Tasmanian Times

Environment

Forestry Tasmania must respond to the Wells’ critique

BEN QUIN

This critique by Graeme Wells raises serious questions about the competence of Hans Drielsma to hold the position of FT Executive General Manager. Either Mr. Drielsma was hood-winked by the IMC-Link report’s authors, or he has knowingly endorsed a fundamentally flawed analysis. In either case, Tasmanians have not been well served. It would appear that more money has been splashed away on self-serving spin. However, both reports are now in the public domain. In the interests of public accountability and transparency, a link to the Wells’ critique should be included on the FT website with equal prominence to the link that already exists there for the IMC-Link report. FT should acknowledge in an introductory comment that “an independent analysis of the IMC-Link report by another respected Tasmanian economist, Dr. Graeme Wells, soundly debunks the methodology and findings of the original report.” Given that Mr. Drielsma, Dr. Felmingham and Dr. Wells all agree that the stated objective of the IMC-Link report – “to match the costs of particular subsidies against their actual contributions” – is worthwhile, FT is obliged to respond to the Wells’ critique. Mr. Drielsma is otherwise left exposed to the charges of incompetence, peddling misinformation and wasting public funds. I would also be interested to hear Treasurer Aird’s opinion of FT’s decision to take on such an analysis on his behalf. Read more, Comment at the end of the article here

Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]

Receive our newsletter

Copyright © Tasmanian Times. Site by Pixel Key

To Top