Tasmanian Times

Adventure and Wilderness

Hobart’s cable car

The memorable rally against the cable car in Cascade Park last year ... A PICTURE FROM ROB WALLS' BRILLIANT PICTURE-ESSAY OF STUDENTS' PROTEST AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE ... Pic: Rob Walls ( https://thisworkinglife.wordpress.com/ )

It’s no secret that it’s been a tough summer in Tasmania. The fires are still going here in the south of the island. Over 200,000 thousand hectares of wilderness and forestry are gone.

There appears to be no end to the costly firefighting choppers clattering about in our sky from dawn to dusk. The island is parched and there is no decent rain in sight. The start of autumn is as hot as hell and we’re being told this is likely to be our new norm.

And just to add to our dismay, the unedifying spectre of an unnecessary cable car on one of our natural wonders is raising its ugly head, yet again.

When thousands of Tasmanians took to Hobart’s streets one Sunday morning last May to protest yet again against the cable car, the size of the turnout suggested it was a turning point in the campaign.

The protest made news all over Australia. Even SBS managed a few paragraphs.

Richard Flanagan, Bob Brown and Andrew Wilkie exhorted the upbeat crowd to maintain their vigilance. Heather Sculthorpe from the Tasmanian Aboriginal Corporation said the cable car proposal was “an act of erasure of Aboriginal knowledge and culture.”

But a scant nine months on, the protestors’ optimism is proving to be a little premature.

Hobart City Council’s opposition has been usurped, at least for now, by the state government enacting the Cable Car (kunanyi/Mount Wellington) Facilitation Act of 2017. The move allows the Mount Wellington Cableway Company (MWCC), access to the council-owned land, to carry out a flora and fauna study near the base of the proposed cable car.

This scoping is not as benign as it sounds. The permit (which was leaked) allows vehicles up to six tonnes to enter the site and for dozens of holes to be possibly drilled in what essentially signals the start of the project.

So, what’s at stake? The short answer is quite a lot.

Easily accessible for many of Hobart’s residents, the mountain has a plethora of walking trails. Locals count on its restorative nature where they can set aside their days’ travails; and in their minds, the prospect of this latest cable car proposal succeeding is simply soul-destroying.

Even the rock climbers from all over the world who travel here to climb the delorite columns of its Organ Pipes have petitioned the premier to block previous incarnations of the cable car.

Equally perturbing, which doesn’t seem to be getting enough scrutiny, is the plan to also construct a high-end restaurant/viewing room on the mountain’s summit; having a seating capacity of up to 200 and a heated hand-rail on the rooftop viewing deck. It’s being touted as an ideal location to perhaps pop the question.

What’s widely regarded as vandalism of the mountain’s facade is, part of an ongoing grotesque throw-back to Tasmania’s dark colonial era.

Back to an era when a coterie of privileged individuals beholden to no rule of the land, appropriated and exploited the Island’s natural resources for their own financial gain.

It’s the Tasmanian Way – a nexus of developers, politicians and mates – who look after each other’s interests at every opportunity.

That this mountain could suffer the ignominy of having a cable car permanently imprinted on its façade is galling at best. Steel pylons, some as tall as fifty-five metres, would be installed all the way to the summit to support the car’s pods which have the capacity to carry eighty people.

Aside from running a slick website, the MWCC is refusing to release their financial modelling. A figure of $50m has been mentioned, but thus far, the costings remain confidential. This secrecy, which is the company’s right, merely reinforces the fact that this is a private venture on public land.

Conservative premier Hodgman is a long-standing advocate. State Labor has folded its tent, with opposition leader Rebecca White suggesting that the project be put up for tender. Unsurprisingly the cable car is opposed by the Tasmanian Conservation Trust and the Greens.

This grand venture looms in stark contrast to Tasmania’s poor socio-economic indicators that sees roughly one third of this island’s population of 500,000 in receipt of social security or income support.

Successive generations are all too familiar with life’s hardscrabble. Tasmania has some of the most socially disadvantaged communities in Australia. In recent weeks, the state’s treasurer, Peter Gutwein has insisted that a 2% wage increase over the next three years is all that available for public servants.

This high-end playground on the mountain’s summit will simply double-down on this exclusivity and further marginalise ordinary Tasmanians.

The rent-seekers’ argument that the spectacular views from Mt Wellington/kunanyi’s summit should be able to be enjoyed by all is simply disingenuous; there is already a well-maintained sealed road that winds its way up to the summit, no AWD is needed.

A shuttle bus is also available. In adverse weather, the road is generally closed. Likewise, in such conditions, a cable car cannot operate.

Perhaps, it’s simply wishful thinking amongst our ill-intentioned cable car devotees, who insist we should have this facility, hang the expense and damn public opinion.

This rationale may well have its genesis in the perception that Tasmanians often feel like the poor relations of mainland Australia.

No doubt community groups like Respect the Mountain and Residents Opposed to the Cable Car are planning their next moves. And, with a summons for “Mountain Defenders” to step up, who knows what twists and turns are yet to come in this long running saga.

Perhaps we can take some solace from the fact that the idea of constructing a cable car on kunanyi/Mt Wellington was first proposed in 1905, just a few years after Federation.

Back when thylacines still roamed the land. While the poor old thylacine has long since disappeared off the face of the earth, it’s still not too late to save our wonderful mountain.

Here’s hoping common sense prevails and our ancient mountain dodges this latest full-frontal cash-grab on its integrity. Future generations will appreciate the wisdom of our foresight, if kunanyi manages to escape unscathed again.

Philip Lynch more or less grew up in rural Ireland. And. after too many years in Melbourne, I finally finally made it to Tasmania seven years ago’. Philip works as a nurse. The Irish Times has published some of his emigration pieces. The Age has also … He has lived in Tasmania since 2011.

EARLIER on Tasmanian Times …

Local residents train to peacefully defend kunanyi/Mt Wellington

Cable car: Richard Flanagan’s speech in full …

Drilling on kunanyi … shocking details of Liberal Government plans …


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


  1. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    March 13, 2019 at 4:49 pm

    On the tendering question:

    If a government is contracting directly for a good or service, they will call competitive tenders.

    If some entity approaches a government for a use of public land to enable a privately funded capitalization for a new use that will enhance/upgrade its value and stimulate the larger economy, that is a somewhat different matter. This often does lead to ‘no tender’ negotiations, particularly where the contractor is offering a good or service that is not critical infrastructure like a tollway, where the use is discretionary and the ultimate pricing is linked to consumer appreciation of fair value, affordability and the quality of the experience that it offers.

