Charles and Claire Gilmour
Why is this Lennon Government in conjunction with their preferred company: – Failing in its duty of care to ensure the safety and well being of its citizens? – Failing in providing due consideration and balanced fairness to legitimate concerns raised by citizens and businesses by ignoring and trying to denigrate citizens’ concerns, requests, and requirements and misrepresenting the truth, which has ultimately destroyed democracy in Tasmania? – Failing in allowing a moral conscience and integrity to be incorporated into its governance by forcing party members to vote only with the party, at the expense and against members own principles and conscience, which in no way can also adequately allow government representatives to represent their constituents requests and requirements, upon which constituents voted individual members in?
“Tassie plantation boom”
http://www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,22055033-921,00.html
“Tasmania now has 254,200 hectares of plantations with 150,407ha of plantations on private land with 129,178ha planted to hardwood species and 21,229ha planted to softwood or other species”
Why would the Lennon Government, after allowing more private land to be converted to plantations than any other state in Australia, and allowing good food producing farms to go under to pulpwood plantations, impose a PAL (Protection of Agricultural Land) policy taking away smaller rural landholders rights but gives more rights to grow the, mostly, absolute bottom end of the market pulpwood plantations?
“Worries growing on tree farms”
http://www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,22035232-3462,00.html
“The Glamorgan Spring Bay Council wants the State Government to change its planning laws to stop the unrelenting march of plantation forestry in its municipality. Concerns about water quality in the catchments of Triabunna, Orford and Bicheno have prompted the council to start independent testing for chemicals.”
Why would the Lennon Government allow the use of poisons banned in other countries, and not consistently and adequately test for poisons in water catchments, water courses, water supplies, coming off pulp wood plantations taking over communities?
Burnie aldermen push for greater say on plantation forests
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/07/09/1974065.htm
“If they’re taking over good farm land which is going to affect our beef production or our milk production or going to affect our water resources” he said, “then the Burnie City Council has the right to object to a timber reserve under its ‘against the public interest’ provision.”
Why has the Lennon Government wanted to take away resources (such as trying to claim Burnies water supply) and allow good beef and dairy farms which consistently produce more revenue per acre to go under to pulpwood plantations which also, (due to destroying capital improvements) takes away from councils ability to raise revenue to help support infrastructure in their local communities?
“Fears for veggie growers as imports set to double”
http://nwtasmania.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=news&subclass=general&story_id=1022919&category=general
“Mr Clements said he had serious concerns about the impact of increasing imports on the local vegetable industry. Mr Clements said the bigger picture, including predictions more struggling farmers would sell their agricultural land to tree farmers, was also a concern.”
Why would the Lennon Government allow an increase in imports of vegetables, not use the allocated $700,000 to advertise local vegetables, allow Managed Investment Schemes in relation to pulpwood plantations, give food producers no such equitable scheme, which would help struggling farmers and boost a sustainable industry, but instead allow good farms to go under to pulp wood plantations?
“Farmers warned of climate change”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/07/04/1970102.htm
“Mr Barnes-Keoghan predicts small-scale temperature increases in Tasmania over the next decade will lead to more weather extremes. “It may well be that practices that worked 20, 30, or 40 years ago and places that you could grow certain crops may just become more and more difficult to grow and may be becoming marginal – just not sustainable to grow certain crop types in certain places,” Mr Barnes-Keoghan said.”
Why hasn’t the Lennon Government adequately assessed the effects on climate change on such a big industry (food) in Tasmania and catered for changes in the industry and instead allowed good high rainfall farms to go under to pulpwood plantations? Why hasn’t there been a land use impact and economic assessment done on pulpwood plantations and the short and long term effects on agriculture?
“Experts warn on biodiversity”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/06/26/1962830.htm
“Experts say Australia is moving too slowly on land management and that the issue is more crucial to the environment than climate change. Dr David Lindenmayer said “we’ve got to really work out this ecologically sustainable resource use issue if we’re going to be able to steal ourselves for when serious climate change comes crashing in over the top.”
Why has the Lennon Government allowed massive clearfelling of old growth carbon sink forests, water catchments, rainforests, important ecosystems? And instead of selectively harvesting for local, future and biodiversity sustainability, allowed so much rich resource native state forest to be clearfelled, chipped, burnt, poisoned, and converted to bottom end of the market monoculture pulpwood plantations?
“Organic farming yields ‘as good or better’”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/07/11/1975440.htm
“Organic farming can yield up to three times as much food as conventional farming in developing countries, and hold its own against standard methods in rich countries, US researches say.”
Why isn’t the Lennon government giving more encouragement, incentive and protection to healthy organic farms when there is expected to be world food shortages and consequently a hike in food prices, milk prices, water prices, but instead focusing on a pulp mill using remaining native state forest to run it and pulpwood plantations grown in publicly owned state forest and on productive farming land, to feed it and precious water resources to wash it all down with?
“Farmers urged to get involved in carbon trading scheme debate”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2006/06/19/1666241.htm
“A report commissioned by the National Farmers Federation says farmers should push to have trees on their properties included in carbon trading schemes. “For every tonne of carbon locked in a tree you essentially earn a permit and that’s a revenue source.”
