No problem Liam. The national electronic media are the only forum yet to fully explore the the complete abrogation of proper process and the cronyism, deceit, secrecy and lies which the pulp mill axis camp have perpetrated to keep this highly risky 2nd rate project alive. When and if the national media choose to focus on this we may well see the downfall of our Premier much in the manner of Joh Bjielke,s and his "moonlight state". Tasmanias now former)deputy Premier Mr Brian Green, the man under whose watch (Forest Minister), the wood supply agreement between Gunns and Forestry Tasmania for the proposed mill was negotiated is already being ivestigated criminally http://www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,20646297-921,00.html
http://www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,20641941-921,00.html
Then there is the potentially criminal matter of the Premier Paul Lennon,s interference with Retired Supreme Court judge.
Christopher Wright was appointed as permanent chair of the RPDC pulp mill assessment panel to replace Julian Green who resigned on Decenmber 24th citing government interference. Green, a decent and highly respected public servant whom our premier had described as a man of integrity was also of course the man who said on 20 December 2006, 4 days before he resigned his post citing government interference said
"I tell you this, if Gunns were not a Tasmanian company, this proposal would have already been rejected. As you know we have bent over backwards to help them get it right and they just keep stuffing us around. They are just a bunch of clowns. I am really, really sorry warwick"
In March Chritopher Wright issued a statutory declaration contradictory of statements by Lennon regarding the details of a meeting which was forced by Premier Lennon on February 27, following Wright’s refusal to meet privately with Gunns’ chief John Gay
Wright said
"I got a letter from Mr Gay, writing on behalf of Gunns, in which he requested a private meeting with me to discuss aspects of the assessment process before I’d even really started the job. Now obviously it occurred to me that that was quite inappropriate and I declined to have that meeting with him"

(cont)Three days after the February 22 RPDC directions hearing, there was a crisis meeting held in the Premier's office. The Premier and Gunns CEO John Gay were there. Gunns were saying the RPDC’s expanded time line was unacceptable. At the Feb 22 RPDC direction hearings Chistopher Wright had told Gunns "The RPDC could no longer be expected to complete its assessment by the middle of the year. It would run until November. This was because even at this late stage the RPDC was still waiting for Gunns to comply with the RPDC’s guidelines. According the RPDC, Gunns was still in "critical non-compliance".
Christopher Wright was blunt, when he said "All or most of the delays appear to me to have resulted from Gunns' failure or inability to comply with their own prognostications ...DR Peter Mannins, from the CSIRO said "Gunns was fully informed of what was required, well before their assessment work was started. It was laid down in considerable detail and Gunns accepted that or said they accepted that process and would follow it, and said continually in meetings that I’ve been involved in, we will provide these data by such and such a deadline, and in most cases just didn’t.
Dr. Warwick Raverty who has 27 years experience as a scientist in the pulp and paper industry and also served on the RPDC pulp mill Assessment Panel as principal scientific adviser. He said
" Gunns failed twice (on 25 October 2006, and 22 February 2007) to satisfy the RPDC that they could build such a facility in the Tamar Valley without adverse impact on the environment and the community. Gunns unilaterally withdrew from the RPDC assessment process in March 2007. Rather than rejecting the proposal at this point, the Tasmanian Government invited Gunns's lawyers to assist in drafting legislation for a 'fast-track approval process' that failed to assess many of the important factors, bad smells among them, associated with kraft mills. Overnight, the Tasmanian Parliament became the State's peak planning authority. Deeply suspicious of this Government-Gunns relationship, the majority of Tasmanians who had been happy became very unhappy"

samps is absolutely on the right track here.
Matt Denholm from the Australian is one of the few journalists in the country to cover the events around that fateful meeting on Feb 27 which I agree may one day lead to criminal charges being laid against the Tasmanian premier.
In that fateful meeting, Wright alleged that Lennon pressured him to abandon further public hearings, to complete the pulp mill assessment by July 31 to suit Gunns commercial timeframe, and threatened to legislatively accelerate the process. Yet on February 27, Gunns also told the ASX that they expected the assessment would conclude within a commercial time frame.
Wright said of that meeting
(start quote)"I was told that the Premier had decided that to speed the matter onward to the timetable that was suitable to Gunns, that is finality by the 31st of July, it was proposed that a new ministerial direction would be given to water down, in effect, the steps and processes that the RPDC would need to follow to make its report. And in particular I was told that public hearings would not be held. However the panel members agreed with me a) that it was impossible to complete our work by the 31st of July and b) it was completely inappropriate and unacceptable to be forbidden to hold public hearings. Obviously the status of the RPDC would have suffered immeasurably I think if we’d come along at a later date and said oh sorry, we’ve decided we’re not going to hold public hearings and we’re going to speed things up just so we can meet Gunns’ deadline. I don’t know if the Premier was doing it off his own back or bat or acting as a messenger boy for Gunns but there was never any doubt in my mind that he was a very enthusiastic supporter of the whole process and that he was anxious throughout that a process that was acceptable to Gunns should be followed" (end quote

