I hope that the evening goes well and that the troops are entertained by the various stories that will be on offer. But I wonder whether the participants might stop to think about the psychology of activism. My personal view is that much of activism is driven out of a tussle between those who want the power to enforce their views on the masses without going to the trouble of achieving these ends through the traditional routes of a constitutional democracy. Achieving the capacity to change things through the regular democratic route is often seen to be too difficult given the ingrained belief structures of the main vehicles of executive power, the major parties such as the Libs and ALP. The Democrats under guidance from the wonderful Don Chipp enjoyed for a while a pseudo-activist role in their balance-of-power strategy in the Federal Senate, but along the way they lost their social zeal to some degree and the confidence of their backers, many of which have moved to the Greens. It is clear that it is also the Greens long-term strategy to achieve power at the Federal level by being in the luck BoP position at some time.

Activism is an exercise in empowerment – it is the feeling of the possibilities that might come from some sort of direct action. In this regard, there is both positive and negative activism. Positive activism usually seeks to change the way governments/communities operate usually towards some sort of perceived social/environmental good. Negative activism is the mirror of this where the activist’s actions are directed at interfering or stopping activities with which they disagree with. Activists would also vary from your fun-loving libertarian through to the unfun-loving fundamentalist, but both united in their view that their view, and that of their clan, is the correct one from a social/ethical/intellectual standpoint. There have obviously been many splendid outcomes from activist movements – for example, civil rights movement in the US, anti-apartheid action in South Africa – that while opposed by particular layers of government have since become embraced by Western-style democracies. Even in Tasmania, activism has led to concrete positive outcomes – stopping dam construction in the 80’s, gay and lesbian rights through the 90’s and advances in aboriginal reconciliation through the 2000’s. We can be rightfully proud of some of these achievements largely driven by small groups of people who have successfully argued and won recognition of their cause from the mainstream populace. I have said elsewhere on TT, I think this is the nub of the great failure of current Greens and Wilderness Society activism on industrial forestry (+ mill) is they have lost the populace by not bringing and selling their argument to the masses. I am not sure who is driving current strategies, but they are failing miserably – be they locking themselves to machinery in disputed forests, playing dress-ups at rallies or hurling abuse at the current governmental players – well, it is just not cutting through. So, perhaps on this Night of Activism it would be worth pausing and examining how the arguments can be sold more so that mainstream Tasmania is brought with you, rather than being opposed based on the arrogance of the activism on show.

You clearly aren’t paying much attention, are you Tomas?

“I have said elsewhere on TT, I think this is the nub of the great failure of current Greens and Wilderness Society activism on industrial forestry (+ mill) is they have lost the populace by not bringing and selling their argument to the masses. I am not sure who is driving current strategies, but they are failing miserably…”

A conservative estimate reveals that at least ten thousand people have now publicly rallied, marched, listened, played, sang, chanted and so on against the pulp mill.  This number represents the combined crowds at the street march in Launceston last year, the Land and Water Rally in March and the Albert Hall Rally a couple of weeks ago. Even allowing for the fact that some people will have attended all three, ten thousand remains a pretty fair estimate.

How are these people not ‘the masses’, Tomas? As I have stated before, in responses to similar inaccurate and misguided claims by you, it is feasible that this number represents the tip of the iceberg.

Two of the three events mentioned were organised and coordinated by the Wilderness Society (I am not sure of the extent of their involvement in the Land and Water Rally).

You might claim that pulp mill protest numbers haven’t reached the ‘good old days’ of the Franklin Dam dispute, and that would be fair enough, but I can assure you that the pulp mill protests are far from over.

Denigrate the Greens and the WS all you want—that’s your right in an open forum such as this one.  But to continually make statements that have either no credibility or no basis in fact serves only to make you look like a goose.

Those who oppose industrial logging in Tasmania “have lost the populace” Tomas, because the other side has millions of dollars to spend on neverending PR, incessant advertising, multiple astro-turf (fake grassroots) organisations, regular fake letter-writing “campaigns” and annual donations to subservient political parties who fear the effect that these same dollars would have if the forestry-advertising-boot was on the other foot.

And where do those millions of dollars of spare cash for PR and influence-peddling come from?  From the immense profits they make in turning our old growth forests into their woodchips.

Government gives them our timber resource for a song, subsidises their infrastructure to the hilt and ensures they do not have to meet the same standards as the rest of the community, and in return industrial forestry props up political Party coffers and carries out advertising that fits into Party political lines like a hand in a glove.

The last Tasmanian election was a case in point - various Tasmanian businessmen and forestry interests were all over the Lennon Government’s Media Unit in December 2005, three months prior to the March election.  When the election arrived we found that an “anonymous” group of Tasmanian businessmen and forestry interests had sponsored a major advertising campaign that mirrored the ALP’s number one election strategy - majority Government or bust.

It is common knowledge in advertising circles that these advertisements were “in the can” well before the election was even called.  How obvious is it that the people putting them together must have been receiving some type of marching orders from the Lennon Government itself? 

On top of this, the Opposition Parties discovered at the last minute that virtually every advertising slot during the last four weeks of the election campaign was gone - (pre)booked out by a combination of ALP mates, forestry interests and the ALP itself.
I could go on and on, but the point is that the Lennon Government gives away our forests to industrial loggers, who then use a portion of the profits from woodchipping our forests to conduct massive advertising campaigns coordinated by, and supporting, the same Lennon Government. 

In my opinion advertising, particularly the type of saturation advertising that this ALP/forestry alliance gives us every election, is a major market failure that is distoring the electoral outcomes in the small market that is our state of Tasmania.

“Lost the populace”?  More like watched helplessly as it gets carried away on a flood of dishonest advertising, bread and the occasional circus.

Regards,
Jason Lovell

interesting rave Thomas <?>, good luck to the activists and i am sure the corws will be well entertained.

In regards to Thomas’s comments,he only issue i can see is the ultimate success of the activism, beyond the personal satisfaction of the activists. Whiles much great owrk has been done, a lot of things are the same as they ever were, same issues to activate against, same mainstream views running things.

