Job losses and economic decline: the true cost of the pulp mill

Paul Oosting
The world has moved on from projects such as Gunns’ pulp mill, which destroy the natural environment and pollute the atmosphere. It is time the logging industry got behind new and innovative opportunities for job creation in rural Tasmania and work with us to build vibrant rural communities.
The Wilderness Society (Tasmania) Inc
130 Davey Street, Hobart, TASMANIA 7000 AUSTRALIA
Telephone 03 6224 1550 Facsimile 03 6223 5112 Email tasmania@wilderness.org.au
www.wilderness.org.au
MEDIA RELEASE May 1st 2009
JOB LOSSES AND ECONOMIC DECLINE: THE TRUE COST OF
THE PULP MILL
A protest held today in response to an ad in the Financial Times internationally, supported by the
Wilderness Society, BankTrack and GetUp, proves the message that Gunns’ proposed pulp mill is a
high risk investment is resonating among the international investment community.
The protestors have failed to acknowledge potential job losses posed by Gunns’ proposed pulp mill
including those in the forestry, tourism, fisheries and winery sectors.
“Today’s protest by forest industry staff proves that our international campaign to inform financial
institutions of the environmental, social and economic costs of Gunns’ pulp is resonating with
Gunns,” said Paul Oosting, pulp mill campaigner for The Wilderness Society.
“The protest is misguided as independent studies have shown that Gunns’ pulp mill will cost more
jobs than it will create and will substantially damage Tasmania’s economy,” he added.
An Essential Research poll, commissioned by GetUp in June 2008, found 61 per cent of Australians
were opposed to the carbon polluting mill and want a low carbon economy for Tasmania based on a
burgeoning tourism sector and healthy environment.
“Working families deserve a sustainable future with clean air, healthy water supplies and natural
assets to help protect them from the risks of dangerous climate change,” said Mr Oosting.
While Gunns have refused to allow the pulp mill to be independently assessed, the Wilderness
Society has run a scientifically backed campaign against this forest hungry pulp mill. The
Wilderness Society has highlighted the environmental, economic and social concerns with the
community and potential investors.
“We will again be writing to the CFMEU and other forest industry groups to invite them to discuss
opportunities to reform the industry in a way that will protect jobs and the environment. These
protestors are selling out their members’ interests and the interests of Tasmania’s economy by
continuing to support one woodchipping company and one big polluting pulp mill over the need for
Tasmania’s timber industry to innovate and diversify in the 21st century,” said Mr Oosting.
“The world has moved on from projects such as Gunns’ pulp mill, which destroy the natural
environment and pollute the atmosphere. It is time the logging industry got behind new and
innovative opportunities for job creation in rural Tasmania and work with us to build vibrant rural
communities,” concluded Mr Oosting.

Independent reports that show Gunns’ pulp mill will be negative for jobs and the Tasmanian
economy:
• Tasmanian Roundtable for Sustainable Industries (TRSI) found the pulp mill will cost some
1,220 jobs in tourism and the fishing industry. Gunns has indicated the pulp mill will only
create 280 direct jobs.
• Dr Peter Brain from the National Institute of Economic and Industry Research (NIEIR) found
the most likely impact of the mill on the Tasmanian economy over 20 years would be
negative $0.3 billion, not the positive $3 billion claimed by Gunns. NIEIR also found ‘that if
anything goes wrong with the mill the maximum cumulative Tasmanian consumption loss is
estimated at $3 billion.’
• Naomi Edwards (retired actuary and former partner with Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu) found
that Gunns consultants, Allens, only addressed potential economic benefits but did not
address potential economic costs; did not consider the broader economic implications of the
pulp mill, and did not consider the opportunity cost implications of the pulp mill.
• The Federal Government Environmental Economics Unit found that “Gunns do not measure
nor take account of such impacts that can not be immediately identified as potentially
impacting on the total effect of the investment”.