OVERWHELMING SUPPORT FOR DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS BUT WALKER CORP. REMAINS IN A WORLD OF ITS OWN
“The TPC has restored our faith!” Submission # 33
“I write with my faith somewhat restored in “the system”. I applaud the strength, commitment and objectivity of the TPC.” Submission #48
“This report also proves to me that democracy is working when the average people are willing to stand up and are heard.” Submission #116
Support for the Tasmanian Planning Commission’s draft recommendation against the proposed Ralphs Bay canal estate was expressed in at least 91% of submissions on the Draft Integrated Assessment Report (DIAR). There was no support for the Walker Corp. proposal from any organisation or professional body, and only a handful of brief submissions in favour of the development from community members.
Former Tasmanian Premier Doug Lowe AM wrote powerfully in support of the Commission and its work and urged the Commission to reject the proposed canal estate in its entirety.
“The processes followed by the Panel, as described in the DIAR, have been rigorous. The quality of the consequential analysis of the proposed development, including its meticulous examination and evaluation of the 547 submissions from the public and relevant interest groups, is exemplary.
”Presentation of the Commission Assessment Report to relevant ministers in the Australian and Tasmanian Governments will enable closure of this needless and divisive development proposal, and the provision of a defining lesson for present and future Tasmanian Governments regarding the perception held by Tasmanians of their precious landscape and the irreplaceable natural treasures lying within it.
“The Assessment Panel has provided a clear statement of principal in the form of its recommendations in the DIAR and this response firmly urges firm adherence to its fair but conclusive rejection of the proposed development in its entirety.” Submission # 46, Douglas A Lowe AM
The Australian Institute of Architects also provided strong support for the TPC’s draft recommendations and its comments were a damning indictment of the proposed development:
“The Lauderdale Quay Development Proposal does not uphold good urban land planning principles. Coastal and estuarine bays in Tasmania should not be considered for residential reclamation ahead of alternative land based sites and this project type should therefore be discouraged. The project is foreign, inappropriate and not in harmony with the Tasmanian urban and coastal landscape. The potential outcome of significant private gain for a major public loss is a matter of State significance. Available residential land should be developed before Crown land is given up.
The Australian Institute of Architects Tasmanian Chapter believes the proposal cannot be justified now, or into the future, in any form, and that the Draft IAR should be adopted as final in its current form.” Submission #96, Australian Institute of Architects
Many respondents urged the Commission to resist any further attempts by the Walker Corporation to ram its proposal through against the clearly expressed wishes of the community. Representors urged that the TPC remains steadfast and the draft recommendations are upheld:
“Congratulations and thank you, thank you, thank you for your findings in the DIAR… Thank you again. Please stand firm against any railroading efforts by Walker Corp.” Submission #73
“This Report is a victory for common sense and I urge you to support its findings. Environmentally, socially and financially the development was ill-conceived and would be a disaster with which Tasmanian Governments and citizens would have to deal well into the future.” Submission #82
The Walker Corporation, however, remains in a world of its own, partly oblivious to community concerns and entirely contemptuous of them. The Walker Corp. submission shows no respect for the Commission and does not thank the Commission or the Panel for their work. The Corporation’s submission contains arrogant assertions about the superiority of its own experts and scientific absurdities in its interpretations of data.
“Once again, ‘Planet Walker’ is shown to be a bleak and lifeless place where there is no respect for ecosystem functioning or sustainability”, said SRB spokeswoman, Jane MacDonald.
The Walker Corp. submission repeated the extraordinary assertions made in the Hearings, that, “there is no factor which has been identified which would result in serious and irreversible environmental harm such that the precautionary principle must be invoked to prevent the project from proceeding”, and, “there is no evidence that construction of the proposed development will or is likely to have a significant impact on any migratory or non-migratory species, as a whole, including the red neck stint.”
“Perhaps the Corporation’s representatives believe that if they utter these nonsensical claims often enough, they will somehow become true?”
wondered Ms MacDonald.
Contempt for the Lauderdale community which would experience the brunt of the canal estate’s impacts was shown in the claim that, “the amenity of the existing community during construction can be managed and mitigated with conditions.” The absurdity reached new levels with the proposition that, “the issue of wind can be dealt with via condition.”
“The Walker Corporation should be reminded that they asked for Project of State Significance status and a rigorous assessment by the Planning Commission”, said Save Ralphs Bay Chair, Bill Edmunds. “Sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for.”
Save Ralphs Bay www.SaveRalphsBay.org