Best of times to everyones innvolved.

We miss out on so much in the North West. We think it would be worth taking it on the road, real stories, real lives, real truth.

(1)
    this guy ,just doesn,t get it ! like bonham and herbert he falls into the same trap of putting everyone who protests over the mill as being a greenie, one would think that by his supposed (self outed) background that he would have taken on board the latest 7.30 report where the A.M.A. have given a damning report on the proposed mill based purely on the health risk posed to the residents of the Tamar Valley ! said risks to be increased one hundred fold should the mill go ahead under the present guidelines !
    A reality check is definitely order of the day for this so called “professional”
                  d.d.

Yes Don, it is interesting how the AMA is getting stuck in. They have had a few forays into various issues related to industrial forestry in recent years. Methinks them Docs for Forests have decided to open up a new front.

I would also love the AMA to let us know how many Launcestonians die each year due to medical errors and are these rates increaing? I would also like to hear their opinion on how they are going to keep the LGH open with a limited tax base due to the lack of industry in the region (I suppose we can rely on pork barreling for a while yet). I would also like their opinion on how the uncompetitive practises of the medical colleges lead to reduced numbers of specialists who subsequently charge exorbitant fees? And why they seek to cripple the health budget with their salary claims to work in public hospitals? And why a number of Tasmanian specialists wont treat veterans with a gold card? And how many Tasmanians die each year because they can’t get access to or afford specialist treatment? These seem to be issues that escape the notice of Tasmanian AMA, while they take every opportunity to undermine industrial forestry practises. Very curious….

On Launceston and air quality - it has been well known that Launceston has a very poor record on air quality given the topography of the region and the unregulated use of woodheaters. I would have to wonder why most people with a serious respiratory illness would choose to continue living there.

Jason - if you can get around 15,000-20,000 out on the street protesting, you are in with a chance vs mill. If you get the ‘usual suspects’ turning out in the low thousands, there wont be many politicians worrying about throwing their vote behind the approval process. The mill opponents of various sorts have resources and links - if these can be strategically managed, then you might get there despite the media manoeuvring of the other side. I have my doubts that the new management of the Greens/WS/TAP etc can get it together, but I could be surprised.

That’s right Tomas - the AMA treveals it has major concerns for the health of 100,000 Tamar Valley residents ... and your only response is to focus directly on the AMA; shooting the messenger just so you can ignore their (inconvenient) message.

Nice one mate - your “concerns” become ever more obvious as each day passes and each post resembles the opinions of Paul Lennon and his spinners ever more closely. 

Never forget TTers, the focus in Tasmania is not on the quality of developments, or the cleanliness of the air that we breath and the water that we fish and swim in, in Tasmania today the focus is on any “minority” group that dares query the pulp mill process. 

And those “minority” groups now include doctors who are worried about the respiratory health of 100,000 Tamar Valley residents.

That’s the way it works in this “New” Tasmania of ours.  Don’t ever forget it.

Regards,
Jason Lovell

So you have a beef with the AMA, Tomas—fair enough, but either save your antagonism for another thread or better still raise your concerns with the current Health Minister, or her predecessor. They might be able to explain some of your issues to you.

You are right in that there are real problems with Launceston’s air quality, and that this has been exacerbated by use of woodheaters and so on.  Some initiatives, such as the woodheater buyback scheme, have helped partly to minimise the problem.

But if you would like to be taken seriously on this particular issue on this thread you need to explain:

a) why a pulp mill will not severely exacerbate an already serious air quality issue for the Tamar River Valley

b) why Gunns have based their reporting of air quality in the region on incomplete data

c) why the AMA shouldn’t be raising merry hell with this issue, given that it has the potential to impact adversely on the health of many in the population centres around the proposed mill site, and of course in Launceston.

Regardless of the fact that opposition to the mill proposal is from much wider quarters, the greens will be crucified if the mill does not get built.  On the other hand, if the mill does get bulldozed through the current approval process, the greens will get the balance of power at the next election, almost guaranteed.  So in a perverse sense the greens would actually benefit from the building of the mill.  That is why they can afford to push the focus of the debate onto forestry, rather than concentrate on the much more important personal risks the mill represents, where the debate can cut through to the fence sitters and where the debate should be and can be won. 

If your average ignorant Tasmanian was fully aware of the dangers the mill will bring to the Island, you would easily get 20,000 people out in the street trowing rocks at politicians who voted for the mill.  But in the long run that would only be a battle won for the greens, in reality a setback for them in trying to win the war.

i just think it would be nice to hear activist stories from the present radical and decentralized networks operating across australia.  rather than the same old faces telling the same old stories.  i mean come on! since wesley vale what has been saved by these old hands?....meanwhile ‘dirty ferals’ run amuck tirelessly at the front line of activism with little physical or philosphical and definitely no fincancial support from the established green elites.

“Tom” i think is on the money there. The Greens may yet get politically ahead if the pulp mill goes ahead but it will be awful for their future prospects if they succeed in scuttling the project (before TT people jump on me, I am talking about perceptions here).

My problem with the AMA is also my problem with the Docs for Forests (don’t forget the latter was started initially by an ex AMA president). They are using whatever perceived social leverage they have as medical doctors to pontificate about political issues, while ignoring more pressing health issues - such as exploding medical wages and the harmful effects on the publich health budget, the greed of private specialists, the increasing rates of medical errors, the unhealthy kickbacks from pharmaceutical and pathology companies. Strangely silent on these issues that affect a greater number of people (including Launcestonians), sometimes fatally. Rather than shooting the messenger, I am vigilant against such monsterous hypocrisy.

In any case, I don’t dispute that industry may lead to harmful effects on the health of the populace - it always has. This has been the trade-off of all modern societies. In the same way we accept other harmful practises in the interests of the greater good, or under the banner of personal liberty - be that motor vehicles, pharmaceuticals, grog, smoking, woodheaters, Macdonalds, particular sports, etc. In this regard, lack of access to quality health care, fueled by the uncompetitive practises of doctors and their professional bodies, will kill a lot more Launceston people than more particulates in the air. Perhaps the AMA might do a report on that?

