Key letters from TAP Into a Better Tasmania to government bodies and others. Click on the link to see the full letter.
Letter 17 to Mr bill Kelty on "Forest Principles" negotiations with the community.
Dear Mr. Kelty,
We note that you have volunteered your services as a ‘facilitator’ – or ‘honest broker’ in the words of the PM - of the forest principles negotiations in Tasmania, which for brevity I shall call the ‘roundtable’. TAP Into A Better Tasmania understands that you are prepared to meet with members of the public and community groups.
TAP Into A Better Tasmania has not received an invitation to meet with you nor will we be seeking a meeting.
You should not regard this as a reflection on you as an individual, but a judgment we have made regarding the legitimacy of the ‘roundtable’ negotiation process in which you are now a major participant. We do not intend in any way to recognize or endorse a deeply flawed and illegitimate process...
Letter 16, TAP's response to Mr Greg L’Estrange, Managing Director of Gunns Ltd . Gunns sent a letter dated 25 January 2011 to Bob McMahon, spokesman for TAP, inviting TAP to a private briefing. It is a remarkable letter, the first and only one from Gunns since the pulp mill was mooted. It also refers a number of times to the 'survival of Gunns Ltd' and will be of keen interest to shareholders. Read Mr L'Estrange's letter and TAP's response.
Letter 15 Risks to bottom line to Swedish firm Sodra re investment risks arising from potential withdrawal of taxpayer subsidies from Gunns as governments struggle to cope with the world financial downturn. There has been no reply from Sodra as at 1 February 2011. Media reports in late 2010 indicated that Sodra were no longer involved as a possible joint venture partner with Gunns.
Letter 14 to ANZ re failure of Gunns' roadkill monitoring to meet the requirements of the Chief Scientist. Given the serious shortcomings of Gunns’ data, funding should be refused by the ANZ.
Letter 13 from TAP to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) details a complaint about Gunns’ public marketing program to gain community support for the pulp mill in the Tamar Valley in Tasmania.
Letter 12 re ANZ funding Gunns’ pulp mill. TAP letter and ANZ response. The ANZ website says that an ANZ decision on supporting Gunns Ltd proposed pulp mill will only be made after the mill has been 'assessed' by the Tasmanian Government yet Gunns have been saying in recent recently (Eureka Interview with John Gay) that the ANZ is supporting the mill as an underwriter of the project . Obviously someone is not telling the truth. Read the ANZ response.
Letter 11 - Open letter to Legislative Councillors of Tasmania from TAP An open letter summarising the key issues arising from failure of good governance and the continuing threats to communities from the pulp mill proposal by Gunns.
Letter 10 from TAP to the Minister Malcolm Turnbull TAP letter 10 to the Federal Minister for Environment and Water Resources asks for intervention in the combined state/federal ‘approval’ process for a ‘world scale’ Tamar pulp mill in order to protect Tasmania's water supplies that are in severe danger of being massively over-allocated for decades to come.
Letter 9 from TAP to the RPDC TAP letter 9 to the RPDC follows up on letter 8 and clarifies two main concerns and how they might be usefully addressed. Key concerns are that: 1) process and other structural flaws prevent the RPDC being either independent, or reaching a fair and balanced conclusions: and 2) the community needs to know now what levels of protection are to be provided from the various hazards and threats presented by mill operations.
Letter 8 from TAP to the RPDC TAP letter 8 to the RPDC asks why the Commission has not responded to letters 5 and 6 which raised key issues and risks in the decision making process.
Letter 7 from TAP to ANZ Bank re pulp mill TAP letter 7 to the ANZ Bank describing its concern around hidden project risks that have been excluded from consideration and discussion, and their potential to be a considerable brake on the Tasmanian economy and its businesses.
Letter 6 from TAP to RPDC re exclusion of wood supply issues TAP letter 6 to RPDC seeking permission to address the Commission at the Directions Hearing about exclusion of issues of wood supply from RPDC consideration.
Letter 5 from TAP to RPDC re Directions Hearing TAP letter 5 to RPDC seeking permission to address the Commission at the Directions Hearing about significant issues regarding economic modelling predictions.
Letter 4 from TAP to RPDC requesting a time extension for IIS submission TAP letter 4 to RPDC seeking a 45 day extension after closing date for submissioins to enable it to fully develop and complete its submission in response to the draft IIS.
Letter 3 from TAP to RPDC re Directions Hearing TAP letter 3 to RPDC requesting permission to be present at the Directions Hearing on 25/10/06 and address the Commission.
Letter 2 Reply to Dept Economic Development's refusal to grant funding TAP letter 2. Its response to Dept Economic Development following their refusal to fund TAP's proposal for building the capacity of the community to adequately respond to the proponent's draft integrated impact assessment.
Letter 1 TAP to Dept Economic Development TAP letter 1 seeking funding [$143 000] from the Department of Economic Development for a community based independent assessment and risk analysis of the proposed pulpmill at Long Reach. Includes an outline of government legislation and responsibilities relating to the pulp mill proposal.
