Polls measuring oppositio to the proposed pulp mill (August 2007)

8 August 2007 EMRS poll on fast tracking and support for the mill


Investors for the Future of Tasmania commissioned EMRS to survey 500 people from the South, 250 from the North and 250 from North-West of Tasmania. Question 1. - do you agree with the Government's fast-track process? Results:

  • Yes 26%;
  • No 64%;
  • Unsure 10%.
  • On a two answer preferred basis; yes = 29%, no = 71%.

Question 2. Are you in favour of the current proposal to build a pulp mill in the Tamar valley? Results:


  • Yes 40%;
  • No 51%;
  • Unsure 9%.
  • On a two answer preferred basis; yes = 44%, no = 56%.

Source www.investorsfortas.com

    23 August 2007 EMRS poll on Lennon's approval rating
EMRS was commissioned by TAP to survey 1000 residents with the question - do you approve of Paul Lennon’s performance as premier? Results:


  • Yes 24%;
  • No 67%;
  • Unsure 9%.

On a two answer preferred basis, yes = 26%, no = 74%.

TAP media release re EMRS poll

Lennon’s political future and fast track are finished

Tasmanian Premier Paul Lennon’s political future and his fast track assessment of Gunns pulp mill is finished, according to community group spokesman, Bob McMahon.

‘Lennon’s personal approval rating of 24% combined with only 26% approval of his Gunns’ fast track process tell us he is finished’ said McMahon, spokesman for TAP (Tasmanians Against the Pulpmill).

Lennon’s approval rating plumbed new depths to only 24%, according to a EMRS statewide poll of 1000 people commissioned by TAP. 67% disapproved and 9% were unsure.

It follows on the heels of a 31 July EMRS poll showing approval for Lennon’s fast track deal for pulp mill proponent Gunns Ltd running at only 26%.

Both Labor and Liberal support the mill but McMahon said that ‘there is a mountain of votes in Tasmania waiting for the first major party to cut loose from poor policy gridlock and demand a full independent examination in the interests of the entire State’.

‘So deeply unpopular is both Lennon and his shonky assessment process that the Parliament risks civil unrest on a scale never before seen in Tasmania if both houses cave in to the Premier’s demands and rubber stamp the pulp mill approval,’ said McMahon.

A petition of more than 20,000 signatures, the biggest ever in the history of the Upper House, was lodged this week requesting that members support the call by the people for the protection of due process, a return to public participation in planning and equal treatment for all.

‘The petitioners request that members of the Upper House vote no to the grotesque assessment process that forces them into the impossible role of pulp mill experts’, said McMahon.

On Tuesday, Beaconsfield Mayor Barry Easther and Council acted decisively and with statesman like authority to unanimously pass a series of motions expressing no confidence in the pulp mill assessment process.

McMahon said that ‘the West Tamar Council’s condemnation removed the keystone holding up the crumbling Berlin Wall’.

‘The Upper House should now follow their lead and end this appalling slide in our democracy. As the house of review, its duty is to the people, not to the vested interests of a corporation and their cosy relationship with the government of the day,’ said McMahon.     25 August 2007 AGE newspaper online poll

2965 responded to the question; will the decision to build a pulp mill in Tasmania's Tamar valley affect your vote? Results:

  • Yes 87%
  • No 13%

Source www.theage.com.au     31 August 2007 Newspoll The Wilderness Society commissioned Newspoll to conduct a telephone poll of 400 people in the electorate of Bass on 27 and 28 August 2007. Question 1. Now, thinking about the Tamar Valley. It’s been proposed that a pulp mill be built in the Tamar Valley. Before today had you heard or not heard about the proposed pulp mill? Results:

  • Yes 99%;
  • No 1%.

Question 2. Based on whatever you may know about it, would you personally be in favour or against this proposed pulp mill being built in the Tamar Valley? Results:

  • Strongly in favour 21%; total in favour 35%;
  • Strongly against 44%; total against 53%;
  • Neither / don’t know 12%.
  • On a two answer preferred basis: in favour = 40%, against = 60%.

Question 3. Thinking now about oldgrowth forests in Tasmania. Some areas of oldgrowth forest in Tasmania are protected from logging, while others are not. Would you personally be in favour or against all areas of oldgrowth forest in Tasmania being protected from logging? Results:

  • Strongly in favour 48%; total in favour 65%;
  • Strongly against 14%; total against 29%;
  • Neither / don’t know 6%.
  • On a two answer preferred basis; in favour = 69%, against = 31%.

Question 4. If a political party adopted a policy to protect all oldgrowth forest in Tasmania would you personally be more likely to vote for that party, less likely to vote for that party, or would it make no difference to your vote? Results:

  • More likely 39%;
  • Less likely 13%;
  • No difference 46%;
  • Don’t know 3%.

Question 5. Federal Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd has announced his policy would be that all oldgrowth forests that are currently not protected would remain unprotected and be available for logging.
Would you personally be in favour of Mr Rudd’s policy that all unprotected oldgrowth forests remain unprotected and be available for logging, or would you be against this policy? Results:

  • Strongly in favour 12%; total in favour 29%;
  • Strongly against 36%; total against 61%;
  • Neither / Don’t know 10%.
  • On a two answer preferred basis; in favour = 32%, against = 68%.

Source www.wilderness.org.au