I personally have absolutely no association with the greens ! contrary to the ongoing crap by the usual suspects that anyone with a social conscience has to be, and in fact i find the “greens” purely , just another self serving political entity who are just as liable to make compromise as the present political rabble, when and if it comes to securing and retaining a comfortable living.
    The only people true, to fair and just outcomes in regards to Joe and Marge average and family are the faceless doer’s who just get on with it and strike a blow whenever they can without finding the need to pontificate all over the goddamn place on what should be done ! and as for tomas ‘s answer (7) just more muddying of the waters, one doesn’t need an essay on the failings of the A.M.A or to be asked why people choose to live in these conditions,perhaps they are unable to afford to move elsewhere, the point is the conditions should not exist ! moreover seeing as they do ! that’s o.k then ! lets add some more shit into the environment , tomas! your so wrapped up in your own “fucking” self importance that you do no justice to your supposed professionalism.
                  d.d.

If the Examiner and Advocate had been fair and published stories, comments on Forestry over the last few years, average joe blow would already realize how shonky this whole current forestry industry is, and the mill wouldn’t have got this far. Gunns and Paul Lennon needed a media outlet on their side, and they got it. The people of the north have been taken for a ride, conned, blinded. Litle jonny rotten obviously needed to make plenty of wine to feed the blood red eyes.

It’s a crying shame how such a small number of people use and abuse the people and state.

Tomas, you miss the point again; you are spraying the whole garden to try and water a plant.

Try to answer this for me: in the face of strong and compelling evidence that the pulp mill will severely exacerbate air quality problems over Launceston, which in turn will have adverse health impacts on some citizens in the Tamar Valley region (including Launceston, of course) why shouldn’t the AMA report on that evidence?

And what politician, bearing this information in mind, would in conscience support such a development?  Other industry exists already, and can’t be removed from the equation—but why endorse an industrial development that will actively make an already wretched situation potentially much worse?

By simply just yelling, you may convince people of your passion, but rarely of the point you are trying to make Don.  That is even more poignant if your comment has no point to make at all, other than yelling.

One has to concede that the AMA is a lobby group set up to improve the income and working condition of doctors, like if either needs improvement, right?!.  And yes, most of their lobbying is targeted with that in mind.  Which is a fair enough observation but completely irrelevant to the pulp mill debate.  And certainly not a valid reason to discount their input.  In fact, if they were simply looking after their own members in this case, surely they would be supporting the mill proposal as it seems that it will be providing plenty of work for many of them for generations to come. 

I can not see any hidden agenda in their input and they are better qualified to comment on air pollution with regards to the mill than any of the proponents to date.  I think the best I heard was from Paul Lennon commenting that the company who will be building the mill assured him that it will be safe.  It was not a joke, he was serious, or at least he has managed not to laugh.  Currently that is the level of scrutiny that this proposal is facing.

Lennon’s intellect!  Which is simply shocking -both the intellect and the scrutiny -, and understandably both upsetting a large number of people.  How many?  We will only really know in 2010 after the mill is completed, operating with complete impunity, provided by the Lennon government, and don’t forget the lame Liberal opposition! 

Jeez Don, turn it down - I know I am wrapped up in my own self-importance but I don’t need the extra swearing to reinforce that.

Let me ask you a question then. In the face of changing demographics that predict a dramatic shift in the balance between old and young people in regional cities such as Launceston followed by a population crash by the end of the century, and then also coupled with the general decline in manufacturing, how do you see Launceston surviving economically and socially into the future without some large-scale industrial projects? Perhaps as one big retirement home (but not for the ones with respiratory difficulties)? May be OK for now to live there when you are retired but what will keep the place going for future generations?

Tomas, why are ‘large-scale industrial projects’ the only possible solution?

No vision, no creativity, no accountability = appalling government.

Well Cameron - perhaps you should share your vision for reversing the demographic trend? How are you going to keep the young folk working and living in the region? Perhaps in the homes for the aged? Bingo halls? Slot machine emporiums? I challenge the NIMBY element on TT on how it will stop Launceston sliding into poverty and (further) irrelevance?

(17)
  well excuse me all over the goddamn place but by the “CURRENT” reports emanating from the Tas Govt ! Tasmania,s never been in a better situation and unemployment is at all time low , not by their doing however, but due to the G.S.T revenue given them by the feds which for the most part they continue to squander so how does that equate to your postulations of Tasmania being a basket case, further to your question the future for this state is in tourism however firstly the useless govt have to be convinced of that! and start spending in that direction ,the first thing being a highway which entirely circumnavigates the island thereby avoiding the massive backtracking that at the moment inhibits same, not endless millions spent on T.V advertising .
  Now i know the greens will throw up their arms in horror about a highway into their beloved south west, but they have to choose between the lesser of two evils and the encroachment into the area by a highway would be of little significance to the viability of the area which just happens to be some of the most beautiful country on earth, and needs to be opened up to the world.
    I know it well having visited Denny King before his demise, when he was in situ at port Davey many moons past.
                  d.d.

Tom
      As for yelling as you call it ,when all else fails ! one gets sick to the back teeth of trying to be logical with obviously inane comment such as proposed by the usual suspects ,this place .
      As with bad kids it is sometimes necessary to “show the strap” in this wildly fluctuating political correct world in which we now find ourselves , said comment! which is most likely to start a new thread, however all of you over fifty know that i’m right!
                d.d.

Easily done, Tomas.  Firstly, if you are such a fan of ‘large-scale indsutrial projects’, by all means lobby Gunns to build the mill in Hobart.  The Derwent is already a no-go zone for fishing and swimming…but more pollution pumped into it won’t matter, will it?

