An email from Paula

Catherine Case

Your email, Ms Wriedt, is nothing more that a prime example of “spin”. I’m sorry, but I’m not “placated” and neither are thousands of other Tasmanians who can see through this appalling abuse of power and perversion of democracy.

An email from Paula Wriedt:

On 02/04/2007, at 1:52 PM, Minister@dtae.tas.gov.au wrote:

Dear Ms Case,

Thank you for your email regarding the proposed pulp mill.

I am disappointed that the assessment of this project by the Resource Planning and Development Commission (RPDC) has not been able to be completed.

This is the largest private sector development ever proposed for Tasmania and it’s only fair that it is assessed in a timely fashion.

As the Minister for the Environment I take my responsibility for protecting Tasmania’s environment very seriously.

The tough environmental guidelines that were established under the RPDC will be used in the new assessment process. These are the same guidelines the RPDC would have used.

In addition the scientific expert will be asked to consider any pulp mill advances in technology that have occurred since the guidelines were developed in 2004. This will ensure that the mill is built and operated with world’s best practice.

Please be assured that the extensive public consultations that were undertaken by the RPDC will be considered during this new assessment process.

As the Premier has stated, the Tasmanian Government does not want a pulp mill at any cost. We will apply a rigourous environmental assessment to the proposal.

Once again, I would like to thank you for taking the time to write to me on this important matter.

Please be assured that I care passionately about our State — the economy, the opportunities and most importantly, the environment that we leave for current and future generations of Tasmanians.

Yours sincerely

Paula Wriest MHA
Minister for Tourism, Arts & the Environment

My reply:

Dear Ms Wriedt

Thank you for your reply.

You raise a number of issues and I would like to respond to those.

The assessment by the RPDC was not able to be completed because Gunns themselves chose to withdraw. Rather coincidentally, the Government had hastily drawn up legislation for a new process, specifically designed to please Gunns and to water down environmental guidelines and other scrutiny that the project would have been subject to. When legitimate processes are undermined and bypassed for the express benefit of ONE company then democracy is truly dead.

Under the new process environmental guidelines will NOT have to be met. As has been made public, already the project is known to fail on several grounds ie Nitrogen oxide emissions, stack height, and fugitive odours. What other guidelines will not be met? The public (and possibly elected MPs) will NEVER KNOW because that information will not have to be included in the report. Any pretence that this new process is as rigourous as that of the RPDC is just that, a pretence. The government knows it and the more intelligent and less gullible members of the public know it.

The consultant, presumably chosen with Gunns’ input, will be under NO obligation whatsoever to read ANY of the public submissions already prepared. Exactly how could that be enforced? And how would we know whether they had bothered to read them? We won’t!

In a time frame of now about 4 weeks it is an absolute farce that this consultant will be able to read, interpret, and consider all the relevant material, even if they chose to do so. The ex-chair of the RPDC panel is on record as saying that the latest information submitted by Gunns was still incomplete. This fact will obviously be totally overlooked now.

Dr Warwick Raverty is on record as saying that the guidelines were drawn up with a “remote location” in mind and were never intended to be applied to a densely populated area like the Tamar valley, especially with all its attendant air quality problems. As he said “ALL pulp mills have problems with odour”. The Tamar valley is clearly not the place for such a mill. But this issue will not be addressed.

Chlorine dioxide will be manufactured on site, and there will be approximately 50 tonnes of liquid chlorine stored there. If there was an industrial accident and all that chlorine was released then the results would be catastrophic for the surrounding area. Dr Raverty claimed that everything down wind within 19 km would be killed. This is a truly shocking scenario. Apparently this manufacturing process would be in breach of a UN treaty that Australia is a signatory to. But will this be addressed? Not likely.

The amount of permanent jobs flowing from the project has, I believe, been grossly overstated by Paul Lennon and others. When the Pulp mill is fully operational it will employ fewer than 300 people. Where does this figure of 2000 permanent jobs come from? That figure is relevant to jobs during the construction period but it it certainly hard to see where these purported jobs will come from afterwards. Job losses from tourism and associated industries have not been taken into account. But will the consultant be allowed to even consider or know about any negative effects of the pulp mill? Again, no.

I read somewhere the other day that the job of a politician is “to placate”, and they do this through the mechanism of “spin”.

Your email, Ms Wriedt, is nothing more that a prime example of “spin”.

I’m sorry, but I’m not “placated” and neither are thousands of other Tasmanians who can see through this appalling abuse of power and perversion of democracy. Unfortunately for us and fortunately for your government many Tasmanians are sucked in by the rhetoric and spin pumped out by your PR department and that of Gunns. Tamar Valley residents are to be sacrificed for the greed and benefit of one company, their shareholders, and their mates in office.

It is blatantly obvious that Gunns, knowing that their proposal would be rejected as it stood by the RPDC, have dictated their terms for a new “assessment process” (read “approval process”) to Paul Lennon and he has quite happily obliged them

Shame on all of you who participate and are complicit in this appalling travesty.

Catherine Case

My original email, March 21

Dear Ms Wriedt
I imagine you are probably being inundated with letters and calls from people across the board, but I would really appreciate it if you would take the time to read this email.

I had faith that the RPDC was the appropriate assessment body to undertake the investigation into the proposed pulpmill. I wasn’t happy that they were somewhat hamstrung in their deliberations by not being permitted to assess impacts on native forests or fauna, but overall it was clear that we had independent and qualified people on the board.

The recent actions of Paul Lennon and John Gay have totally undermined the fairness and appropriateness of the pulpmill assessment process. Paul Lennon says “there’s no conspiracy” ie he never stitched up a deal with John Gay to do away with the RPDC. How can any Tasmanian believe that now? How can any Tasmania have faith that the new assessment process will have the appropriate rigour and enough time for a correct decision to be made?

Why one rule for Gunns and another for everyone else?
Paul Lennon gave assurances that the RPDC would assess the project. His word his worthless now. Gunns should have been told ‘this is the process, like it or lump it”. They should not be given special treatment .

I plead with you to vote against this fast-track legislation. It would be a huge shame if you or your colleagues were forced to vote against their beliefs because they had to “toe the party line”. The Labor Party is on the verge of losing all credibility over this issue. I’m sure there are members who are privately opposed to this but don’t wish to cross the floor. What use is democracy when a person’s vote is not a free one?

Please help keep integrity and honesty and openness alive in Tasmania. I really feel that this is crunch time for Tasmania, we stand to lose so much if this blatant disregard for proper and due process continues.

Yours Sincerely

Catherine Case