Forestry Tasmania, the A.L.P and the right to privacy

LUCA VANZINO

Forestry Tasmania, the A.L.P and the right to privacy

ON TUESDAY the 14th of April, my partner and I, with our three children, spent the day snorkelling at Nine Pin Point near Verona Sands at the southern end of the D’Entrecasteaux Channel.

By mid afternoon we were ‘assaulted’- and I use that word explicitly, by five simultaneous forestry regeneration burns. Two were in the vicinity of Recherche Bay; two were behind Dover and one in the hinterland behind Geeveston. As to be expected, the inexact ‘science’ of regeneration burns saw some of these smoke plumes coalesce and by late afternoon we were breathing the smoke at our house in Woodbridge.

A week later on Wednesday the 22nd of April, any tourist sitting and supping ale at the Peppermint Bay Hotel at Woodbridge would have had a grandstand, corporate box view of a nuclear plume rising over South Bruny Island just west of Adventure Bay. I felt ‘pincered’ as another smoke plume attacked the Channel residents simultaneously-this one coming from somewhere to the SW of Woodbridge.

The final cannonade by the Forestry ‘Robber Barons’ occurred the following day, on the afternoon of Thursday the 23rd of April when yet another onslaught –this time from the North West brought ash raining down on my house, my gutters-and by extension my water supply, and actually fell on me whilst I was standing outside. As a geologist, it was akin to tephra or volcanic ash that drapes the landscape during a volcanic eruption. (See attached photograph of the ash accumulating on the kids trampoline)

This aggression by Forestry Tasmania resulted in the South Channel population having to breathe smoke and ash from eight regeneration burns in a nine day period.

At this juncture I was sufficiently riled to get on the ‘dog and bone’ directly to the Premiers office as well as the ALP members in my Franklin electorate.

In all cases I asked the administrative staff of each office to have the relevant member return my phone call and to hear my complaint in person. I am yet to hear back from Bartlett or Giddings-I am not holding my breath…if you pardon the pun!

Ross Butler actually answered his own phone and after an ambling conversation by Ross, he stated that as a humble backbencher there was not a lot he could do. I suggested that at his age his testicles should have descended by now and that he may want to emulate the likes of Terry Martin and Harry Quick and actually have some integrity instead of mouthing shallow platitudes.

And this is where this story takes a sinister turn.

I rang the new chum on the Franklin block-the esteemed Daniel Hulme.

Regular Tasmanian Times readers will be well aware of the amount of comment the honourable member generated on the T.T. site with his maiden speech to parliament. Young Daniel, who incidentally had just shifted his electoral office to Huonville was unavailable so I left my phone number, but I did not state the reason for my call.

When the unsuspecting Daniel and I did make contact, the conversation developed as I expected.

Daniel tried to allay my concerns by citing; very poorly I may add, the early 1950’s research into regeneration burning of wet eucalypt forests. I knew that arguing with someone who has such an automaton response was fruitless, so I tried another tack and asked him if he supported the by laws that exist on the statutes of many councils around Australia that ban the use of back yard incinerators. I pointed out that such bans are in place due to the loss of amenity and for health reasons of nearby residents.

He said ‘Yes-but this is different’.

My reply was ‘Yes-it is different, what I have just experienced over the past nine days is actually state sanctioned violence with the state actually being the perpetrator.’

The conversation ended.

A mere 90 minutes later and I receive a phone call from a person called Peter Pepper who identifies himself as the Forestry Tasmania’s community liaison officer and that he would like to discuss my concerns about smoke and ash fall. This conversation was short lived as I mauled him for invading my privacy and then immediately rang the State Ombudsman’s office to make a complaint against both Forestry Tasmania and the A.L.P.

What right does Forestry Tasmania have to interfere with a private conversation between an elector and his elected representative?

Moreover has Daniel Hulme and the A.L.P broken the law by passing on my personal contact details to a government agency without my explicit permission?

The ombudsman is still researching the legality of this…I know what the morality is!

Luca Vanzino
Woodbridge 7162