Secondly—and you probably aren’t going ot like this, I’m afraid—but The Greens answered your challenge a couple of years ago.  Their Forest Transition strategy allows for the construction of smaller mills, employing more people than the pulp mill will ever do (inflated employment numbers from the CFMEU notwithstanding), catering for downstream processing for veneer timber laminate production (if memory serves).  I’m sure the policy is still on their website, if you would care to check it out.

Additionally, with even a small amount of visionary thinking, Launceston could become a Centre of Excellence for the Arts, a process which is already in place with the University SVPA alongside the Inveresk campus of the QVMAG, and the Architecture school next door.

Of course, compared to lazy and outmoded parochial thinking such as yours, where big is always better as long as it’s in Hobart, these solutions probably aren’t all that sexy.

Next?

Camron - I think you missed the ‘excellence’ part of the centres for excellence. Excellence in what precisely? I believe the University is trying to come up with the very same concept for its northern campus but is struggling to actually find any excellence on a national and international scale. Maybe you were referring to excellence on a Tamar valley scale? Your other contributions are not very precise - heard of something on a website somewhere? As for the Derwent - well we have Norske Skog, InCat, Cadburys and the EZ - time the Tamar did its bit?

19: Thomas, there are many and diverse ways to engage employment for the young or anyone for matter. These days there are new industries for people to go into, computer industries, media industries, plus to good old ones.

In theory there ‘should’ be enough employemnt within any socoeity simply sustaining the needs of that society. Supplying food, fuel, housing, products, education, health care etc etc..

Unless of course a lot of these things are sourced offshore.

The jobs are needed above all else argument falls short of issue innvolved managing resources and ensuring viable employment in thats its not just about earning $$$ for everyone, its about sustaining society in a healthy manner.

Tasmania has more to gain in the long term via tourism, selective logging, craft industries etc in preserving its environment than it does in the short term by exploiting it and selling it off to the highest bidder for the lowest price.

It just takes a bit of vision and committment and quality management not desperate exploitation, not getting stuck in the old ways of thinking.

You can’t have it both ways Tomas.  All that industrial development you mention has had the effect on the Derwent that I mentioned, has it not? Perhaps those of us who live north of Oatlands are smart enough to learn from history—lest, as the saying goes, we are condemned to repeat it.

And by of educating you, the Tamar already does its bit.  Where do you reckon Bell Bay is, not to mention Comalco?

If you would like to slag off the University of Tasmania, that is your choice.  Are you jealous, perhaps, that Nursing hasn’t been totally hijacked by the Hobart campus? Diddums.

Otherwise your flippant response belies your prejudices, Tomas. I told which website it was on and I’m pretty sure the policy I referred is still there.  If you were remotely interested in thinking outside the square (which I doubt) you would take the time to find it.  It suggests if nothing else that putting all our eggs in one basket with a pulp mill is, really, a pretty bloody silly idea.

(23)
  Say’s it all,
          someone tell me he didn’t mean the last sentence !  PLEASE !  the Derwent’s F———-d therefore so should the Tamar !
              d.d.  sigh !

Which pulp mill drove Tasmania’s boom for the past decade or so?  Which part of Forestry is likely to provide enough quality employment to keep young people in the sate, given that it contributes all of 6% to the economy?  Mostly truck driving. How much of the 1.5 billion dollars of the mill will actually be spent in Tasmania, 10% maybe as much as 15%?  What will be the long term impact of the mill on the income and employment in sectors of the economy other than forestry?  Why aren’t these questions are examined by the government when considering the mill?  Maybe they should have done so before Spirit 3, Bass link, Football deals etc…  It may have been true 50 years ago, but why do we still view retirees as a financial burden on an economy, particularly one based on service?  Maybe if this view is shifted we would see them as an opportunity instead!  Why two dead rivers is a step forward from one? 

I was hoping for some reasonable answers but the absurdity of my last question made me realise the kind of answers I’m likely to get - if any -, and that Don is right, I would be trying to engage debate with a complete moron!

Cameron - still waiting for your blueprint to provide meaningful and ongoing employment for young people in the Launceston-Tamar region. Banjo - those are some of the same motherhood statements about employment that seal the demise of regional centres. Without substantial industry, the young will flee. The “new’ industries cop-out doesn’t cut the mustard unless there is a reason for capital investment and industry development to flow. It is not as if there is anything else for investors to put $1 billion+ into in the North, and that is the nub of it. Mind you, I remain unconvinced that Gunss will find the financing - I wouldn’t be surprised to see their hand out to the State Govt for some co-investing, which to my mind will be the most dangerous thing about the mill proposal.

Coupled with the potential for the mill proposal to cause financial damage to the State Govt, I think I will be starting to actually root from now on for the Mill to go under. It will stuff the Greens electorally forever and it will further concentrate industry development in the South! Woe betide anyone who has invested in real estate in Launceston - not a good investment for the long term if the mill doesn’t happen. Not unless it can be turned into a B&B, craft shop or a nursing home. I know, how about all of these in one complex that stretches from Youngtown to Alanvale? We can get the increasingly old folk of Launceston on production lines turning out huon pine letter openers when they’re not cooking hearty breakfasts or scones with jam n cream for the tourist hordes. The tourists will be flocking to Lonny to visit the Centre for Excellence in sassafrass/huon pine/blackwood bread board manufacturing. Or perhaps we can look forward to the positive effects of Global Warming when Launceston becomes the tourist’s Venice of the South?

If the mill gets built, Launceston will see a sizable decrease of property prices, talk to any real estate agent privately, and consider why the economic benefits of the mill will not be considered by the government.  There will be none!  The drop in property values will wipe billions of wealth off current property owners.  Anyone who thinks otherwise should rush out and buy some of the increasing number of properties currently for sale, and un-sellable along the river.

Retirees are and will be an ever growing driving force of economies of developed countries around the world.  This is evident both in the US and in Europe where retirees are fleeing large cities to cheaper cleaner places, bringing large amounts of cash and income with them. They don’t leave it to their kids like they used to, they spend it, all of it.  Tasmania is well placed to take a slice of this new market. 

