DEAR Mr Bolan,
Question at Council Meeting 2 May 2005
I refer to your questions taken on notice at the Council meeting of 2 May 2005 namely:

1. On what basis did the Launceston City Council and Councillors give this proposal support on behalf of our City?

Answer

Council has passed three motions in support of the proposed Pulp Mill in the Tamar Valley:

a) Minute No 14.1 of 12/07/2004;
b) Minute No 14.1 of 20/09/2004; and
c) Minute No 15.3 of 24/01/2005

In addition Council received a briefing from the State Government Communications Unit at a Strategic Planning and Policy Meeting on the 6 December 2004. While the Committee Minutes are not available to the public I can advise that the general thrust of the information provided to the Aldermen included:

• That the State Government has set down clear environmental standards that any pulp mill will need to meet.
• The standards were developed by the Independent Resource Planning and Development Commission.
• The approval process will require it to be treated as a Project of State Significance.
• An outline of economic outcomes.

At the time of making the decisions in support, Gunns Ltd were still assessing the suitability of sites at Longreach and Hamshire.

Each of the motions a), b) and c) above has been of a general nature declaring publicly the support for the proposed mill. From observing the debate at Council on these occasions, I suggest that the following were considered important factors that formed the basis of the decisions:

• A development of the magnitude proposed will provide considerable economic benefit to the North of the State and the Tamar Valley in particular.
• Gunns Ltd is a local company and Council in the past has been supportive of local firms and initiatives.
• Encouragement and support for the project, at that stage may have enhanced the region’s chance of securing the site for the project.

2. For the purposes of ratepayer evaluation of Council performance, will Council provide a full list of the voting patterns of Councillors on this matter?

Answer

The minutes do not record the voting pattern of Aldermen on this matter. The motions were “Carried” in each case. There was no request for a “Division”, which records how each individual Alderman voted on an issue.

3. Can the Council give a guarantee that Councillors that have voted in support of the proposal have no conflicts of interest (eg personal or family Gunns shareholding)?

Answer

The question of “interest” in a matter before a council for decision is one to be considered and decided by each Alderman.

Legislation in this State does not require elected representatives to complete a register of their respective shareholdings in advance of a matter being considered by a council.

If an Alderman has an interest in a matter that is before Council for consideration and decision, he/she is required to signify that interest, complete details of the interest and vacate the meeting area where the deliberation is occurring.

In respect to the three decisions taken in July and September 2004 and January 2005 respectively, the minutes do not record that any Aldermen present signified that they had an interest to declare.

I trust these responses satisfy your enquiries.
Yours sincerely
Martin Reynolds
Corporate Secretary

Mike Bolan’s original letter:
Questions for Launceston City Council