Sven Wiener
Then on Saturday 3 November, George Town Council advertised in The Examiner that the public meeting would take place on 27 November. It appears that Director Alistair Scott did contact George Town council and the council decided to stay with 27 November as the date for the public meeting, following obtaining legal advice. A complaint to the State Ombudsman was made on Monday 5 November and they have undertaken to write to George Town Council requesting an explanation by 22 November. It will be interesting to see just what the results of this investigation by the State Ombudsman will be. Of course we’d like to see the pulp mill public meeting held prior to the November 24 election (as the Local Government Act requires) in order that George Town Municipality residents from both sides of the debate can have heard more information on which to base their federal election voting.
Sven Wiener
DOUBTLESS you’re aware that since Burnie Pulp Mill and Queenstown smelter have closed down, George Town has been the pollution capital of Tasmania. According to Curtin Uni Prof Alex Wadsley (see YouTube video clip of Prof Wadsley’s Hobart Pulp Mill Forum comment regarding George Town at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzCYBILM2OE ), mortality rate in George Town of 10.4 deaths per thousand people per year, is almost 50% higher than the average for Tasmania. George Town Municipality has only 4700 voting residents and would seem to be a likely candidate for council amalgamation with Launceston City Council. Located on the 25km northernmost part of the East Tamar, it extends from Low Head in the north 25km southwards along the Tamar to Hillwood and then across a similar distance to take in most of Pipers River. Its boundaries are shown at http://adam.com.au/scandia/georgetown_municipal_map.gif
In the mid-nineties, the council was sacked and an administrator appointed. Possibly due to its small size making it less prestigious as a place to work, it’s had a succession of General Managers ever since.
The current General Manager is Miss Ngaire McCrindle.
Could it be that George Town Council has not been amalgamated with Launceston City Council for some ulterior motive state governments have had in that the pollution problems residents of George Town have put up with would not have been tolerated if more responsibly-minded Launceston City Council Aldermen were in charge? From what I’ve heard, it seems Rio Tinto (aluminium factory previously operated as Comalco) and Temco had been given a licence to pollute after dark provided they paid some minor penalties. Pollution is nowhere near as bad now due to the installation of million dollar dry-scrubbers (electrostatic precipitators) that filter out the fine particles from air emmissions.
I’ve been involved with opposing the pulp mill in George Town Municipality because I am an elector there, owning property at Long Reach abutting the proposed pulp mill site. Very few people from TAP apart from those who live inside the municipality, seemed interested in collecting signatures for a petition seeking a public meeting from George Town Council regarding health impacts the pulp mill might have. And so I ended up collecting roughly two thirds of the 600 petition signatures, doorknocking within George Town. I think the people there are mostly quite polite if you speak to them in their homes but well over half definitely do want the pulp mill as they see it bringing prosperity to their town, especially during the mill construction phase. Probably not all of those mill-supporters voted in the council elections that returned extreme pro-pulp mill Mayor Doug Burt to power for another two years by the slimmest of margins (110 votes out of 1500). George Town Municipality generally has one of the highest participation rates in council elections (60% in 2005 & 70% in 2007). A lot of the people who signed the petition calling for a public meeting had been impacted by cancer or had a relative with cancer.
The petition calling for a public meeting was lodged with the council on 13 September and on 23 October, after careful checking of signatures, council resolved to hold a public meeting as required under the Local Governement Act 1993 (Section 60).
The strange thing is that even as early as 19 September in the council’s September Meeting Agenda, General Manager McCrindle had been tentatively scheduling the public meeting to take place around 27 November which considering the October Council meeting was scheduled for 23 October, meant the public meeting date would be in breach of the Local Government Act:
“If the petition complies with section 59, or the council otherwise resolves to hold a public meeting regarding the subject matter of the petition, the council, within 30 days after the (council monthly) meeting referred to in subsection (2), is to hold a public meeting to discuss the subject matter of the petition.”
I first became aware of their intended breach upon reading an article in the Examiner on Tuesday 30 October in which they admitted that they were about to breach the Local Government Act by holding a public meeting outside the 30 day period allowed (from the date of the council meeting at which its resolved to hold the public meeting), however they said in the news article that they felt the community would accept this breach. The lodgers of the public meeting petition faxed George Town Council that same day with a legal letter written by Jess Feehely of the Environmental Defenders Office, and made it clear that no breach would be tolerated. Then on Thursday 1 November, another article in the Examiner indicated council was considering having the public meeting earlier in November in order to avoid breaching the Local Government Act and that Minister Assisting the Premier on Local Government, Michelle O’Byrne, has asked the Director of the Local Government Office within the Department of Premier & Cabinet, to look into the matter.
Then on Saturday 3 November, George Town Council advertised in The Examiner that the public meeting would take place on 27 November. It appears that Director Alistair Scott did contact George Town council and the council decided to stay with 27 November as the date for the public meeting, following obtaining legal advice. A complaint to the State Ombudsman was made on Monday 5 November and they have undertaken to write to George Town Council requesting an explanation by 22 November. It will be interesting to see just what the results of this investigation by the State Ombudsman will be. Of course we’d like to see the pulp mill public meeting held prior to the November 24 election (as the Local Government Act requires) in order that George Town Municipality residents from both sides of the debate can have heard more information on which to base their federal election voting.
One spin-off from the upcoming pulp mill public meeting is that the following day, as stipulated by the Local Government Act, we’ll be able to lodge the corresponding petition requiring an elector poll be held regarding the pulp mill with poll question wording along the same lines as the October council election elector poll held for Hobart City Council. The HCC poll showed 76% of HCC election voters are against the pulp mill being built in the Tamar Valley:
76% of HCC voters opposed the process used to assess the pulp mill (ie fast track instead of independent state planning body);
67% opposed the type of pulp manufacture proposed (ie chlorine-bleaching instead of chlorine-free or closed loop);
76% opposed the proposed siting of the pulp mill in the Tamar Valley.
A motion for George Town Council to vote regarding whether to have such an elector poll at the October council elections, did make it onto the September council meeting agenda however the motion lapsed without even being voted on when Hillwood Councillor shipcaptain Bob Wallace was unable to attend due to his ship being waylaid by stormy seas. My guess is that George Town Council Mayor Burt was keen at all costs to avoid having any such elector poll held for George Town Council prior to the Federal Election. He was on ABC Radio in early September saying that no elector poll would take place because “he’s consulted with the community and they are happy”.
However an unofficial meeting of concerned residents took place at Hillwood Hall on September 23 (see http://adam.com.au/scandia/hillwood.html ) that suggested the George Town Municipality community are not all happy. Furthermore the petition calling for a public meeting on the pulp mill in relation to health concerns is now acknowledged by council to have been legitimately signed by 529 George Town Council electors. George Town Mayor Doug Burt seems to be playing a game of bluff in the hope of having the pulp mill built in his municipality based on the vast majority of residents there supposedly being in favour of it. The propaganda war continues in George Town to this day.
Sven Wiener
Independent Candidate for Bass
[email protected]
http://www.SvenForBass.com
Authorised by Jim Welsh, 43 William St, George Town, Tas