It isn’t just the number of retirees that set to dramatically increase in Australia over the next ten years, so is their income as the benefit of compulsory super will start to kick in.  I still can’t see how attracting these people will be anything but a huge financial benefit to the state in every respect.  Take off your blinkers and do some sums on the impact of super. 

It would be way too clever to try to harness this emerging new economy by offering lifestyle choices and services large cities can not offer.  Instead we must keep going down the dumb large pulp mill path to ensure that only the poor sods remain who can not afford to leave.  And don’t mention the fact that it will only take a thousand professionals to leave to take potentially over a billion dollars out of the state as a result of the mill.  But who cares about that, there will be 200 new jobs, right?  Get real! 

I could be very wrong, but unless you seriously examine the long term economic impact of the mill, it will be too late to find out, the state will be gone.

Oh my god tomas you have gone crackers. You really dont know what you are talking about. Havent you seen all the houses for sale on the east and west tamar.

Vineyard owners are selling up. Families are making the plans to move, change schools for their kids, find new houses, find new employment - stressful, expensive, timeconsuming and not always great for the kids.

Your lack of understanding of the demographic is astounding and you clearly have no clue about the health issues confronting the state.

The fact the Tasmanian timber Gunns plans to use for the pulp mill could be properly used to value add, to make laminated veneer lumber, elongated strand lumber, plywood, mdf, furniture, housing, yes we could build houses, a novel thought - what about the 3000 homeless people, have you conveniently forgotten about them too.

Maybe Launceston is about something you would never mention, because it hasnt been built by a man, well in your lifetime.

Take the time tomas to visit The Launceston Gorge and the River Tamar, bet you didnt know it is the second most visited place in Tasmania. This is what makes this place so unique, its natural values. This is what brings in the tourists and this is what the industries around the region currently trade on.

Just think of all those industries that could emerge - the vineyards, olive groves, apple and pear orchards, cherry orchards, organic lettuces and micro-green production, elderflower, fennel, hops, capsicums, nuts, wasabi, apricots, asparagus, blueberries, buckwheat, cocktail abalone, lamb and beef production, fishing, poppies, vegetables, water, whiskey and beer producers.

Oh sorry they exist already.

How much do you think they contribute to the state tomas?

Now where could that money go? Maybe into expanding production of any of the above small industries, increasing relevant and rewarding local employment, increase exports and local consumption and drive food and agricultural tourism. 

These hundreds of businesses are under threat from the mill. Their livlihoods are at stake.

The great irony is tomas’ dislike, or should we say, complete disdain, for unwashed, dreadlocked greenies and the fact that he thinks its okay for a whole place to stink a few times a year. Why would anyone go to a place that stinks?? Like really STINKS! And its not just one or two straggly hippies, but a whole town of over 100,000 people and around 150,000 visitors a year that is affected by the smell. Isn’t that right tomas. You wouldnt go near it let alone talk about it in a nice way to your friends.

Oh I also got it slightly wrong oh the Gorge being number two top visitation spot. The Cataract Gorge is Tasmania’s third most popular tourist attraction with 128,000 visitors between Jan to Dec 2006 (TVS). The Gorge received more tourists than the heavily promoted Cradle Mountain Valley.

Tomas, I hate to sound merely contrary, but I place no truck whatsoever in the argument that we need the mill to keep our young people in the state. 

I fail to see why things are so desperately dire here that we should condemn our young to stay.  As I have said elsewhere, we live on a tiny island at the bottom of the planet—life is almost certainly happening in lots of places elsewhere.  Perhaps with the exception of Slobart.

As I have also said, employment figures for the mill are rather overstated, particularly from the CFMEU.

I am still waiting for you to show evidence that you can think outside the square.  Our esteemed treasurer Mr Aird said it himself today—the state doesn’t need the pulp mill to prop up the economy.  It has, apparently, about $2 billion worth of other projects in the offing.

The conclusion therefore is that the mill will not be the economic panacea that people would like to believe.  I’ll treat your patronising nonsense about Launceston with the contempt it deserves, and ignore it.

I would however love to hear about the mill going under will ‘stuff the greens electorally forever’.  This only stands up if you buy Paul Lennon’s nonsense that the Greens are to blame for the mess the pulp mill process is in.

Which, of course, they are not.

(28)
    The last tirade from this (!) tomas ,for me is the last straw and i personally do not intend to interact with him in any shape or form in the future and perhaps it would bode well for all to follow suit.
    just an opinion !
                d.d.

Cameron - I work in an international industry (biotech) that largely does not exist in Tasmania with the exception of the alkaloid producers, so you don’‘t need to lecture me on thinking ouside the square. You, Don and others have failed to indicate what industries would promote the economic survival of Launceston, beyond a bit of tourism - and a bit from Slim Shady on the hobby farms. Launceston’s historic prosperity has depended previously on the wealthy landed gentry and inherited money. This isn’t sustainable into the future, and even a few of the Lonnie burghers are starting to get this.

On the Mill no-go - it won’t matter why it goes down, if it goes down - the Greens will be blamed for it for decades to come and will suffer electorally accordingly.

Tomas Tomas Tomas. This amateurish upside down twaddle you are running here about the AMA is surely one the most twisted examples of sour grapes we have seen on TT. Not to mention it being a rather silly and futile attempt to discredit them. And you wonder why some people around here suspect you of being a govt or industry stooge. Really do you think anyone else in Tasmania except for Herbert could relate to your critique of the AMA and the medical profession? Where is your critique about the state govt.s mismanagement of the health care sector? Tasmanians are not angry at their doctors. They are crying out for more of them, as they are other health professionals. Tasmanians are angry at the the Lennon labor govts. mishandling of hospitals, waiting list, cutting back of services and the loss of health professionals including doctors.
Doctors for Forests?
How many Tasmanians have heard of them?
A front from the AMA?
That is desperate spin buddy.
The AMA’s public support of the ‘no mill in the Tamar Valley’ position has obviously upset you because you know how many people will sit up and listen when a credible figure like Dr. Michael Aizen warns us about the ill health Launceston residents can look forward to if the mill is built in the valley. You know that many people who have been exposed to the AMA’s public statements about the pulp mill will take them at their word? So how do you respond.  By trying to convince us that the Tasmanians branch of he AMA’s foray in this Tasmanian public health issue is Doctors for Forest conspiracy. That is the the type of rubbish response that we here in Tasmania would expect from a govt. spin doctor. As was your line about “the usual suspects turning out in the low thousands”. As then there was your heartless questions about “why people with a serious respiratory illness are still living in Launceston”. How Ruddockesque of you Tomas. Tomas you ought to be vigilant against your monsterous hypocrisy as well as the very lazy, biased and uncritical thinking in your comments above. And you expect us to believe that you are an internationally published scientist?

