Letters to the Editor

NWTD-Affected Landholders to Pursue Legal Action

On Saturday the 15th of November, landholders impacted by the North West Transmission Developments (NWTD) project met in East Ridgley with Barrister Raymond J. Broomhall.

Mr Broomhall gave an excellent presentation on legal matters relating to the proposed NWTD and associated energy infrastructure. A question-and-answer session followed. Approximately thirty people were present at the meeting, including Carlo Di Falco MHA of the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party.

After listening to Raymond Broomhall’s presentation and hearing the legal options available, the landholders decided to pursue legal action with the aim of stopping the NWTD and Marinus Link altogether.

They dismissed the option of merely seeking better compensation, expressing their views that the proposed energy projects are of no benefit to Tasmania and also pose a risk of harm to their families and property.

Following the meeting, landholders plan to continue more detailed discussions with Mr Broomhall on the next steps needed for taking legal action.

 – Malcolm Ryan, Meeting Chair, 17 November 2025

SID Visa

The Labor federal government changed the 482 visa to the SID visa (Skills in Demand) so it doesn’t require residency in regional areas back in 2024.

Migrants offer great contributions to Tasmania through unique customs and culture that basically add population growth in times of less traditional marriage.

Overall migration in the Global North is actually down two fifths this year after the COVID period which was null.

 – Karl McBeath, 14 November 2025

Tasmania does not need another new Stadium!

Dear Ministers, MHAs, MLCs, the Tasmania Devils FC, and others,

I write to ask that you stop this Stadium approval process immediately.

I am a former crane company owner that operated across the North West of Tasmania. I had a hand in working on local projects over many years and know the work that goes into big construction jobs.

This stadium project is a folly, a waste of money and I believe the cost blowouts make it the wrong priority for Tasmania.

You must give Tasmanians (or Tassie’s) the chance to vote for the stadium location, and then you will find that most Tasmanians believe the team should go to Launceston. We must use and utilise UTAS Stadium, which is already funded to be upgraded.

If the stadium is built at the current price tag, this government will have us lose police, doctors, nurses, carers and most services. That is not right.

How many years has AFL been played in Tasmania, and robbed our men to play in their national competition?

The Premier, Jeremy Rockliff, and CEO of the AFL, Andrew Dillon and co. will bankrupt Tasmania wide. People will lose cars, houses and businesses. This will cause family break up, and those who have pushed the stadium will also be guilty of causing suicide.

For the extra costs to people statewide, the Government should fine the AFL $5 million for blackmail.

This year, in Hobart, the number of AFL fans attending was 7,395 to 11,176 over two games, averaging 9,285 across both games.

This year, in Launceston, the number of AFL fans attending was 12,772, 13,287, 14,021, and 15,129, respectively over four games, averaging 13,802 across all games.

Over the years, these attendance differences have been consistent, with higher attendances at UTAS Stadium in Launceston compared to Ninja Stadium, in Bellerive.

My question is with the Club Funding and Development Agreement, why was Tasmania the only region required to build a new stadium for a new team? Have all other AFL stadiums also been given roofed ultimatums or no licence for the teams that want to use them?

The MCG, SCG, Kardinia Park, Adelaide Oval, WACA, Gabba were all existing stadiums used for AFL teams established or beginning. None of these stadiums were required to have a roof!

Please WAKE UP and think of others, not only getting a name for yourselves.

Tasmanians want to know the total amount taxpayers will have to spend on this Stadium. A response from you, justifying the way you will vote or act would be nice.

Do the right thing for Tasmania!

 – Minnie Gardam, Wynyard, 13 November 2025

MAC Point not suitable for stadium

I’m against the stadium at Mac Point. Like others, I’ve been voicing my objections based on the obscene amount of money it is slated to cost taxpayers, but that’s not the only reason for my objection.

I won’t deny I’m a new Tasmanian and I’m not interested in sport but as a resident and a committed community member of Hobart I stake my claim to an opinion.

As an ‘outsider’, I can voice what perhaps others haven’t. I’m told football is fundamental to the local community and that AFL unites the State. Yet every financial argument for a stadium at Mac Point centres on it bringing overseas and interstate visitors.

The argument goes that visitors’ money won’t fund it unless it’s at Mac Point because Salamanca is where visitors flock. Regardless of the irony that the thing that unites the locals can only exist if visitors fund it, people making that argument need to ask why visitors go there and have to be prepared for the answer, which is: Salamanca is where historic architecture is celebrated; where fine dining and Tasmanian produce are championed.

Salamanca is where the MONA ferries dock; where TMAG and TSO live and a launchpad to Tasmania’s rural beauty and wilderness. Salamanca has a culture which is potentially highly vulnerable to inappropriate development.

That the very thing being slated to support the finances of a football stadium is threatened by that stadium’s existence in Hobart’s prime tourism site is as obvious as to use a football type expression — dogs’ balls.

There’s something else too. Hobart is a multicultural city, and Tasmania has a rich Indigenous legacy. Hobart has an opportunity to expand its attraction to overseas visitors by championing this far more than it does at present.