    Part of the reason for non tendering is that governments are not negotiating in a vacuum.There are lots of precedents in terms of the kinds of deals that governments and project proponents enter into. Everyone knows what the negotiating parameters are are. They do not have to reinvent the wheel every time, unless there are pressingly overriding reasons to do so.

    Tendering for major projects is not cheap. Companies that do it factor in their tender losses into their tender wins. In the case of dealing with a sole proposed contractor, the government negotiators will demand that that be shaved off. And for the tender offerers, it is also a quite expensive and very labour intensive business to properly prepare the tender documentation, then analyse the tender offers and decide on a winner. And if they make a mistake, it can be very legally costly, drag on through the courts for years and stymie the roll out of the project.

    The criticism of no tender negotiations is that they are ‘in commercial confidence’, which means they are not transparent. The Andrews government in Victoria was criticised recently by then Guy led opposition for not tendering the western tunnel project and instead negotiating with the existing major private roads infrastructure consortium, Transurban. .And it has to be said that there are robust arguments going on around this public-private theatre as to the advisability of public asset ‘no tender’ contracting. As the arguments stand at the moment, the jury seems to be still out and it is unlikely that when it does come in, it will do more than suggest firmer parameters on when and in what circumstances it is appropriate to ‘no tender.

    There is no question anywhere that there should be no ‘no tender’ contracting..

    Having said all that, there is an enormous amount of in detail negotiating that happen after the tendering is finished, but before the contract is actually awarded. When Jeff Kennett was negotiating with Transurban in ’94, they went to the wire on at least two occasions. All that is commercial in confidence stuff. And while Kennet had a reserve bidder (first losing bider) on ice if those negotiation failed, renegotiating the entire contract with them would have been a huge hassle and set the project back by as much as a year. I am not sure how much value having a reserve bidder is, once the project is in a very advanced stage of negotiation….which is when the nastier problems tend to pop up.

    I am not trying to advocate for ‘no tender’ process. What I am saying is that on balance, it is still a legitimate practice. And if one does not trust the government that is doing the negotiating on the Skyrail project, then the answer is, make sure that there is a government that is more ‘honest’ and committed to transparency by not stuffing up the next election.

    The last one was lost because it takes 10 to 20 years of campaigning to get rid of an industry like the gaming one. It cannot possibly be done within the window of a single election campaign. And anyone with any brains should have been able to see that. If one needs a copybook model of how it is done, track back the same sex marriage campaign. The plebiscite campaign was simply crossing the Ts and dotting the Is, because by the time the vote was announced, it was already game over. That is how it works.

    And the absolutely guaranteed way to give the Hodgman government munitions for the next election is to be able to paint what he will rather quaintly call ‘the left’, as a bunch of obstructionist losers who have no near clear idea other than to promote their own atavistic tribal agenda at the expense of the ordinary Tasmanian punters, who might rather like the new amenity, the jobs, business opportunities and international interest the project will bring in its wake.

    And if the agenda is to keep Hodgman and his team in place, I can’t think of a better way of helping him and his mates along, than than going after Skyrail…and ending up as losers….again..

  2. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    March 12, 2019 at 4:16 pm

    William, capitalism is stiff with public/private collaborations whereby governments sweeten the deal for investors to come into their jurisdictions in order to encourage desired new projects. All really major investments will get something to put their money here rather than somewhere else.

    God knows what Utah had to stump up to get Tesla to puts its gigafactory in that state. But you can bet your bottom dollar, they will get their money back. If you go into a new economic zone in a third world country trying to expand its industrial economy, it will offer a ten year tax holiday. It will get its money back.

    There is no reason to suppose that the Tasmanian government has cut a poor deal on the Skyrail project. But of course such an assumption could not possibly work for someone who doesn’t like the project and wants it stopped at all costs, for reasons which have absolutely nothing to do with its economic viability at all.

    And that is the rub. All your palaver about what the present government has done, not done, shoulda done and shouldna done is irrelevant if the project is a goody and a worthwhile adjunct to the infrastructure of the city.

    And that is where the real argument lies, about your role as a common or garden NIMBY who is so invested in the status quo and comfortable in it, you do not want it disturbed and will throw up any piece of dirt and ideological poodle fake in the way to obstruct it, just like the anti-wind farmers that you so resemble.

    • Geoff Holloway

      March 12, 2019 at 6:28 pm

      I agree with you Christopher, capitalism does not exist in a pure form (as was argued by German sociologist Max Weber 100 years ago), all world economies are mixed and as you have pointed out long ago terms like ‘capitalism’ and ‘socialism’ have little true meaning today – so blaming ‘capitalism’ is a furphy. HOWEVER, there are very real reasons to suppose that the Tasmanian Government is up to their eyeballs in corrupt, money for the boys, etc – Tasmania has a long history of joint government/corporate corruption – and more of this will come out soon. More importantly, unusual for your logic Christopher, is your personal, whimsical, gut feeling, totally unsubstantiated suggestion that the cable car has to be “a goody and a worthwhile adjunct to the infrastructure of the city” ??? surely there is no rational logic in such a claim!

      • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

        March 12, 2019 at 10:25 pm

        Sorry Geoff, Tesla went to Nevada, not Utah.

        Whether the Hodgman government is a ‘Far South’ version of the ‘Deep North’ Bjelke-Peterson. experiment is neither here nor there. Corrupt they be, but that does not mean they are complete fools incapable of spotting a good idea, or lack the imagination and vision to encourage it..Hating them doesn’t mean it is necessary to hate everything they do on principle.There is such a thing as picking your mark and exercising a bit of judgement on a case by case basis.|

        Blind Freddy should be able to see that this project is an absolute blinder, and the only reason I can possibly account for why there is so much irrational anger and resistance to it is that it is a form of behavioral displacement from having lost the impossible to lose election….and an expression of moral panic, made worse by the emerging worldwide attack on liberal ideas, both in the first and the third worlds.

        I think the wretched Skyrail has become the collective scapegoat/revenge for that election failure. And what is particularly perverse about it is that obstructing it just gives Hodgman the chance to entrench his power in the next election cycle.He will run all over you, because, fundamentally, it is a reasonable project that most people who are not ideologically hung up would like…..and you lot want to take it away. Nuts!

        And the reason I say this is that the objections to the project are irrational junk. It is a secular version of the sort of psychological milieu that could turn a benign but slightly offbeat woman into a witch, which is what I think the skyrail project has become.