Rick - I understand that you may be a nurse by profession, and a noble profession it is too. Do you think that it is reasonable that a highly qualified nurse may, after many years of experience, make around $60-70,000 tops if they are lucky, whereas the specialists they interact with (fleetingly) are on packages around $500-700,000 on average? Do you think that is fair that the AMA and colleges have conspired to keep specialist numbers low so that they can dictate their renumeration? Do you think it is ethical that they have shut out the nurse practitioners as it may affect their income and ability to rort medicare?  Do you think it ethical that specialists dictate their holiday travel requirements to the pharmaceutical companies in return for patronage of their drugs? Do you think it ethical that while the public largely pays for their education, some specialists won’t treat Veterans on Gold cards because they don’t pay enough? I don’t trust the AMA as far as I could throw their constituents BMWs and Mercs, and I choke on my cereal when I hear them criticise the forestry industry when their own is so greedy and corrupt. And where is the AMA on other Tasmanian industries that are associated with poor health outcomes, such as their own?

Lecturing you, Tomas? Not getting a bit sensitive, are we? You spout endless rubbish about Launceston as a retirement home, and then you take exception to being ‘lectured’?

Oh puuuurlease.

I don’t give a rat’s who you work for. Don’t change the subject.

Could it be, Tomas, that economic paradigms are changing? That behemoth industry is no longer the answer? Particularly if you consider the Auspine example—I’ll bet those fellows thought their jobs were pretty safe. Until filthy commerce got in the way.

Some of us are prepared to embrace the potential of the Culture Economy, the Creative Economy, call it what you will—promoting Tasmania as a destination for artists, as a skills centre for arts development, etc. As I said, Tomas, for the dinosaurs clinging desperately to their outdated Big is Best philosophies, these solutions are not that sexy; but they might just be The Way of the Future.  Wouldn’t that be something?

You can live in hope the Greens will go down Tomas, but REAL fair dinkum Australian men admit their mistakes and don’t shove it in someone elses face.

Not hobby farms tomas, opportunities to expand, fill the demand (at the moment production levels far too low to supply market) and create viable industries. If you cant see beyond the mill and have no other ideas on how to create opportunities then here’s a taster, dont want to give too much away to you if you cant think for yourself:

-Echinacea seeds for example - the potential to be a billion dollar industry to the US
-Pyrethrum - natural insecticides use on the increase globally
-Crops and agricultural solutions to create biofuels
-Processing wool opportunities - none in Australia, all goes to Asia
-Mining - there is great potential for new mines in Tasmania particularly as there is now a push for mining engineering at the Uni - which has been much needed

Didnt the Tasmanian poppy industry start as a hobby until someone decided to triple the Thebaine content so it could be feasible to increase plantings without the black market problems

This is why we need a look at the costs of the mill and not just too the mill.

Come on tomas dont tell me Launceston will suffer without a mill. Why are you so keen to see the other fledgling industries suffer because of your myopia.

Anyway I dont really think you want the mill for the right reasons, certainly not for employment as you’ve said elsewhere you’d be happy for the mill not to succeed just to show up the Greens. Your rationale doesnt sound very socially or economically responsible to me.

Shady - new mines yes, others big maybe. The question is where the capital investment is going to come from? Maybe we should commiit to small enterprises, but that will have significant downstream effects on economic credibility that no Lib/Lab government would admit. Some of the products you have described are not juxtaposed to a hungry market that would make further investment into industry development worthwhile, at this point anyway. Creative economies are also all very well if you have a base to develop it from - but I can’t see Lonny fulfilling this. It’s tertiary institutions are third rate, at best.

C & C Gilmour - what mistake would that be? TTers whould know by now that I am 99% right…....  (I’m being ironic there, its probably closer to 95%). Anyways, I don’t hope that the Greens will go down, I just hope they have no future role in government, be that balance of power or otherwise, until that have more statesman-like politicians. Nick McKim may yet reform the party in a useful direction. Maybe Cassy O’Connor can help with this as well?

You can huff and puff and grandstand all you like Tomas with your heartfelt concerns about the effects of Medical dominance and I could you write essays all day on that subject. But I aint Gunna!! Cause it just aint up for discussion today. Dont verbal me with all your questions Tomas. Lets face it, the only reason you suddenly care about medical dominance is because the AMA have dared to criticised a forestry related Sacred Cow. Dont even dare talk about about “so called” (where is it Tomas, really where is it?) greed and corruption in the Tasmanian medical profession in the same breath as the Forest Industry. You are really grasping for straws there. Hey, lets ask the average Tasmanian what they value more… their doctor or the forestry industry. Lets ask Tasmians which of those two industries profession they consider to be more vital to health and wellbeing. And lets ask them which of those two industries is rife with greed and corruption in the apple isle? 
As I have stated nobody else but you has any problem with the AMA speaking out on a very important public health issue like Air Quality in Launceston. Nobody else but you, the Premier and the forest industry has a problem with the AMA not supporting the proposed mill due to the serious omissions and gaps in Gunns IIS.
You Tomas like other mill supporters are yet to adequately address the concerns expressed by this body which is responsible for protecting the health of Tasmanians. It is either ignore or attempt to discredit. I wll talk to you about the ill effects of Medical dominace when you have adequately addressed the issues at hand

Tomas, why don’t we really test how Tasmanians see Tasmania - lets change our slogan on our vehicle number plates from ’ our natural state’ to ‘our pulp mill state’. That should really test how we see Tasmania. What do you think?