Why does the Lennon Government allow forest companies to cut down any potential carbon sink forests on farming land they buy, but stop farmers from clearing, and not automatically give farmers/property owners the chance to profit from keeping and protecting their carbon sinks? With instead governments trying to claim private carbon credits? Shouldn’t “good practice” farms and property owners be allowed to claim the revenue from their assets? Shouldn’t the dwindling state old growth forests, rainforests, forests in water catchments, instead be used for government carbon offsets and public carbon trading scheme revenue? Why should the public lose out once again and pay to support private industry?
“Farmers compete with mines for workers”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/07/20/1984115.htm
“Some Tasmanian farmers have issued an urgent call for workers over summer. Many farmers need hired help from October onwards, but say competition for skilled workers is putting them under pressure. North-west harvesting contractor, Peter Radford, says he used to only employ Tasmanians, but has had to bring in workers from interstate and overseas in recent years. “There’s a lot of young guys in the industry at the moment, being taken away by the mining sector, other jobs are paying a lot more money than we can afford” said Radford “I think forestry’s our main issue in Tassie, here at the moment. I think we’re going to have more trouble down the track, this year coming we’re not sure where they’ll come from, but it is a concern”, he said”
“Will Gunns employ local workers?”
http://www.gunnspulpmill.com.au/faqs.html
“Gunns is committed to source employment and services from Tasmania whenever possible. It is estimated 40% of jobs during construction and 80 per cent of jobs once the mill is operational will be filled by Tasmanians.”
“2.2 Key statistics for major pulp producing countries (2003)”
http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/publications/pdf_files/Books/BSpek0601.pdf
In a report by The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) entitled “Pulp Mills – An appraisal of risk assessment and safeguard procedures”
The number of employees directly employed in the pulp and paper industry in Australia in 2003 was 4,156.
Why has the Lennon government repeatedly told the public, that it has performed so well, Tasmania has it’s lowest ever unemployment rate, but at the same time bullishly pushes the mantra that Tasmania desperately needs to create pulp mill jobs, (anything from 300-1600?)? All the while ignoring the farming and food producing sector, who have jobs to offer, and the Tourism sector, who will be, either directly or indirectly affected by destroying Tasmania’s brand of a clean green image, neither of which are given the same consideration, support and incentives the forestry industry is given? Between an ageing population, the PAL act, the proposed pulp mill and forestry operations turning “lifestyler” citizens away, where are the people to fill these jobs going to come from? Why would the Lennon Government help to destroy healthy industries and jobs so they can go and work and help save that unrealistic figure of 10,000? jobs in a destructive forest industry currently set up unsustainably and at the complete mercy of a world market, which has already cost contractors their contracts and a scaling down in Forestry? Why doesn’t this Government’s left hand seem to know what the right hand is doing?
“New era for state road safety”
http://www.media.tas.gov.au/release.php?id=21464
In a media release Jim Cox said, “The whole community has a stake in the new Road Safety Strategy and support for a small annual contribution will give all of us a sense of ownership of the outcomes. The related Action Plan will support four key strategic directions – safer travel speeds, best practice infrastructure, increased safety for young road users and enhanced vehicle safety.” However in a news report Transport Minister Jim Cox said “the topography of Tasmania demands that roads are not always nice and lovely as we would like them.” Is this best practice infrastructure?
Why does the Lennon Government allow the dangerous practice of overloading log trucks, is that “enhanced vehicle safety”? And why allow them different road rules to other motorists, putting lives in danger?
Why is this Lennon Government in conjunction with their preferred company:
– Failing in its duty of care to ensure the safety and well being of its citizens?
– Failing in providing due consideration and balanced fairness to legitimate concerns raised by citizens and businesses by ignoring and trying to denigrate citizens’ concerns, requests, and requirements and misrepresenting the truth, which has ultimately destroyed democracy in Tasmania?
– Failing in allowing a moral conscience and integrity to be incorporated into its governance by forcing party members to vote only with the party, at the expense and against members own principles and conscience, which in no way can also adequately allow government representatives to represent their constituents requests and requirements, upon which constituents voted individual members in?
Why? Why? Why? Why Indeed! Because when characters aren’t gentleman, they can’t see past the dirty politics, past their scheming cronies, past unjust mandates, past their own greed, past their own, at any cost, selfish dream of a pulp mill. They can’t see the ludicrousness of destroying the very basics of life, our water systems, our quality of air, the land for food, our forests that process our air and water and soil, to a clean, green, healthy and sustainable vision. They can’t see the forest, for all the millions and millions of rows of vested interest, tax dodging, lowest end of the market, pulp wood trees. Planted to prop up self indulgent pride in people who have bypassed principle and right, to measure success in dollars rather than good moral sense, and who don’t understand the truth in the value of integrity and contentment.
“Nature teaches us to live, but wisdom teaches us to live contented”
(The Royal Path of Life)
Charles and Claire Gilmour