        All the palaver about the sacred mystical qualities of the aboriginal spirits of the mountain is coming out of the mouths of people who think that Genesis is a superstitious larf and that Jesus C is the son of a non existent God. It is nothing more than late modern fantasizing of people who are finding out just how existentially empty their own cultural cupboard has become…and will desperately grab at anything

        And as a lot of those communities during the seventeenth century found after they had hanged their witch, they had lost the only person in the place who knew how to fix women’s disorders, an upset stomach and heal a wound….just like Hobart and Tassie could lose a winner that that have helped the place along a bit.

        And what is the worst that could happen if went ahead. How much real damage can the damned thing do to the place? Is it going to leave a toxic legacy like an old lead mine? How much pleasure can it give to people? How many millions of memorable selfies will be lost if it never gets up?.What responsible government wouldn’t stump up some money to get the consortium on board, including I suspect the ALP…if you could get anyone there to admit to it now? You know them, torn between wanting to be on the side of the angels (fairies at the bottom of the garden) and still provide vaguely plausible governance….

    • William Boeder

      March 15, 2019 at 10:28 pm

      Christopher Eastman Nagle, strange how it is that you claimed me to be a common or garden NIMBY, even though this derogatory labeling is unsupportable.
      The fact is that I very keenly endorse wind-farm power generation.

      A prior holiday to visit a friend I have in the township of Spalding South Australia, saw Peter and I spend a whole day to the inspection of a great many of the Hallett Wind farm’s many towers as well as the Hallett Sub-station.


      Your inclination to come in with the boot and blunderbuss your inccurate claims does you no favours.
      (blunderbuss; 2.an action or way of doing something regarded as lacking in subtlety and precision.)

      The basis for my comment was specific to the cronyism and deceptive tactics that this current State government rely upon. see below my openng remarks.
      “there is no reason why the Tasmanian citizens must bow and scrape to the frequently inproper motives that are synonomous to most all of this State’s government proposals.”

      All of your disparaging terms, your inaccurate claims, your heavily-biased opinions, the State based cronyism, all of which you have inclined yourself toward thereby gains your approval.

      Former economist and public policy expert John Lawrence looked into the cable car’s investors and highlighted Mr Cretan’s link to the $50 million project. Although Tourism Tasmania is not involved in the government approvals process for the cable car, he said he believed the conflict of interest was undeniable.

      “I can’t see how it’s not [a conflict of interest],” he said.

      I recommend you revisit your prior comments, read them, then to come to terms with your nonsensical achievements.

  3. William Boeder

    March 12, 2019 at 2:04 pm

    Fair comment PLB, although you have ignored the blustering disparagements hurled my way as ware held in the C N-Ecomments, and that only the ownership persons might if all fails, will lose their money.

    my original contention was that the people of Tasmania cannot be expected to approve of this costly venture on the express desire of this State’s government ministerial or departmental incumbents.

    See below[

    “Christopher E-N, with what appears to your staunch Liberal-party views there is no reason why the Tasmanian citizens must bow and scrape to the frequently inproper motives that are synonomous to most all of this State’s government proposals.
    Generally these proposals are to support the cronyism extant in this State than any likelihood of a development or project having its very own basis of merit.”

    Now, one reads about the self interest of a Mr. James Cretan who sits with (his role on Tasmania’s Tourism Advisory Board) his 50% share in this proposal that is yet to proven that it is not a conflict of interest.
    I ask you if you believe it is legitimate for an appointed State government official to participate in this cable car development project?

    As Lyndall had provided in her comment.
    ““James is the chair of the Tourism Tasmania Board of Directors and a member of the Premier’s Visitor Economy Advisory Council. He oversees the agency’s strategic direction and plays a significant role in communication with government and industry. James is an executive director of Kriticos Nominees, a family company that owns and operates Cradle Mountain Wilderness Village, Swansea Beach Chalets, Shoreline Hotel and Tasmanian Collection Service. …”.

    So PLB, do you believe that the above named person Mr. J C has the bonafide credentials to continue in his appointed role when considering his advocacy for the cable-car is a classic example of a self interest indulgence?

    Or do you accept that this appointed government advisory person along with his personal investment, is employing an inordinate means to gain government funding for a privately owned business project? (His 50% ownership in this cable-car venture.)
    I do not accept that the underlying ingredients contained in the above are acceptable to the State’s citizens, hence the resistance to such a stacked-deck private (yet State revenue funded) development proposition.

    So, PLB, Not withstanding that I have read and understood your reasoning to agree with this cable-car venture to entertain the grandchildren and so on, though the expectations of full support by the citizens of Tasmania must not ever be a foregone conclusion.

    How about Mr. James Cretan, can he let the people in on the the proceedings or the outcome of the Spirit of Tasmania cause for the death of the polo ponies affair, if he is such a fine fellow?
    (This case affair appears to be securely locked away from the inquiring minds of Tasmania’s citizens and highly likely to become another of this State government’s non-legitimate covers-ups, considering there may well be a substantial financial compensatory undertaking in progress?

    Unfortunately for this State’s ignoble government ministers I am unable to accept each and all private development gaining State funded support, or if it be a private financial dealing given the same support, or be it a state government funded but private project undertaking.
    I question the integrity of our State’s government appointees along with this State’s government ministers, that enable private individuals (or perhaps cronies) the access to, or to lean upon the State’s taxpayer revenues, that only go to promote the interests of private individuals.
    Especially in their being well connected or holding a paid appointment, they having enabled their grasp at non returnable State goverent funding.for their private business undertaking.

    State government financial transactions of this kind do not pass my ‘corruption of process’ test.
    Meanwhile PLB, I still respect your patrimonial grandfatherly intentions.

    • PLB

      March 13, 2019 at 10:26 am

      I agree with you, William, on the points you make on corruption of process. It should have put up for Tender as Labor points out. But what did Labor do about putting it forward, and how many decade’s has this lingered. So we now finally have the Liberals actually moving on it, and as most who read here on TT know, with the Liberals it will usually have the odour of mateeeees attached to it. I would believe, William, that you, like myself and many others here on TT look forward to Labors election, and Bill Shortens promised ICAC. There will be much to probe here in Tas alone, as you surely know.

      As for it being financially unsound, do not believe so. But hey, should Mr Cretan, Bold and friends go arse up, we can stand back, laugh and clap, but we will still have the Skyrail.

      For the rest of my reply, I refer to Christopher’s reply to Geoff at, March 12, 2019 at 10:25 pm, which l fully agree with.