Tomas it might be useful to read if you havn’t already done so the following books on modern economies and post industrial employment:

‘Sleepers, Wake! Technology & the future of work’ by Barry Jones published in 1982. As we would all know Barry Jones was a Minister in the Hawke/Keating Government and more recently National President of the ALP.

‘Future Shock’ by Alvin Tofler published in 1970. Tofler met with many world leaders over the years to explain the ‘shock’ that the world would experience as the old economies collided with new economies.

Certainly both books predict and explain employment in modern economies much of which can be witnessed in the new Tasmanian economy, including Launceston and the Tamar Valley. If you can’t see this maybe you should look harder.

If you have read these accounts where do you think the analysis is wrong?

Re #28:  Quote from Tomas ...“I think I will be starting to actually root from now on for the Mill to go under. It will stuff the Greens electorally forever”.
You mean, just like the “going under” of the Franklin Dam and the Wesley Vale Pulp Mill stuffed the Greens electorally forever?  Goodness me, I must have been hallucinating these past 20 years.

Thanks Max - I haven’t read Tofler but I have a very well read copy of Sleepers, Wake and have had chats with the author previously about new industries and, sadly, how these have passed by Tasmania’s door. Barry has a very soft spot for Tasmania and would like to do more to help move us into the 21st century. Jim Bacon had half a stab at it but it just really isn’t Lennon’s cup of tea. For these industries to develop , we need to have champions in high places, which we don’t (maybe MHA Bartlett will reactivate his interests in these areas one day) and we need substantial capital investment. I can’t see this happening for some time.

Snowy - the difference twixt then and now is public opinion about the development under question.

Rick - I look forward to the medico conversation later. I have always wondered why the public is happy to have their public and private health dollar gouged by a group who operate uncompetitively, but we can bang on about that later. I still question why the AMA has picked on forestry when more pressing health problems pass without comment. If you read the AMA’s submission on the IIS, it is laughable but not surprising how poorly written and referenced it is.

Tomas, just a few examples:

Gunns mistakes -
Choosing Lennon as a Governemnt front man.
The site of the mill.
Changing the mill design.
Wanting the BIGGEST mill in a tiny state.
Not looking at alternatives for pulp for paper production.
Assuming such blatant disregard for the environment would go unnoticed.
Changing the goal posts again and again.
Attitude of “my way or no way at all”.
Ignoring scientific expert advice.
Assuming Tasmanians are blind and stupid.
Being so greedy they ignore the average Tasmanian.
Highlighting their selfishness by suing free speech.

Forestry mistakes -
Ignoring forest practices codes.
Assuming no one can see what they are doing.
Giving our forests away for an out of tune song.

The Government -
Putting Paul Lennon in as Premier.
Legislating the demise of democracy.
Legislating codes that don’t support the average Tasmanian - their health, their lifestyle,their businesses.
Pushing the wrong buttons with high profile and more intelligent and experienced people.
Believing everything Gunns tells them.

Overall - ignoring -
That Tassie is a little state and many are either related, or know each other, and people can’t help themselves and talk!
That overall Tasmanians are caring people and care about their fellow man and have a true blue fighting spirit.
That money can’t buy everything.
That when they tell us no truths, we’ll tell them no lies.

None of that is anybody’s fault but the people who are wielding the power. BIG MISTAKE.

Reap as they sow.

Attracting investment tomas will be no problem if we not only play by the rules but lead in thought and action. An example is Tesco’s who consistently have reacted swiftly to consumer demand, first removing own brands GM products, then removing foodstuffs with Sudan 1 and now adding carbon credits. The airplay has been constant and their sales have consistently gone up, this quarter by 14%.

The mentality that we’ll have to beg for investment is destructive and needs to be shifted. This is how our politicans think tomas, and I note you do too. Whether this is a hangover from Wesley Vale or just a state of mind, whatever it is, its a weird philosophy and its holding us back.

How about we start looking after what we have got. The people, the place and its health.
Water - top gong to Tassie for water systems and clean renewable energy. Greater emphasis on water solutions companies and innovative engineers to create world first island systems. Increase emphasis on all aspects of water, professionally, strategically and in the home. Payer uses system more tightly enforced. Pollution spills in waterways carry heavier fines.

Air - air quality monitoring stations at all industrial sites, pollution fines if over and above approved emission levels, all government cars, buses and trucks to be low emisisons or fitted out with cats and traps (catalytic converters and particulate traps) and a focus to create transport systems that run on electric.

Tassie Devil - instead of getting rid of half of our state forests for the pulp mill, which will surely impact so significantly to spur extinction. Why not encourage the Devil to flourish and create and maintain habitats for it to survive. We do not have a Devil or quoll unit for that matter, and our platypuses are sick. Wildlife viewing in Tasmania is worth billions of dollars and will only increase. Education is key.

The only way we are going to tackle an aging demographic, health problems and education improvements is to think outside the square.

I suggest tomas you try standing on your head for a while, see if that helps

Actually Tesco’s arent a bad case study. Not saying we should trade with them, but the model is worthy. Reactive, on the ball and on the money. No pulp smoke on them foods and organics.

Tesco’s shares, which have climbed 40% in the last year, closed up 6p at a new high of 461.75p. UK trading profit climbed 9% to nearly £2bn, powered by increased sales of upmarket food, fashion and electrical goods. International trading profit was up 18% to £564m. Sir Terry said shoppers’ increasing awareness of healthy eating, sustainability and higher-quality food had prompted a sea change for supermarkets: “The long-term trend of declining spending on food has stopped.” Sales of organic ranges climbed 40% last year, with growth fastest among less affluent families. Some 10% of fruit and veg sales are now organic. “Growth in organic has been quite remarkable,” he said. Sales are “approaching £1bn”.

