  12:04 AM

5. It appears that Cath Hurley has been somewhat negligent in her duty to provide worthwhile coontent in local radio.

   I, as a listener, want to hear people such as Peter Cundall - and other ABC personalities who may have a wide range of views on a wide range of subjects - interviewed on local radio.

   Cath Hurley must not only apologise and allow the airing of the Trevor Jackson/Peter Cundall interview, but must give an undertaking that such censorship will never happen again.

   Posted by Justa Bloke  on  30/06/05  at  12:34 AM

6. I agree with Justa Bloke that the ABC have made the wrong decision in this instance.  Someone as widely regarded as Peter Cundall should be allowed to air his views given his relationship to the Tamar region.

   Also, whilst I still stand by my comment that the ABC is not in bed with Gunns (rather, they are just a bit soft), the latter part of the first paragraph in my 0644 post didn’t make much sense.

   Posted by Geoff Rollins  on  30/06/05  at  01:57 AM

7. It is very common for companies to have limitations on employees expressing public views using their employment affiliation as part of their identification, particularly when it does not relate to their employment. So, from that point of view, I would not say that ABC is in bed with Gunns.

   However, given that Peter Cundall is such a well known personality, it would be almost impossible for him to say anything without people relating it to ABC. In such cases, I think that the right of the individual to ‘have a life’ so to speak should prevail. In this case I would say that ABC should just accept that Mr Cundall has other things to say and broadcast the interview.

   Bob said “I can see the day coming when we will start having ASIO raids on the houses of “dissenters” here in Tasmania for having the temerity to speak out against the leader.”

   That is an extremely exaggerated, kind of paranoid comment. Let us keep things in perspective.

   Posted by Prince of Darkness  on  30/06/05  at  04:31 AM

8. An ABC person of my acquaintance passed this comment re this matter.

   Cath Hurley has proven for the one millionth time that “ABC management” is an oxymoron.

   Not bad, I thought.

   She also told me the story of the fish that ended up in the Senate inquiry. 

   My ABC friend says the money wasted on and by management would be more wisely spent on researchers, producers, and good investigative journalism.

   Posted by nudger  on  30/06/05  at  06:23 AM

9. By censoring Peter , the ABC may have inadvertantly ramped up the level of public interest / debate on this issue. Peter has got nothing to lose by airing his views — and he may just do this.

   Unfortunately the acrimony will claim a distinguished career as a mature age presenter, but it may put this project of state significance to bed.

   Posted by aeroguy  on  03/07/05  at  11:59 AM

10. And the tradition lives on.  After hearing Peter talk at tonight’s public forum on Gunns lawsuit and the convenient ‘editing’ of Peter’s interview with Andrew Denton on Enough Rope, it seems that the ABC wants to limit the power of one 80 year old gardener from speaking to not one but a series of generations about an issue which speak to us all. 

    Peter represents an important facet of our community and his actions are truley respected as, as far as i know, he hasn’t been dropped yet.  Support the treedomfighters and get onto the media for their part in protecting Gunns and what it’s doing to public protest.

    It affects us all.

    Posted by Rachel goldlust  on  15/11/05  at  04:27 PM

11. They couldn’t have picked a more upstanding person to arrest.  The amount of time Peter has put into supporting the Australian public to better their environment - he is a hero!  It’s a low act to arrest someone who speaks up for the environment, who puts that before the politics of today.  Keep it up Peter, we’re all behind you.  At least now they’ve chosen the voice to oppose them - and what better one than Peter’s!!

    Posted by Clea  on  20/11/09  at  07:21 PM