  4. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    March 11, 2019 at 10:03 am

    The kind of obtuse conversations that I am having in this thread about the potential economic benefits of the sky rail project exactly parallel the equally stupid conversations I had with the anti-wind farm lobby over the environmental benefits of wind turbines!

    And the reason it is impossible to have a rational conversation with any NIMBY is that they are all so heavily invested in the status quo, no argument can possibly suffice to satisfy them.

    In Tasmania that status quo investment occurs because they have no interest either directly or indirectly in private investment in the economy, so any risk or potential downside is an overwhelming & insoluble problem if it so much as touches the status quo, no matter how slight, or how much potential it offers

    The non commercial bureaucrat consciousness’ of the petty bourgeoisie demands the kinds of guarrantees, ideological guidelines & pissfarting tickboes ticked, because economic opportunity is a suspicious foreign object that does not compute.

    And the bottom line is that for them, it doesn’t need to, because they are not dependent on it. Their lifestyles are just fine the way things are.

    The anti windfarm people are exactly the same..They will find every conceivable bullshit & pissfarting reason why turbines won’t work, cause health problems, are unreliable, damage bird life, despoil the ‘pristine’ landscape, are uneconomic, divert investment from coal & gas and we do not have a global warming problem, and even if we do, it isn’t caused by CO2 because climate change science is a hoax & scam.

    And absolutely nothing will persuade them otherwise, because they are so heavily invested in the status quo. No rationale is to slight not to be used in the fight.

    If I were the present premier of Tasmania, I would be positively rubbing my hands with glee at having the same anti gaming dummy bunnies come back with another sure fire loser of an issue in 2022.

    Most people rather like the idea of something that might generate more investment in the private economy, new jobs & gives them some new boasting rights for their main city & their state.

    It is not as if ‘they’ (the powers that be) are going to cut down the forests, or build a polluting paper mill or damn lake Pedder. It isn’t an ecological issue. The environmental footprint of the Skyrail is almost identical to turbines.

    Anti windfarm & anti Skyrail. Similar projects. Same obstructive bullshit. Same reasons for it. Same mind set.


    • William Boeder

      March 11, 2019 at 1:25 pm

      Christopher E-N, with what appears to your staunch Liberal-party views there is no reason why the Tasmanian citizens must bow and scrape to the frequently inproper motives that are synonomous to most all of this State’s government proposals.
      Generally these proposals are to support the cronyism extant in this State than any likelihood of a development or project having its very own basis of merit.
      Not overlooking that which is deemed by the reprehensible Senator Eric Abetz interfering importune dictatorial edicts.

      There is supposed to a democratic citizen right held by each of the people of Australia (yet that right has been stealth abraded or is simply usurped by the Liberal party to the detriment of the citizens of Australia) to enable imroper projects and major developments to proceed.
      An example of the the above is the Liberal party rodentae still supporting the danger to the Queensland regional inland as well as the coastal environments applicable to the Adani coal mine project.
      Your having stamped and stomped on your former credibilty, has since had you denounce any whatsoever cares or concerns you may have previously established on this forum.

      • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

        March 11, 2019 at 9:34 pm

        You haven’t been nailed by a Liberal Party stooge. You have just been nailed. You do not like it and you cannot think of anything vaguely plausible to defend yourself, so you trot your out little bag of cliche stereotypes to smear me. It is the typical tactic of an ideological bankrupt who has been caught out, by amongst other things, some Marxist class analysis that would go down well with the Liberal Party like a lead balloon.

        You have been subjected to some extremely damning analysis and this is the only blather you can come up with. Spare me.

        Admitting that we live in a capitalist economy hardly signifies anything except the awful truth. And last time I heard, that is where the wealth is created that enables you (very probably) to live the nice fat fiscally redistributed lifestyle you now enjoy…..

        And it might be a good idea, if not just a plain honest admission, to acknowledge which side your butter is breaded on. For all your ridiculous moral high grounding, you and the petty bourgeois class you represent, are little more than capital’s loud mouthed ideological pensioners….that it tolerates, because your class is also a very powerful component of its latter day regime iteration; i.e.,indulgence capitalism.

        The petty bourgeois humanist ascendancy runs the social administrative wing of Indulgence Capital and it has hung onto the position because it has performed its deregulatory and privatization agenda function with the robust and highly effective enthusiasm that would normally have been the monopoly of church clerics in another time.

        What I am saying is that as a result of that protracted agenda, the whole society is becoming so damaged that it is losing not just its existential grounding, capacity for rules based behavior and sense of boundary, but its sense of critical judgement, proportionality and perspective, whether we are talking bank boards, the transgen lobby, the postmodernist shit in our university humanities departments or the likes of you.

        This issue has brought out the worst aspects of groupthink in a group that has lost its compasses, sense of priority, proportion or real intellectual reference, and careening around like a chook with its head cut off.

        The skyrail is a small beans project that will provide generations of people with a unique opportunity to have a truly breathtaking interface with a hauntingly beautiful place that they will remember all their lives, even if they only do it once. And they will be able to do it in any weather, enjoy and explore the top of the mountain in safety and comfort and surrounded by world class amenities. People will be able for the first time to really enjoy their mountain in ways not previously possible, and stay up there and make a day out of it. It will be right up there with Mona, the Zoo, and the Botanical Gardens for Chrissake!…..and right next to the bloody city…

        I cannot for the life of me see why such thing wouldn’t be wildly successful and on everybody’s bucket list of things to do before they die. I cannot believe that any group of people could be so singularly collectively lacking in imagination about something so screamingly obviously better than what is presently there.

        What the blazes is wrong with you? You miserable bunch of dour and ideologically self absorbed killjoys? Get a grip.

        • William Boeder

          March 11, 2019 at 11:43 pm

          Whew, give yourself a pat on the back Christopher, to think that I had once upon a time admired your writings.
          Do please continue supporting the Liberal party with their societal cankers, begged for mountains of corporate funding, the Liberal party citizen suppressing policies, then the party’s abidance to the US of A propaganda that is ever freely flowing into Australia only to emanate from within [the curse upon Australia] both the State and the Federal Liberal government parties.
          Have you heard the news of the Liberal Federal government caused fall in the Australian economic growth figures, a sort of slide down to the very bottom of an almost horizontal hillock?

          Were not the Liberals touted as the finest of financial caretakers back before their ruinous policies had been implemented and subsequently inflicted upon the Australian people and our national economy?

