Economy

The expanding area of plantations intended to feed the proposed pulp mill, is already having a major impact on the state.

Water

Plantations lock in water shortages. Over 40 of Tasmania’s 48 water catchments are affected by thirsty plantation trees drawing water out of the ground and lowering the water table. Consumption of water by expanding plantations in the headwaters affects everyone downstream. When plantations exceed 8% of the catchment area, river flow audits show declining water levels particularly during dry summer months as evaporation rates increase (D. Leaman).

Plantations compete for water with irrigators, farmers, domestic consumers and the environmental flows needed to sustain river health. Changes in land use to plantations lock in patterns of water consumption for decades, at a time of declining rainfall from climate disruption. Tax subsidised plantations are taking water that could be used to make Tasmania the food bowl of Australia.

Here is the online copy of the first edition [Summer 09/2010] of TAP's newspaper. You can download a pdf of the four A3 sized pages at the bottom and print off copies.

Its purpose is to detail in newspaper format how the proposed pulp mill, the fourth-largest kraft pulp mill in the world, threatens the health, jobs, lifestyle and investments of the community.

Introduction - Why jobs?

Creation of new jobs is the central pillar in the case for winning the hearts and minds of Tasmanians for Gunns’ proposed pulp mill. Gunns’ CEO John Gay said the “mill would create jobs and long-term job security for a significant part of Tasmania's workforce” [1]. This position is echoed by the Forest Industry Association of Tasmania chairman, CFMEU forestry division, Timber Communities Australia, the Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and both Liberal and Labor parties, as well as some northern council mayors.

The promise of thousands of new jobs helped ex-Premier Paul Lennon justify rescuing the ‘critically non compliant’ Gunns pulp mill in 2007 with a special act of Parliament, the Pulp Mill Assessment Act (PMAA). The other main pillar of support for quickly passing the PMAA, the urgency of Gunns’ commercial needs, has now been discredited. However, the creation of new jobs remains as the central justification for the project by Liberal and Labor. Labor is positioning itself for the 2010 March election as the pro-jobs party and the Greens as anti-jobs.

What we are asked to believe

There are several competing stories around the pulp mill proposal that we are asked to believe. We can choose to believe Gunns’ PR man Matt Horan, who says it will create 2000 construction jobs [2], or we can believe Gunns’ secret advice to the George Town Council engineer that only 1250 building workers are needed [3]. We can choose to believe Horan that the pulp mill will create “about 16,000 jobs in the future," [4] or we can believe consultant ITS Global that it will create only 292 direct long term jobs [5].

We can believe Gunns’ stated wishes that underskilled Tasmanians with no experience in pulp mills will get preference over skilled outsiders from interstate or the thousands of overseas experienced pulp workers who have been made redundant in the global downturn. Further, we can believe that the fourth largest kraft chemical pulp mill in the world will happily co-exist with fishing, tourism and nature-based activities, boutique wineries, organic food producers and farming [6].

We are also asked to believe the Liberal and Labor story that Tasmania as a provider of undifferentiated bulk commodities is better than one based on the State’s distinctive and unique attributes that give businesses in tourism, fishing, wineries, organic foods, and others a competitive edge.

The consequences of choosing to believe the wrong story are serious. So what are the job facts and which story stands up?

Tony Burke, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has misled Parliament and should be relieved of his portfolio.

“It’s time for the Prime Minister to cut Burke loose. Not only is Burke a plagiarist, a shameless proponent of vested interest and incompetent in his portfolio, but most seriously of all, he has misled Parliament,” stated TAP spokesperson Bob McMahon. 

Updated and revised 26 May 2009, with new foul gas zone boundaries and downloadable pdf.

Fugitive odours from pulp mills

Advice from Dr Warwick Raverty

Dr Raverty is a retired pulp and paper expert and former Assessment Panellist for the Tasmanian Resource Planning and Development Commission which was charged with the responsibility of examining Gunns’ proposal for a kraft pulp mill at Long Reach, Tamar Valley, Tasmania. He provided the following advice to TAP on 10 May 09.

    --------------------------------

Fugitive odours (foul gas) from Gunns’ planned pulp mill will be detected in the air up to 55kms away eg Launceston, Deloraine, Longford and Bridport if it is built at Bell Bay. Foul gas causes nausea and headaches in most people exposed to it for long periods. It will impact on health, quality of life and businesses of everyone living within the 55km zone around Bell Bay.

All kraft pulp mills produce tens of tonnes of toxic gases per day that pulp mill managers refer to euphemistically as 'Non Condensable Gases', or NCG for short. In the same way that industry managers refer to 'outplacement' while workers call it ‘getting the sack’, pulp mill workers call NCG by its real name ‘foul gas’!

Friday 1st May 2009

TAP Into a Better Tasmania is concerned that the extreme claims by Gunns, CFMEU and Timber Communities Australia about the planned pulp mill are threatening thousands of existing Tasmanian jobs in fine food production, wineries, agriculture, tourism and fishing industries during impending hard times.

“The planned pulp mill will cost the State economy up to $2.1billion and 2088 jobs lost in tourism alone, according to the Business Round Table Report,” said TAP Into a Better Tasmania spokesman Tony Saddington.

Despite being an environmental disaster, the Gunns pulp mill was at least supposed to make lots of money for Tasmania. But it turns out it won't even do that.

With Gunns putting themselves under the financial spotlight by potentially misleading the Australian Stock Exchange, now is a good time to have another look at the economics of the proposed pulp mill.

Bob McMahon TAP Spokesman, January 8, 2009

As the community campaign against the Gunns pulp mill proposed for the Tamar Valley enters its fifth year, federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett has set a new deadline of March 3, 2011, for Gunns to complete hydrodynamic modelling of effluent dispersal into Bass Strait.

The extension condemns the people of Tasmania — the communities of the Tamar Valley in particular — to at least two more years of uncertainty and conflict. Investment in the region will continue to dry up because of the continuing threat of the pulp mill. The property market collapsed years ago — an analysis of sales figures for 2003 and 2008 show a 75% decline — and people have held off investing for four years in the hope that the mill plan will be knocked on the head.

Report on Gunns AGM 30 October 2008 by a TAP insider shareholder

Pulp and paper expert Dr Warwick Raverty, reached the “sad conclusion that Gunns is not a fit and proper company to build a pulp mill anywhere” in Tasmania (14 March 2007). That conclusion is supported by the pdf documentIs Gunns Ltd Reliable?, a record of nearly 200 statements from CEO John Gay and Gunns Ltd, and State and Federal governments relating to the planned pulp mill in the Tamar Valley.

Its purpose is to help potential investors assess Gunns' competence to build and operate one of the largest pulp mills in the southern hemisphere. It illustrates the political, economic and project risks for investors in Gunns' proposal.

The statements have been collated by TAP Research from media reports, documentaries and publications from 2004 to the present and are hyperlink referenced for easy checking. It will be updated periodically as new evidence emerges.