AFL is known for its racism, particularly against First Nations people so seems a poor choice for Mac Point, especially when the stadium proposal has run roughshod over the Indigenous cultural significance of the site.

Mac Point is not an appropriate place for an AFL football stadium, even without the compelling financial argument against it.

 – Helen Dow, Hobart, 11 November 2025

New push for cable car

You may have heard of a new push by the government for a cable car.

An RTI reveals that the draft minutes of the July meeting of the Wellington Park Trust show that State Growth staff provided a presentation of the status of the “Mountain Review”.

We have no details of the content of that presentation, but can infer from Trust responses that it included a recommendation of a cable car.

To quote from the draft minutes: “Trust members questioned why the cable car was included as a draft recommendation”.

It is clear therefore, that despite known opposition from the traditional owners and the community, and rejection by HCC and TASCAT, this government is intent on pushing for a cable car on Kunanyi.

It is worth looking at the full detail uncovered by the RTI to get some idea what they propose. We are only able to see the Trust’s response, not the draft proposals, but it still makes disturbing reading.

To read the text of the full RTI go to the WPMT website. At the bottom of each page there is a link which says “right to information”. Scroll down to the disclosure log and open the one RTI that is there.

There is nothing out in the open just yet, but we need to be prepared for when the government starts trying to put their intentions into action. We need to show that we are still here and that we still care deeply about the mountain.

You can write a letter to the editor of the Mercury. You can visit and engage with the Respect the Mountain Facebook page. This is where new information is most likely to be posted first.

It is notable that Monday’s editorial in the Mercury appears sympathetic to us for once, concluding that: “until the government finally clips the cable once and for all, this city will be stuck on repeat, forever arguing over a mountain that deserves a bit of peace”.

Thanking you for all that you do to protect our mountain,

 – Phil Stigant, for Residents Opposed to the Cable Car, 11 November 2025

Whose work is the most valuable?

Imagine two people waiting at traffic lights outside the hospital, one in the distinctive dark blue, no-frills nurses uniform complete with logo. The other wearing a well-cut suit with matching tie, a whiff of self-assuredness and job title to match.

They both work for the Health Department but their paths rarely cross except at innocuous traffic lights.

Polite indifference leads him to ask how her day has been?

Exhausted, devoid of words and craving for the solitude of her flat with only George a cantankerous cat for company after just finishing a double shift in Emergency because of staff shortages images of the last few hours come into focus.

The anguish of a parent’s face as she explained the test results for their child, delivering a baby in the carpark, sensing the fear of a crash victim covered in blood, dealing with the inevitability of death, being spat on and attacked interspersed with the mundane, making beds, emptying bedpans or just chatting with the old lady who sits for hours in the waiting area to avoid loneliness.

With a weary smile she shrugged her shoulders gave an ambiguous response. Bouncing the question back and he thinks of his day full of meetings, drinking weak percolated coffee, hours creating strategic plans, refining the Department’s Mission Statement, pouring over budgets to determining ways not to give a pay rise to staff like the nurse beside him, implementing cutbacks and yet another restructure.

As his chosen smile clicked into place he responds with nonchalance.

As the lights change, they part to follow their own lives and careers except one is paid $700,000 pa while the other about a seventh of this amount: Which begs the question whose work is the most valuable?

 – Dr Ian Broinowski, Battery Point, 09 November 2025

Salmon – it’s easier to enjoy if it’s clean

What could be and what is are not the same, Tasmania’s farmed Atlantic Salmon industry is at a cross roads, much is being said about reticulated systems providing a controlled environment for the initial stages of growth.

The technology includes filtration and extraction of waste product and, in the areas of use, sets the Tasmanian industry up to lead the world in sustainable practice.

The biggest question is, does the industry value the recognition of driving this innovation across all freshwater operations. The idea of actually being a world leader, in environmental sustainability, is appealing to many.

Maintaining Tasmania’s clean green image is a focus that has potential to build the industry into a valued partner with the Tasmanian community. The confidence generated through genuine sustainability is exactly what’s needed to build social licence or to reduce conflict between community and environmental groups and the industry.

The alternate is flow through systems which vent all by-product into our fresh water streams to be carried and absorbed.

Huon’s facility at Whale Point is said to create 8 skip bins of faeces each day, it seems probable the same amount is discharged into what should be pristine waterways, from the dozen or so flowthrough operations still in use.

Given the technology exists to replicate the reticulated systems statewide, the decision is available to be made, and any delay is already compromising river health.

While wishing for better in the hatchery and growout stages the setting to sea for the final grow out is drawing the ire of many.

This week we heard about the approval, if indeed that’s what you call the boggie dealings between industry and government departments to enable heavy use of the antibiotic Florfenicol.

This week TASSAL has commenced using Florfenicol in two leases close to Dover.

The Director of Public Health released a statement suggesting no wild harvest fish should be retained, if caught within 3 km of a pen undergoing treatment with Florfenicol.

The area considered if all leases were to initiate antibiotic use concurrently would be significant.

The initial reaction from Tasmania’s recreational fishing community is one of stunned amazement followed by anger!