          Okay, I will not debate this Federal Liberal government’s Robo-cop bearing its specious harms being inflicted upon the disadvantaged, non-fat-cat or fat Toad like people in Australia.

          Meanwhile, I recommend a cup of tea and a Bex, then a laydown by you to ease your biased proletariat opinions and ease your uncommon flaring temper a bit?
          Y’all have a nice day day tomorrow.

          • PLB

            March 12, 2019 at 10:26 am

            Well William Boeder, will you also label me, with “staunch Liberal-party views”, (haha) as like Christopher E-N, I also tend to think a Skyrail trip up the mountain with the grandchildren would be an enjoyable day well remembered by the children, long after my passing. A beautiful way to view the City and its surrounding.

            Your labelling of Christopher on this single issue, is very much the same as, labelling all, as Greenie’s, because they didn’t support Gunns Pulp Miil, or because they want Climate Action. Pitiful. Bloody pitiful.

            You state, “to think that I had once upon a time admired your writings”, but now, you don’t ? because he has a difference of view on the Skyrail, so “you trot your out little bag of cliche stereotypes to smear” and that’s what bought me in. Just can’t stand those who use such cheap nothing tactics. You go full tilt on it in your second reply, attacking with the accusation of being a Liberal supporter, but from my understanding from Christopher’s writing over the years, differently don’t see him with “staunch Liberal-party views”.

            So William, does this make me a Liberal party supporter also? Haha.

            Me thinks it is you William, who needs to have a good cup of tea and a Bex, followed by a laydown, and reconfigure.

            Then you finish with ‘Y’all have a nice day” oh, how disappointing. Y’all. Sounds so very southern US backwards hick talk. Sorry, but I have a very strong dislike of US low hick langue. But, do have nice day, all.

        • spikey

          March 12, 2019 at 8:55 am

          Mona, quite popular.
          The botanical gardens, also quite popular.
          Hobart Zoo, not so popular, for quite some time, but conveniently a short stroll from the botanical gardens.

          If you’d like to see some caged animals, Bonorong would appear to me be the least revolting/most caring Wildlife Park/Rehabilitation sanctuary.

          Finally, kunyani cable-car, extremely unpopular and completely ludicrous.

          • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

            March 12, 2019 at 2:18 pm

            PLB, you took the words right out of my mouth. Thanks for saving me the trouble.

  5. Philip Lowe

    March 9, 2019 at 8:28 pm

    I met David Bellamy in a restaurant here. He sends regards to all his battle chums in Tassie.

  6. Russell

    March 9, 2019 at 12:12 pm

    There’s already a perfectly good road going all the way to the top. No-one is unable to get there. What’s the point?

    I could understand if someone wanted to propose a cable car at Cradle Mountain because very few people are fit enough and those with some physical limitations just can’t go any further than the walk around Dove Lake at the bottom.

    Someone close to government is on the take here.

  7. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    March 5, 2019 at 7:17 pm

    I looked really hard to find anything of substance in this article. I just could not find anything that looked like a serious argument that the proposed project would do any significant or lasting damage to its surrounding environment.

    I spent several years helping to bat off the anti-wind farm NIMBYs in the Bass Coast region, so I am something of an expert in the genre. I would say there is around a 90-95% crossover between them and the ant-skyrail lobby.

    The genre is characterized by magpie-grabbing at anything, no matter how ballsaching, or nitpickingly, mythmakingly and environmentally slight, to cast doubt on the project. The ‘pristine’ landscape lovers even managed to persuade the anti-wind farm federal environment minister that the Orange Bellied Parrot was at risk, which in the end was proved not to be the case and he had to withdraw his objection to the project on that ground. It was baloney.

    When one boiled down their objections, which include self induced wind turbine ‘syndrome’, their basic one was a conservative visual aesthetic that just didn’t like change, no matter what it was. And informing that was an unwillingness to engage the technology of mitigating climate change because it was not an immediate problem for them.

    The only difference I can see between the Bass Coast NIMBYs and the Hobart ones, is that the their underlying informant vector is an unwillingness to engage a technology for expanding private sector employment in Tasmania, because the lack of it, and the relative poverty of Tasmania’s economy isn’t a problem for them, they are deeply and comfortably invested in the status quo, and it works for them.

    I know that is a hard thing to say to people who fondly believe that they are on the side of the angels….as well as the aboriginal spirits of the landscape (whose stone age consciousness definitely doesn’t like change of any sort). But if the cap fits…..

    Now if this project were a significant ecological threat, nobody would be more supportive of opposition to it than me. If the opponents of this project made better use of their time by making sure the next government of Tasmania will be as keen to make all the new tourist infrastructure in the rest of Tasmania as environmentally careful as the Skyrail project seems to be, the state just might get a viable ongoing industry, new collateral investment and new employment opportunity that is as sustainable as it can be in what is becoming a very uncertain world

    I think the NIMBY opposition to the Skyrail project is as reactionary and self serving in its obstructionism as any of its variants elsewhere.

    • Philip Lynch

      March 6, 2019 at 8:04 pm

      Hi Christopher. Why would anyone be invested in maintaining the relative poverty of our economy? An odd perhaps even offensive comment.

      • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

        March 10, 2019 at 9:23 am

        ‘Offensive’ is just another of those ideological weasel words that morally dismisses the other & obviates the need to enter debate.& defend what you are doing.

        Like so much of the dismissive language of the humanist ascendancy,, it has degenerated into vapid cluches, moral conceit, & intellectual laziness.

        You are obviously used to getting away with it.

        The arguments being led against the railcar are the miserably deficient ones one would expect from NIMBYs who are indifferent to the reasonable hopes for economic advancement of their home state & their neighbours.

        That is the honest feedback & being offended is no defence whatever.. If you do not like what I am saying,, it might be appropriate to make some attempt to prove me wrong.

        It is called debate.

        • Ben Jones

          March 10, 2019 at 12:21 pm

          Christopher, You sound confident that MWCC’s proposed cable car development on kunanyi/Mt Wellington will advance the economy of Hobart. What is the evidence to support this assertion?

          • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

            March 10, 2019 at 2:33 pm

            A very fair question Ben.

            Whenever we talk about the future, there are always a lot of contingencies and potential unexpected outcomes, which means any commitment into that future, whether it is ideological or of a capital nature, is a balance of probability risk. And how well that risk is managed is very material to how it ultimately performs, whose interests it serves and to what extent . There are a lot of variables, always.

            But such uncertainty is no reason to hold back if on balance the positives outweigh the negatives.

