Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sadly, after nearly 30 years in Tasmania, the state Liberal and Labor parties still both share the same single, tired vision for the future of jobs and prosperity in Tasmania—a price-taking pulp mill producing a low-value, high-cost, undifferentiated commodity built on the quicksand pit of a corrupted assessment process and community conflict. The revival and inclusion of the pulp mill in the current political debate leading up to Tasmania's state election—formalised by Premier Lara Giddings when she recalled state parliament to pass new enabling legislation designed to help the Gunns' liquidator, KordaMentha, find a new investor in the failed project—is a sad indictment on what is wrong with Tasmania's political leadership. The Greens were the only party to oppose this dodgy legislation, and, as if right on cue, the Greens leader, Nick McKim, was 'mistakenly' denied the opportunity to move a no-confidence motion in the state Labor government prior to the tabling of the legislation. Although sitting right in front of the Speaker, he was missed out of the corner of the Speaker's eye.

The old parties in Tasmania seem to have no new ideas, no new vision, and only a singular focus on the ever-reliable push-buttons of division. Conflict and division are the currency of Tasmanian politics, and they have always devalued Tasmania and its progress. Just last week a group of vineyard owners, who sent a letter to Tasmanian state MPs expressing well researched and heartfelt doubts on the project proceeding in their tourist valley, were viciously targeted by pro-mill groups in a campaign to boycott their wine sales—as was my mother, also this week. The pro-mill groups posted on Facebook and promoted banners from the Cancer Council—which were clearly altered—to claim that 'Tamar Valley wines give you mouth cancer'. That is the hatred and division in Tasmania, which has built up over many years and is always so readily exploited by some politicians for their own party-political advantage.

I understand the anger from many over the loss of jobs in Tasmanian industries that are failing in competitive global markets, the likes of which we have also seen recently in Victoria and South Australia. But it is more cruel to string out such people by offering them false hopes over a project that was never economically viable and only ever got parliamentary approval via a highly unpopular and corrupt process. What makes this mindless, zombie obsession with the failed proposed Tamar Valley project all the worse is that there is no plan B from Labor or Liberal and no serious political recognition of other state-building economic strategies. Only the Greens have released a comprehensive vision strategy of economic development for the next 20 years in Tasmania that does not centre around a pulp mill or around a failing native forest timber industry.

The lengths that the Tasmanian polity—our state's brain trust—has gone to and the waste of political energy on this doomed project is quite extraordinary. The lengths to which governments have gone to avoid legal scrutiny, close loop holes and cover their legislative tracks in attempting to deliver this project for vested interests is almost bewildering. Tasmanians must wonder what could have been achieved if such talents and energy had been put to focusing on growing other businesses and industries that Tasmania actually has a future in, in line with our competitive advantages such as agriculture, education, ICT, health care and tourism.

I believe the opportunities are there for all in Tasmania—but not if you are blinded by ignorance, stupidity and a lack of political will; or, perhaps, the fact that it is not in your short-term political interest to back change. There are plenty of success stories in Tasmania across many industries that never get highlighted. Even if the Tamar Valley pulp mill were economically viable and environmentally sustainable—which I believe it is not—it would never receive community approval or a social licence. The never-ending cascade of assessment and public relations disasters, including high-profile political and corporate failures, underlines why the community has forever lost confidence in this pulp mill project.

Last month's recall of the Tasmanian parliament to again do a big corporation a special favour is yet another example of this loss of confidence. By passing retrospective legislation to remove doubt surrounding the pulp mill permits Labor and Liberal members of parliament and many MLCs removed a key clause that would automatically suspend operations if the pulp mill were to breach permit conditions, such as well-known hideous odour emissions or the dumping of industrial waste into oceans and ecosystems. This legislation has been widely criticised in the legal fraternity around this country.

Is it realistic that such permit conditions may be breached? Yes, it is. Although it took 10 years of legal action, just last month in Chile the Valdivia pulp mill, which is owned by pulp giant Celco, was fined $US10.5 million for damage to local wetlands and ecosystems, including the deaths of hundreds of swans, from its toxic pulp mill effluent. A similar kraft pulp mill in Chile, the Licancel mill, also discharged effluent into the Mataquito River, killing fish and damaging the livings of local fisherman. Both mills have been the subject of repeated legal challenges and fines for breaches of environmental laws, and they have often been shut down and forced to comply. Both mills use the same technology as the proposed pulp mill for the Tamar Valley, and—hard as it is to believe—Tasmanian MPs, all of whom voted for the doubts-removal legislation, visited these pulp mills as part of a Gunns-sponsored tour prior to the introduction of the original legislation.

You would expect that the government had at least learned from this, but you would be right on some accounts and wrong on others. You would be wrong because it has been made clear—but ignored to date—that the Tamar mill has never stacked up in key independent studies of proposed effluent treatment and dispersal. You would be right because Tasmanian decision makers have obviously learnt what happened overseas and put special clauses in legislation to prevent any future proponent from having to shut down the mill if they breach the conditions. So they have transferred risks from investors and the proponents onto the community and onto the environment.

I and many Tasmanians have campaigned—and will continue to campaign—against this zombie pulp mill and for a better Tasmania. My local Greens MP and friend, Kim Booth, has stood steadfast and strong as a community leader throughout and is now up for re-election. The community of Bass needs Kim because of his moral strength and courage. One good thing that has arisen in this last, sorry saga—and from 10 years of conflict—is the community's continued determination to see change, even in the face of all obstacles, including obvious government abuses of power. There are so many good people who have done so much or, in their own way, contributed to stopping this toxic pulp mill project—too many to name here tonight. But I take this opportunity to pay tribute to them all. As well-known Tasmanian Peter Cundall has said so often, we will never give up.