The supermarket is also working hard to underline its credentials as an environmentally friendly business. Last year it unveiled a 10-point community plan covering issues ranging from solar power to children’s health and more recently pledged to put “carbon labels” on all of its products. Yesterday it added a new pledge - to cut the packaging on own-label and branded goods by 25% within three years. “Customers want to live more sustainably,” Sir Terry said. “These issues are of growing importance to our customers. It is not altruism, but sound business sense.”

Dear Tomas

As a member of the biotech industry you would be aware that having no animals (including humans)and/or other plants competing in the catchment is a good thing for the biotech harvest.

What the Taswegians have failed to grasp is the fact that they are not wanted or needed in Tasmania. The quicker you suffocate and die, the happier some will be so that they can plant their vines and trees at will.

On the mainland and in the context of chemical spraying, a plantation manager was heard at his local pub espousing the view that they didn’t care how many people or animals were effected by spraying as they were replacable whereas the trees were not.

If you’re interested in a different vision, an interesting read is Going Native by Michael Archer and Bob Beale (ISBN 0 7336 1522 8. I do not agree with everything they promote (specificaaly, a simplistic view of how great your industry is without considering the hazards).

There is a valuable living to be made in being a haven. In areas such as the Hunter Valley outside Sydney and their equivalents in all the other States, there is big money to be made in being a respite centre from the 21st century. As there is in being a wedding centre of excellence (have your boys and girls weekend here too) and these are labour intensive industries.

If you think that the pollution etc created by a pulp mill pulls Tas out of being a cargo cult economy then you are mistaken. It is a ringing endorsement of your third world status.

xxoo

At the risk of being flamed, I’d like to mention some non-Tomas related thoughts on what types of employment will a pulp mill offer?

Work in the mill - most are semi-skilled jobs handling what is basically a plant producing chemicals in which to boil wood chips, and processing to convert the results into pulp.

These are hardly going to be rewarding jobs that present a great future. They’ll be hot, unpleasant and smelly, many of them presenting plenty of hazards. The skilled jobs in areas such as process control will mainly go to staff brought in from elsewhere.

Then there’s work in logging trucks for those who can afford to get into it, plus plantation and forestry logging work.

This really doesn’t seem all that attractive, nor does it offer transferability of skills.

Tourism is already well up the value chain that Gunns likes to brag about with their mill. The jobs range in skills, can be done by Tasmanians and most are transferrable.

It depends what people want of course, but if they want career progression, tourism (employs 38,000 in Tas) is likely to offer that to many more people than a pulp mill (employing 300+).

Richard - your are right, and if I can summon any enthusiasm for the Mill it is about giving the less-skilled an opportunity for gainful work. There has been talk about not needing the mill because there will be work in the servie industries, tourism and the ‘creative economies”. Well, this isn’t much help if you are a traditional blue collar worker. The creative economy is not for everyone.

Thanks for the book tip Sabina - I will see if I can track it down. On biotech and agriculture, I wonder if TTers knew that Tasmania is one of the biggest producers of (legal) opiates in the world? Knocking off GM has limited some further R&D opportunities, but I can understand the public’s reluctance, even though I disagree with them. The sort of biotech I am mixed up involves products developed in the laboratory, such as antibodies and peptides.

Tomas, a smaller scale mill for on export production and investment of the funds in other farming or similar industries will always needs some blue collar workers. As does most of the ‘creative’ industries in some way. truck drivers, gardners, builders, labourers, shop workers are always needed in most kinds of businesses in some way.

The promise of large scale employment from the large scale pulp mill is bogus and would be fluctuant depending on the commodity price of pulp.

The more local economy is generated by local businesses, even those serving tourism, the more workers are needed across the board.

I’m originally from Texas, where the motto is “Don’t mess with Texas”. I think Tasmanians would do well with the motto, “Don’t mess with Tas”...

And you guys are really gettin’ messed with…!

Incidentally, despite the motto, Texas is basically messed up. Too many oil refineries, etc. ad nauseum. When will people learn?

on a slight tangent, re Comment #48, Shady Deals you mention Tesco as an example. they are indeed a great example of marketing and consumer manipulation.

one fact is telling: 1 in every 3 pounds spent on food in the UK is spent at tesco. catering to the market for organics and other niche markets is all part of the plan to dominate. I suspect the ‘sea change’ for supermarkets is due to sea level rise drowning out their smaller competitors (street markets, corner stores, greengrocers, etc).

and the leading supermarket chain in the UK when it comes to organics, fair trade, ethics, corporate responsibility? the Co-op Chain, operating as a co-operative rather than a corporation was years ahead.

tesco have very effectively cornered much of the daily household expenditure in the UK. ‘tesco express’ convenience stores at service stations are like the Uk’s equivalent of a 7/11 while at the other end of the scale the superstores have bargain department stores combined with a supermarket and a massive car park. in between are ‘tesco metro’ supermarkets.

Re Tesco #54
nic, I am certainly not advocating Tasmania trades with Tesco, we dont have the volumes for a start, our carbon credits wont look good on their packaging and the documentaries on Panorama are enough to put you off doing business with them from far away.

No what I am saying is if Tasmania truly took up its natural advantages (GM free, disease free, safe, clean, natural), upped its quaratine strategy in the selling of food products and was able to provide transparent traceable up-to-date information we could corner the market with niche clean safe food the way Tescos do. Its more their attitude to embrace green credentials to make money.

The will to change and doing so. Something Tasmania could and should be doing. Its an anathema to those living outside the place why we dont.

And whilst Tesco may not have the integrity you desire, Tasmania has an opportunity to create a framework with integrity for the selling of foodstuffs that uses creative solutions (innovation) is flexible and responsive to consumer needs and daily or worldy issues.

There will be a time where tourists and international buyers will source places and products of clean safe food not only as choice but necessity. We need to get ready.

I am sure you will love <a >hermes birkin</a> suprisely