Tasmanian Times

Economy

Tony Burke responds to the analysis of Graeme Wells

A Government response to: da Vinci, Picasso and Minister Tony Burke

TONY BURKE, Minister for Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry replies to GRAEME WELLS, School of Economics and Finance, University of Tasmania.
The government carefully considers all proposal for assistance to forestry …

Download: Tony_Burke_Reply_MNMC2009-7588.pdf

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

12 Comments

  1. crud

    September 2, 2009 at 6:21 pm

    BURKE by name,BERK by nature.just listen to his spiel on how great chinas contaminated vegies are.well eatem up berk.

  2. phill Parsons

    September 1, 2009 at 10:29 am

    The element you are missing here is Tony Burke did not approve the pulpmill’s construction, the Labor Governmemt cabinet did that on the advice of Peter Garrett, Minister for Industrial Development.

    Its not to excuse Burke’s actions in promoting this particular company with questionable and dated data.

    However the bigger picture has to be looked at to understand the modern former party of Labor.

    Like the Bartlett and Howard government that we all experienced this Party is a blantant front for vested and special interest groups, taking direction from industry.

    The failure of this would have seen a native forest fed pulpmill, only community action has caused that beast to retreat into its lair, and a completely incompetent company driven approach to the leaking oil field off WA.

  3. salamander

    September 1, 2009 at 2:45 am

    Burke says the ‘difference in figures arise from various assumptions’ – would some of those assumptions include data being based on pure fiction?

    As for ‘commercially viable in it’s own right’, does that mean no federal grants or subsidies? The mill has no chance of ever being commercially viable in it’s own right, (Gunns wouldn’t be building the mill if those were the terms) so what use is that statement?

  4. Gerry Mander

    September 1, 2009 at 2:21 am

    Remember this – it will be the same person writing the replies even if the Liberals get in!

  5. William Boeder

    September 1, 2009 at 12:01 am

    In the past I have given Kevin Rudd the highest accolades for his ability and capacity to take on the greatest spin-merchant of all time.
    Do remember the time when Howard and Lennon did a deal to trounce Mark Latham’s bid for Prime Minister.
    (From the Tasmanian peoples perspective.)

    For Kevin Rudd to follow the piping tune of Gunns Ltd and Forestry Tasmania, is enough to alter the praise toward our Kevin, from high to abhorrent.

    How can so many supposed highly intelligent people get transfixed into supporting the vile, the destructive, the pure mindless greed, of that which is against the best interests of all Australia’s people?
    This despicable Tasmanian forestry industry shows its absolute wicked intent in even misleading the highest levels of Australia’s government!

  6. pilko

    August 31, 2009 at 11:16 pm

    Yeah I’m not surprised Mike. Would one get a better return for their time and effort by standing in front of a brick wall and chanting blah dadi blah blah blah blah. I answering a rhetorical yes.

  7. Phil Lohrey

    August 31, 2009 at 10:59 pm

    Heaven help this little island and all of the little people hurt by this monstrous proposal when a Labor federal minister sticks to the Tas Forestry line.

  8. Mike Adams

    August 31, 2009 at 9:19 pm

    Come on young Rachel! Let’s read all about it!

  9. Bob McMahon

    August 31, 2009 at 8:57 pm

    At least this reply comes from someone pretending to be Minister Burke. How many of you out there have written to Burke and received a reply from Forestry Tasmania?

    A flickering candle is brighter than this bloke.

  10. john hayward

    August 31, 2009 at 7:20 pm

    We have a Tasmanian-quality minister in Mr Burke, untroubled by this benighted state being the only place in the developed world currently seeking to build a kraft pulp mill. It will, moreover be one of the three biggest in the world, and the only mega-mill to be fed primarily by native forest for as long as it lasts.

    With global warming inevitably becoming the monster political issue, one can only marvel at the magnitude of both the venality and stupidity required to explain Federal Labor’s support for this giant scam.

    John Hayward

  11. Mike Bolan

    August 31, 2009 at 6:24 pm

    You’re right again Pilko!

    I wrote to this Minister detailing the distortions created by subsidising one type of land use, pointing out the need for food compared to our need for trees. I received a reply written by his forestry bureaucrats which basically told me that forestry interests had presented information that supported their case and, since that information contradicted my own, I was perforce wrong!

    An excellent example of representing the public.

  12. pilko

    August 31, 2009 at 4:39 pm

    A profoundly engaging and in depth reply from the Minister! That the Minister sees no problem in using 5 year old economic data about a project for which the variables likely to impact on its financial outcomes have changed so significantly is beyond me. One cant help but be cynical and assume that this minister who openly admits his bias towards the project just went looking for the most impressive figures he could find, regardless of their continuing relevance.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Receive Our Weekly Tas Roundup

Copyright © Tasmanian Times. Site by Pixel Key

To Top