ALERT: Final Push Needed as Australia's Final Decision on Horrendous Tasmanian Pulp Mill Expected Soon
TAKE ACTION: Australian media reports that Australia's Federal Minister for Environment and Water Resources, Malcolm Turnbull, will be announcing this week whether the federal government will provide environmental approval for the proposed Tasmanian ancient forest fed pulp mill. As expected the Tasmanian state parliament recently rubber-stamped the project. However, Malcolm Turnbull then announced a six week extension to decide whether the federal environmental would approve the project. Of particular concern was the mill's proposed effluent discharge into the area's fragile marine environment. This extended period of consideration is nearing its end.
It is also reported that Gunns logging and Tasmanian government have sent a high profile delegation to Canberra for last minute lobbying. Meanwhile Australian and international protest continues to surge against the ill-conceived, fast-tracked doubling of logging in Tasmania's ancient forests for throw away paper products. Ecological Internet's network alone has sent 387,476 protest emails to Australian authorities form 3,545 people in 83 countries. The world's forest and climate protectors need to make a final push on this difficult and detestable matter. TAKE ACTION!
Comments
Hello Dr. Barry. I voted against the pulp mill conditions on the
following grounds:-
1. Incomplete modelling - Ass. Prof. Nowak and Dr. Stuart Godfrey.
2. To be determined emissions with incomplete information.
3. Scientifically based, but did not use computer modelling to best
advantage - 3 dimensional visualisation or virtual reality, technology
that has been available for years, would have saved so much community
angst.
4. Lack of trust in future planning processes and integrity,
precedence is now set e.g. out with RPDC.
5. The stringency with which conditions and guidelines will be
enforced and implemented, particularly when so many agencies and
departments are involved in cross referencing.
6. Potential impacts on water, agriculture, fishing, tourism,
roads, communities, employment etc. if this process is not properly
monitored and managed.
7. Disenfranchised, thinking people need a voice and spoken of in
disparaging terms e.g. anti development and lack of information.
8. Terminology that can be narrowly or widely interpreted, e.g.
"world's best practice", "where practical", "substantially".
NORMA JAMIESON MLC
Member for Mersey
Posted by: Norma Jamieson | October 25, 2007 9:31 AM