|
The proposed Bell Bay pulp mill deserves a chance to
be tested against the rigorous updated emission
guidelines.
The incapacity of the Lennon Labor Government to
manage this project to date, and its withdrawal from
the RPDC assessment process should not be fatal to
it ever being assessed, so long as this is done
vigorously and independently.
However, significant concerns remain about Premier,
Paul Lennon’s, ability to manage this project, free
from the undesirable and counter-productive
political interference that dogged the previous
assessment process and it will be on the Premier’s
head if the new process fails.
The Leader of the State Opposition, Will Hodgman,
said the Opposition had long supported the
construction of a pulp mill in Tasmania that is
socially, economically and environmentally sound.
“We strongly support Tasmania’s forestry industry
and the notion of value-adding our timber resource
and processing that resource here in Tasmania,” Mr
Hodgman told Parliament today, speaking in support
of the Pulp Mill Assessment Bill.
“Our support for a pulp mill in this State has been
based upon it being subject to rigorous assessment
and it meeting the high standards that protect
Tasmania’s environmental, social and economic
attributes. Where there have been technological
advances or improvements in techniques since the
guidelines were established in 2004, they need to be
taken into account when assessing the merits of the
pulp mill in 2007.
“We should not be left wondering whether this pulp
mill did, or did not, pass the test.”
Mr
Hodgman said the Pulp Mill Assessment Bill 2007 had
been drafted and introduced in a short space of time
and issues would be pursued through the committee
stages of the Bill in Parliament today.
“However, it is not beyond the capacity of
government or the Parliament to construct an
assessment process that is rigorous, independent and
able to test the pulp mill proposal, notwithstanding
the broad support there was for the RPDC undertaking
this task,” Mr Hodgman said.
“The key issue is whether the pulp mill can be
assessed vigorously and independently, not whether
the RPDC undertakes that assessment.”
Mr
Hodgman said it was critical that the appointment of
the consultant to undertake the assessment was
transparent, based on strict criteria and subject to
the highest standards of probity. There can be no
questions of competence or conflict.
The issue of emissions is an area where there must
be strict assessment – anything less than world’s
best practice is unacceptable.
The process by which the pulp mill permit is issued
must set the highest standards and there must be
full disclosure with respect to the issuing of these
permits.
“We expect transparency, full disclosure and
complete certification. This is essential to the
integrity of the process,” Mr Hodgman said.
“The Parliament and the public wants to be assured
that the permit system proposed will involve
comprehensive assessment and address all major
concerns, testing various aspects of planning
approval – whether it be transport issues, visual
impacts, social criteria and so on.”
Mr
Hodgman said it was also critical that Parliament
was provided with all relevant information available
to enable a proper assessment by it of the pulp mill
proposal if it reached this stage via a
recommendation by the consultant that it proceed.
Members must not be swamped with information and
asked to make a decision with insufficient time.
He
also sought assurances from the Premier that there
would be no more political interference in the
process and that he and his government would abide
by the determination of the process, and any
conditions that were applied.
“This project, and the importance of good governance
and integrity in process, is too important to be
compromised any further.”
Further information: Georgia Warner 0418 564
073
Ref…pulpmill mar2202gw
<<
return to media
release page
|