            The proponents would have done an enterprise cost/benefit analysis for themselves and it obviously stacked up, otherwise they would not be proceeding. In their calculations for that analysis would have been estimations of how much additional tourist traffic the Skyrail facility would bring into Hobart.

            That cost/benefit analysis is not public property, so I do not know what is in it, but it would be extremely surprising if the additional traffic estimations were not a significant consideration component in deciding to go ahead.

            At the moment, Mount Wellington is not a particularly significant attraction for the city. The new project will provide an all weather platform to deliver a ride experience, destination facilities and a view that would rival the offerings of a lot of other tourist destinations around the world, and help put Hobart on the map.

            I personally am very excited about it and will make it my business to come down from Melbourne when the project opens, with the grandchildren, and have a ball of a day out together enjoying what the mountain that glowers over Hobart has to offer.

            The project by itself will attract not just more tourist traffic, but new entrepreneurial interest in investing in Tasmania, hopefully resulting in potential new projects downstream. And alongside that come new niches for the smaller collateral enterprises that spring up to service major new enterprises.The economic ripple effect can be substantial, including of course, jobs.

            Having said all that, it is possible to stuff things up. It is possible, in the wrong hands, to make the sort of tourist mess that Bjelke-Peterson and the white shoe brigade made of the Gold Coast. But I would point out that had the local petty bourgeois do-gooders not managed to clutch defeat out of the jaws of victory during the last election, we could all have a bit more confidence today in the capacity of the Tasmanian government to not only manage its tourist industry sustainably, but make sure that as much of the benefit from the industry stays in Tasmania as is reasonably possible. Closed loop low value mass tourist churn is proven bad news all over the world.and cause a lot of local bad feeling.

            Your problems with rental housing stock reflects the kind of priorities coalition governments all have towards the common weal and quick profit, although to be fair, no one really saw airbnb coming anymore than the taxi industry did with Uber. But whatever, it is now obvious that the place needs a lot more investment in tourist accommodation. And the Skyrail. along with a lot of other development will undoubtedly add persuasive momentum to addressing that

            However, since this project will very likely not be built before the next election, you guys have a reasonable prospect of fixing that unhappy state of affairs, as long as the ideological dummies stay out of the way to ensure there is a government in place that isn’t just interested in the money and the big end of town.

          • Geoff Holloway

            March 10, 2019 at 8:23 pm

            The following answer by Christopher to Ben Jones’ question is full of gobble-de-gook, non-economic diatribes, “there are always a lot of contingencies and potential unexpected outcomes, which means any commitment into that future, whether it is ideological or of a capital nature, is a balance of probability risk… (and however managed) is very material to how it ultimately performs, whose interests it serves and to what extent … (as there) are are a lot of variables, (as) always.” A very good example of a Yes Minister answer by Christopher and then the totally unscientific and absurd statement that “it would be extremely surprising if the additional traffic estimations were not a significant consideration” – this assertion by MWCC is a total fabrication with no scientific data to support it.

      • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

        March 10, 2019 at 12:44 pm

        As to your question, I would have thought the original comment I made was a plain enough answer, on top of all the other answers I have provided over time.

        One can infer the lack of interest in new industry by the sort of ‘case’ being led against the project.and by doing a comparative analysis with NIMBYs elsewhere, whose arguments and tactics are just as miserable as the ones I see in these columns.

        The case being led against the Skyrail project exactly mimic those of the anti-windfarm lobby, which was magpie opportunistic ‘environmental’ pristine piffle. You have not established any plausible environmentally based case against the project other than the same ideological cliches as the anti wind farm people.

        And the bloody reason Phillip that I am taking a piece out of you is that I hate seeing the language of ecological concern being debased and weakened by political ideology, whether yours or people who don’t like wind turbines.

        The anti-windfarme agenda was basically driven by an investment in the aesthetic (‘pristine’) and industrial (farming) status quo and a denial of the environmental case for turbines. Yours is exactly the same, except that your denial is one of economic opportunity for others.

        And I can adduce that using a bit of old fashioned class analysis. Who are the sort of people who would have no investment or interest in new economic infrastructure? People who are invested in and perfectly comfortable with the economic status quo. And who would such people be? They are people who are not dependant on private economic investment or who are comfortable in their existing private economic niche; i.e., the petty bourgeoisie.

        This category represent students, teachers, academics, bureaucrat/administrators, professionals and some elements in small business who do not stand to directly benefit from increased tourist numbers or expansion of the economy.

        This category of people isn’t presently caught up in the struggle to get a job, find opportunity other than going interstate, or the literally thousands of little businesses that really struggle and hardly make wages, let alone a profit.

        One walks around old Hobart town or Launceston and the outsider just loves the quaint old fashioned/dated buildings that have disappeared most everywhere else. But if one has to live there, it isn’t quite so ‘quaint’. It represents generations of chronic under-investment, ageing infrastructure and the ageing population that you would expect to find in an economic cul-de-sac!

        And I am saying to you Phil Lynch that the case I am making against you and the petty bourgeois interests that you are serving is perfectly reasonable, supported by the evidence of the poverty of your own case and the relative poverty of the economy you live in, and a measure of that class’s indifference to change that might better the place.

        ‘Offensive’? I don’t think so. ‘The awful truth’? I have made the case

        • Ben Jones

          March 10, 2019 at 1:24 pm

          Christopher, I don’t see any evidence in your original comment to support your assertion that that MWCC’s proposed cable car development on kunanyi/Mt Wellington will advance the economy of Hobart. Could you please elaborate. As the proposed development is within a public park surely it is incumbent on the developer and supporters of the development to demonstrate the positive economic and social outcomes of the proposed development.

          • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

            March 10, 2019 at 11:05 pm

            Ben, I do not need to quantify the potential benefits of the skyrail project. If it is successful and captures the imagination of people near and far, as the proponents have calculated, then ipso facto, it will likely have some substantial economic ripple effects that will significantly add momentum to the image of the city as tourist destination, and future tourist traffic will likely reflect that.. How much it does that is anyone’s guess.

            And how much benefit is going to be felt, by whom and when is almost entirely a speculative exercise because there are so many variables, including how good the regulatory infrastructure for the tourist industry as a whole is likely to be, in shaping and managing the impacts of the industry. And of course, no one knows the future of the larger economy, except in glimpses and guesses.

            Turning an idea into a successful outcome is a gamble and an act of faith. Only unbusinesslike petty bourgeois bureaucrats who think the world runs by guidelines and tick boxes, and get their salary dropped into the bank account, rain, hail or shine, could possibly imagine that visionary enterprise could be anything else. In markets, nothing is certain.