(cont)
Of the events of this meeting in which Christopher Wright said that he felt compromised, pressured and leant on by an ultimatum given to him by Mr Lennon, David Porter QC says that if Mr Wright’s version of events is accepted, there is a prima facie case that the Resource Planning and Development Commission Act has been breached.

Despite the fact that Tasmania's Director of Public Prosecutions was asked to investigate, the problem in Tasmania is the DPP,s legal powers only allow him to accept referrals for investigations directly from the Attorney-General. But Attorney-General and labor cabinet mate Steve Kons has flatly and continually refused to refer the matter. Tasmanians from all sides of politics believe that this abrogation of responsibility for which the AG is paid a very handsome wage means that Minister Kons has been derelict in his duty. The only other avenue through which the matter could have been referred to the DPP would have been through an ICAC which unlike every other state in Austrlalia, Tasmania does not have.
It is not hard for a Tasmanian like myself who has followed this saga as closely as I have to prosecute a case against this corrupt pulp mill proposal. It cannot be overstated enough just how much damage has been done to public confidence in both sides of the Tasmanian government as well as Gunns LTD - the proponent because of the stench of corruption that hangs over the pulp mill assessment. These days, sadly for Gunns employees, the Tasmanian public regards Gunns as something akin to a James Hardie industries. It is an indisputable fact that Gunns ltd are universally loathed and not trusted by the majority of adult Tasmanians.

Mr Ashbarry and his pro-pulp mill mates have just opened a can of worms and I am more than happy to submit more details of this sorry saga in the next few days so that the real story of Gunns pulp mill assessment that has been thus far kept behind closed doors in Tasmania can truly go on trial on this most wonderful national forum

An ICAC in Tasmania?

Children, children, children c’mon!

Only Mr Howard dare intervene.

A brief summary of deceit.

December 2006
Dr Warwick Raverty and RPDC chairman Julian Green resigned from Tasmania's Statuatory RPDC pulp mill assessment panel. In a letter leaked to the press, the RPDC chairman Julian Green said the Premier Paul Lennon had failed to protect the integrity of the assessment process and he accused the Pulp Mill task force of undermining the integrity of the commission.
Attorney Mr. Kons was caught out lieing to the Tasmanian public when he said that Mr. Green "just wanted to take early retirement and there was no pressure or underlying dissatisfaction behind the decision". Not only did Julian Greens resignation letter (http://www.tamarpulpmill.info/green.pdf) and other subsequent statements prove that the Government were lying about the reason for Mr. Green's resignation but also that they had failed to respond to warnings that the Pulpmill Task Force was undermining the integrity of the RPDC approval process. Julian Green has been described by Premier Paul Lennon as a man of the highest ability and integrity yet it was Mr. Green who blew the whistle.
Dr. Raverty called for the Tasmanian Governments "Pulpmill Taskforce" to be disbanded because its activities were in contempt of the approvals process. Dr. Raverty said that if the Premier failed to disband it then he would have absolutely no confidence in Paul Lennon as an ethical Premier and would call for his resignation. Dr. Raverty also said that the committee had become increasingly frustrated by the task force's blind promotion of the mill.
Dr Warwick Raverty also said that the location of the proposed pulp mill was the worst possible because of the surrounding population, the already polluted valley air and inversion layer. He said that the RPDC tried to persuade Gunns to build it at Hampshire, but because it would cost $20m more Gunns were sticking with Longreach.In an interview, Gunns CEO John Gay blamed the Greens for the resignations of Green and Raverty despite the fact that both gentlemen made it clear that this not the case. Mr. Gay said Gunns had satisfied the conditions in the guidelines (in spite of