I sit here wondering what level of arrogance or stupidity is associated with driving a clearly unpopular outcome without setting in place clear and readily available information on where, when and for how long Florfenicol will be used.

The media around antibiotic use paints a poor picture where, yet again, industry prioritises operational convenience above environmental protection, human health and community support.

The cross roads isn’t about antibiotic use, it’s about creating an industry we can all be proud to support. I wonder how long we’ll need to wait?

 – John Stanfield, 08 November 2025

Paradoxical Abuse – When DECYP Harms Us with One Hand and Offers “Support” with the Other

Recently, I received a kind and courteous email from a staff member at the Department for Education, Children and Young People (DECYP), offering youth support services for my 13-year-old daughter.

I appreciated the thought and the professional tone of that message.

But the reality is that my daughter would not need that support had DECYP not caused the harm we are now living with. This is a form of paradoxical abuse — when the same institution harms with one hand and offers help with the other.

After enduring more than a year of workplace bullying and mobbing that was known to school management, the situation escalated, was mismanaged by an Acting Assistant Principal, and I asked to leave the school.

DECYP’s HR then reversed the narrative a clear example of the DARVO tactic (deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender) and in 2023 the Department labelled me a “risk to children” without any lawful or fair investigation.

Right to Information evidence shows that processes of natural justice were manipulated, my responses were edited, and evidence was fabricated and misrepresented to achieve that determination.

Then it was labelled an internal decision so there was no appeal pathway offered for me to challenge it.

Both a DECYP Principal and the school’s Assistant Principal have provided statements supporting me, yet these were ignored. A psychiatrist engaged by the Department confirmed I had sustained a psychosocial workplace injury, but that too was disregarded.

There is no evidence of wrongdoing on my part — only two hearsay statements from the teacher assistants I had reported to management.

That false classification ended my impeccable 30-year teaching career and has left my daughter and me in three years of financial hardship and distress. The impact on her has been profound, right at a critical stage in her development.

She has been plummeted into poverty, lost her stability and her sense of community, and her trust in people and public institutions. Yet the same Department that caused this harm, and continues to maintain the false determination — despite clear contrary Right to Information evidence, now extends “support” as though none of this context exists.

I have sought oversight from every relevant body — TRB, WorkSafe, the Ombudsman, the Integrity Commission, the Office of the Independent Regulator, and Members of Parliament — but none have acted to investigate objectively or correct the error.

After three years of fighting and many months pursuing RTI requests, I have now filed in the Supreme Court of Tasmania seeking to have the Department’s determinations declared unlawful and void.

Mistakes can happen. What matters is whether they are acknowledged and corrected. Until DECYP accepts responsibility for the harm it has caused and corrects the record, its gestures of support ring hollow.

 – Muria Gail Ann Roberts, Nubeena, 08 November 2025

Coping with antibiotic resistance: an ongoing battle

One thing that has not quite come through clearly enough is the fact that application of antibiotics to control microbial infections in industries such as salmon farming (and farming generally) comes at a cost. The never-ending merry go round of antibiotic resistance and their side effects continue to be a thorn in the side of the many primary production industries; salmon production is no different. Explaining the cause of resistance goes right back to Charles Darwin.

Once considered to be the final solution to microbial infections, antibiotics became a mainstay in the arsenal of treatment options for several serious diseases. However, as time went on microbial resistance became an increasing problem. The strict protocols for dealing with staph infections in our hospitals are just one example of the measures we must take to prevent the spread of highly infectious bacteria.

Over recent years there has been a considerable effort to carefully control the administration of antibiotics in the human population as resistance and nasty side effects become more prevalent.

Microbes, like all living organisms, have their own genetic makeup and it is this genetic code, carried by each member of a population of microbes that enables them to outsmart even the best designed antibiotics – really, it’s simply a case of ‘survival of the fittest’. So, in a population of say 1000 microbes there may be one or two microbes who have the right genetic code segments needed to deal with a ‘new’ antibiotic and as microbes can reproduce very quickly, the problem continues and host infections can run rampant.

So, for anyone to lay claim to applying an antibiotic panacea (even in concert with other management measures) is simply dreaming – the battle never ends, especially where production conditions are favorable for the growth of pathogenic microbes.

To add, there is also the reality of antibiotic residues remaining within the edible product (in this case salmon). Here lies the potential impact on human health. There is currently official advice directing people not to consume caught fish within certain distances from salmon pens here in Tasmania. Such advice demonstrates the potential toxic nature of the antibiotics both in use and as residues remaining in the water column and riverbed sludges.

Interested readers can consult the links below for further information.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10316380/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6760505/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513277/

 – Philip J Tattersall, Beauty Point 10 November 2025 

Tasmanian Times (TT) is a community-based news and current affairs service covering the island state of Tasmania. It exists to provide a diverse presentation of Tasmanian issues. TT creates and supports independent media content utilising the best of modern technologies and tried-and-true practices of public-interest journalism.

Support us in expanding our coverage and developing new content by and for Tasmanians. 

 New initiatives on the way include … what our contributors and readers suggest! Please get in touch with your suggestions.