            If the thing flops completely, it will be a breeze to pull it down. All that will be left will be the concrete pads. And the proponents will have lost their money.

            My gut feeling is that it will be boomer of a project which will have substantial flow on effects, some of which we might be able to guess, and a whole lot more that we can’t until we get there.

            At the end of the day, I think most people are going to wonder what the fuss was about.

  8. Chris

    March 4, 2019 at 4:33 pm

    Willy Will every one of these work sites be surrounded by a lockable work site fence complete with danger notices?
    If not Willy will they be exempt from work site rules?

    • Raylan Givens

      March 5, 2019 at 10:04 am

      Good question, sometimes the simplest questions are the hardest to answer.

      The proposed drilling job – which actually looks like the start of construction rather than preliminary testing to gather information for the engineering design prior to a DA, will be a colossal logistical and technical challenge. Even erecting a temporary fence at most of the drill sites will be a major task in itself. Then considering the job will be chopper supported and that all equipment except for the drill rig and water tank must be carried into the worksites by hand, I wonder who will be reviewing and monitoring the safety management plans?

      • MJF

        March 6, 2019 at 5:38 pm

        At a wild guess, the designated site safety officers and all the other employees who have to buy into site safety by way of specific SWMS.

  9. Peter Clark

    March 4, 2019 at 4:01 pm

    Oh good god the great unwashed have been given oxygen again. There must be something poisonous in their mushrooms that has scrambled their brains as the green anti cable car group seem to be really messed up….. A cable car on the mountain is actually a universal green policy … no idea what these “people” are arguing ??? A cable car gets people off the ground and vehicles off the road …minimizing fume belching vehicles from the mountain road in turn minimizing the carnage of wildlife….. clean hydro powered cable car…, any greens being a part of this movement are being highly misled.

    • Rob

      March 5, 2019 at 12:40 pm

      Peter – if this dud dream was ever actually built (by the purchasers of MWCC, once Bold gets permits issued to it and then sells MWCC) then road traffic to the summit would INCREASE by a massive amount. Far more will want to drive up to check out the facilities for the cost of petrol, rather than being herded into the single CC heading up. Bold’s traffic surveys touting a traffic reduction (of between 40 to 60 % !!) were done before he announced the expansion of the summit facilities. *Early on, the Cable Car was the main deal, not it is being used as a Trogan Horse to set up various commercial operations at the summit – something that would have been refused, if presented as a stand-alone project.

  10. TV Resident

    March 4, 2019 at 12:43 pm

    I believe that wherever there is ‘big’ money, whether it be in sport, aquaculture or as we see here, developments in TWHWAs, we will find corruption. Liberals have proven that they are motivated by monied developers at every turn. Labor under Lennon were no better, hopefully under Rebecca White they will show more gumption to stand up for what is right and the will of the community rather than the developers. Unfortunately the Green party have been reduced somewhat, but they are still a loud voice in our parliament.

  11. Peter Bright

    March 4, 2019 at 10:35 am

    Isn’t it obvious?

    Get rid of all Liberal governments!

    For how long?


  12. Realist

    March 4, 2019 at 7:28 am

    ”A shuttle bus is also available. In adverse weather, the road is generally closed. Likewise, in such conditions, a cable car cannot operate.”
    That is simply plain wrong. There only needs to be a dusting of snow on the road and it is closed. Why is it I wonder, that cable cars are used to transport people to ski resorts all around the world. Honestly, the way people carry on with the hysteria about a cable car here is simply ridiculous. Any one would think we only have one mountain in Tasmania. And one spiked with infrastructure at that.

    • Clive Stott

      March 4, 2019 at 1:16 pm

      Realist you just don’t get it.
      Go ride an escalator at Myers if you aren’t happy with majority public opinion.

      • Realist

        March 5, 2019 at 7:48 am

        ”if you aren’t happy with majority public opinion.” Ha Ha Ha, if you really believe that Clive, you must still believe in the tooth fairy. Repeated polls indicate otherwise.

    • Ben Jones

      March 4, 2019 at 6:23 pm

      Realist. The kunanyi/Mt Wellington Explorer Bus is an all-weather, year-round shuttle bus service from Hobart city to the summit of kunanyi/Mt Wellington that operates 7 days a week, 364 days of the year (closed Christmas Day). If a cable car was ever constructed on kunanyi/Mt Wellington it would be closed on a regular basis due to wind.

      • Realist

        March 5, 2019 at 8:05 am

        Believe what you like Ben. Simple fact is a shuttle bus would simply not keep up with demand. Plus I cannot see the bus travelling in a foot of snow or more, the very time people would like access to the mountain.
        Table mt. cable car in South Africa can handle winds up 90 kph. which considering the sheltered aspect of the route here would not be regular factor. Keep coming up with the lame excuses.

        • TheReaRealist

          March 5, 2019 at 9:28 am

          A real realist would publish the fare costs, would see using free public land is a step back to the 1800’s, would see the vested interest of the head of Tas Tourism being a major shareholder of MWCC as an issue, would see polls that have preambles to sway participants are not real polls ( http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2014/09/polling-on-mt-wellington-cable-car.html?m=1#more) and lastly would use their real name. But you keep believing your own lame reality.

          • Lyndall

            March 11, 2019 at 5:10 pm

            Hi TheReaRealist
            I’ve only just read this thread and picked up on what you’ve said. Thank you.

            Setting aside the merits or not of the MWCC proposal itself, isn’t anyone really worried about the machinations behind it?

            On any conflict of interest:

            ABC News April 2017 – “Tourism Tasmania chairman James Cretan has denied there is a conflict of interest in him being the half owner of a company heavily invested in the Mount Wellington Cable Car project, which is being fast-tracked by the Government. … Four months after Tucre’s share buy, the Tasmanian Government announced plans to compulsorily acquire land on Mount Wellington to help the project “proceed through the planning process”, Tasmanian State Growth Minister Matthew Groom said at the time. … Mr Cretan said he had declared his interest to the Government and Tourism Tasmania’s board.

            “As an independent chair and a private investor, as long as I declare my interest and manage any perception of conflict, which I am diligent in doing so, I don’t believe there’s an issue,” he said. “Should it become a discussion point at the Tourism Tasmania board, I would abstain from that discussion.” …

            Former economist and public policy expert John Lawrence looked into the cable car’s investors and highlighted Mr Cretan’s link to the $50 million project. Although Tourism Tasmania is not involved in the government approvals process for the cable car, he said he believed the conflict of interest was undeniable.

            “I can’t see how it’s not [a conflict of interest],” he said.

            “[Mr Cretan is] mapping a strategic direction for Tourism Tasmania while at the same time a director of the largest preference shareholder in the cableway company … and acquired this asset only in the last six months.”

            Late last month Tasmania’s State Growth Minister Matthew Groom denied there was an issue of integrity in relation to the project. A photo was deleted — and later reposted — from his Facebook showing him posing with the project’s proponent Adrian Bold, who was wearing a “Vote One Groom” badge.”

            On the use of public land for the MWCC project:

            ABC News Aug 2018 – “The Mount Wellington cable car proponents are vowing to push on, after the Hobart City Council voted to deny the controversial proposal access to council-owned public land. …

            Mount Wellington Cableway Company (MWCC) chairwoman Jude Franks said the decision would not stop it being built, and the company would continue to push ahead with a development application. … “Our plan is to continue with the ministerial authority, progressing with that, and getting in front of the Council. Between here and October there’s a lot that can happen.” … She said the company would wait for the October elections, hoping a new council could mean a change of outcome. “We always knew this was going to be an election issue and I think now it is even going to be more so,” she said.

            The company will lodge a development application despite the motion to prevent their access to public land on the mountain, and will not be considering any other routes.
            “This is our site,” Ms Franks said. …

            Deputy Premier for Braddon Jeremy Rockliff said the Government remained behind the development. “We want to make sure, and they will, that the project has to go through all the necessary approval processes, notwithstanding the fact we are very strong supporters of that project,” he said. … “.

            James Cretan’s current bio on Tourism Tasmania’s website:

            N.B. no mention of his part-ownership in the above-mentioned Tucre company which is reportedly “heavily invested in the MWCC project”:

            “James is the chair of the Tourism Tasmania Board of Directors and a member of the Premier’s Visitor Economy Advisory Council. He oversees the agency’s strategic direction and plays a significant role in communication with government and industry. James is an executive director of Kriticos Nominees, a family company that owns and operates Cradle Mountain Wilderness Village, Swansea Beach Chalets, Shoreline Hotel and Tasmanian Collection Service. …”. https://www.tourismtasmania.com.au/about/board

            The more I look the more I see – or can perceive as potentially corrupting, at least – in questionable arrangements such as the above. Simply declaring one’s interest (to the Tas. govt and Tas tourism board), ‘abstaining from discussion’ or even leaving the room doesn’t cut it; for as we all know, the relationship building, work and influence have already been well established beforehand and these understandings will continue well beyond the formal discussion or vote. In addition, the company’s automatically assumed ‘right’ to take public land for their privately-owned development and the government’s willingness to oblige and compulsorily acquire the land needed by the company should also be a red flag in this case.

            Tasmania needs a ‘world’s best practice’ strong and fully independent anti-corruption and integrity commission; not the less-than-ideal and ineffectual one it’s got at present. Australia needs a powerful national version as well. As a nation state, we were ratified as a signatory to the UN’s Convention against Corruption back in 2005. But I don’t see that we’ve actually implemented nor diligently practiced the full intent as per Articles 5 & 6 of the Convention and per the below outline.

            There are four themes under the Convention, of which the first is Prevention. I wonder about ‘the look’ of the reported relationships, interests, processes and planning for the MWCC proposal when viewed against the UN’s corruption prevention outline:

            “Corruption can be prosecuted after the fact, but first and foremost, it requires prevention. An entire chapter of the Convention is dedicated to prevention, with measures directed at both the public and private sectors. These include model preventive policies, such as the establishment of anticorruption bodies and enhanced transparency in the financing of election campaigns and political parties. States must endeavour to ensure that their public services are subject to safeguards that promote efficiency, transparency and recruitment based on merit. Once recruited, public servants should be subject to codes of conduct, requirements for financial and other disclosures, and appropriate disciplinary measures. Transparency and accountability in matters of public finance must also be promoted, and specific requirements are established for the prevention of corruption, in the particularly critical areas of the public sector, such as the judiciary and public procurement. Those who use public services must expect a high standard of conduct from their public servants. Preventing public corruption also requires an effort from all members of society at large. For these reasons, the Convention calls on countries to promote actively the involvement of non-governmental and community-based organizations, as well as other elements of civil society, and to raise public awareness of corruption and what can be done about it. Article 5 of the Convention enjoins each State Party to establish and promote effective practices aimed at the prevention of corruption.”.

          • Lyndall

            March 12, 2019 at 7:01 am

            Oops, I missed this, sorry – this reference belongs to the UN Preservation outline (last para) I quoted in my reply: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/corruption/convention-highlights.html

        • Ben Jones

          March 5, 2019 at 9:40 am

          Realist. Real operational data from the Table Mountain Aerial Cableway shows that the cable car closes due to high winds 21% of the time, or 78 days each year. Mt Wellington is actually much windier than Table Mountain, therefore it is not unreasonable to conclude that a similar cable car on kunanyi/Mt Wellington would close due to high winds for more than 78 days each year, far more than often than the road is ever closed due to ice and snow.

        • Snowy

          March 5, 2019 at 11:53 am

          When the current shuttle bus service commenced last October it was announced that a special purpose built bus for snow and ice conditions – similar to those in use at Thredbo, Mt. Buller and Queenstown, NZ, – had also been ordered. It was expected to start service in May 2019.

          The MWCC website claimed that 80 kph winds were the maximum “comfort level” at which the cable car would operate. An analysis of BOM records showed that wind speeds on the mountain exceeded that on 123 days during a 12 month period during 2017/18 Also each year there are numerous low wind but low cloud days when the view from the summit is obliterated.

          • Clive Stott

            March 10, 2019 at 6:04 pm

            If it wasn’t defacing our mountain, install a chair lift.
            People who are going to be using a cable car come here for the experience…then give them one!

  13. Chris

    March 3, 2019 at 6:34 pm

    Remember Bob Brown’s victory in the high court where he was vindicated?

    You may protest, particularly politically!

  14. William Boeder

    March 3, 2019 at 11:43 am

    Enter into Tasmania’s history of its corrupt undertakings and you will realize how unwanted developments are given the Green Light. One particular State minister stands out as this State’s most prominent advocate, WHY?

    I wonder if this unwanted development might incur the ire or the wrath of Tasmania’s Police Commissioner, he happens to be handily located closely to the proposed location?

To Top