Splendid.  Gunns can put up Tasmania as collateral on the purchase price loan.

John Hayward

It would be a good strategic move if Gunns and their union thugs and Labor and Liberal government could actually request and supply plantations to a smaller pulp mill that is much less toxic to any surrounding area they choose to descend upon.

It would be a good strategic move if Gunns and co would consider the rural communities who are paying the ultimate price for their farm land, native forests and water catchments to be destroyed for the ‘still’ increasing plantations just so Gunns can ‘feel good’.

It would be a good strategic move if Gunns could at least be a little bit honest and stop the perpetuated myths.  An even better strategic move would be, if they (Gunns) cannot accept the social backlash, is if they could just disappear.

Once upon a time the thought of Gunns might have inspired fear … keep quiet, unless one wants to incur their wrath. 

Bugger off …  here we are …. come and get us … if you dare … You Gunns,  the most hated, useless, environmental degrading, worst reputation company in Tasmania if not Australia, with your old men dictators, don’t scare us.

However, let’s get back to the issue … you get paid for that do you Rachael? And the public pays and pays and pays … and pays, for what? One eightieth of a story? Keep it short, sharp and ...!  ...  A number of us already supplied you with the ‘real’ info, why didn’t you use it all?  Fair dinkum, how does one get an honors degree in journalism?

You know some journalists put their lives on the line …. along with some of the public.

Someone from Gunns please tell us why they employ Frances Duffy as P.R. person? Rachel does it so much better, and she has Gunns Gazette to do it in.

I wonder if in Victoria there are Tender Submission Fees.

Rachel doesn’t have an honours degree in journalism.  (Anonymous Personal Inference Deleted).  Don’t be too hard on her.

I really don’t get it !  I have written 4 letters to the Examiner in the last 4 weeks and each and every one has been printed, and of every letter i have presented over the past 12 months, every one has been shown , so ! i reckon if you are too bloody mean to buy it,  how the F——-k do you know what,s printed and what,s not.
 
  Many of you people constantly claim to be against the mill, well ! I just don’t believe you, you write one letter and most likely are not game to put your name to it, because of what you neighbours will say,  and when it is rejected ! you shoot the messenger and by doing so you spoil any good work that is being done by those of us that take the trouble.
  Wake up to yourselves ! for christ sake,

                  d.d.

Twice today I submitted in the comments section under this article in the EX what i considered to be an informed an thoughful comment (see below). The Examiner wont publish it. Why?

“That Gunns want to buy Timbercorp’s Victorian plantations to run its pulp mill off 100 per cent plantations begs the question - Why did Gunns reject the Hampshire option? Gunns could have a mill operating by now in Hampshire supplying it with its own plantation stock from that area and plantations form Victoria which are currently being exported. Hampshire is a site with excellent road and rail that was established by the previous owners, North’s Ltd as the site for a future Kraft pulp mill. Gunns’agenda is actually quite clear. Gunns has a wonderful deal with Forestry Tasmania to supply 1.5 million tonnes per annum of native forest derived woodchips to the proposed mill for 20 years. Longreach is well located for transport of the majority of this native forest wood. Most of Gunns Japanese customers, for environmental and economic reasons refuse to accept woodchips from native forests. So Gunns aims to repay the Pulp Mills debt by continuing to exporting millions of tonnes of plantation woodchips to Japan while they pulp native forest woodchips and sell native forest pulp into the undiscriminating Chinese Market. Charming aren’t they”.

According to Gunns IIS I am correct. Otherwise there is absolutely no need for Gunns to have a contract with FT to supply native forest to the mill. All Gunns need to do to prove their critics wrong is tear up this agreement.

The RPDC asked Gunns repeatedly for
1. The capital and operating cost differences between a mill at Bell Bay and one
at Hampshire, and
2. Gunns’ projections of total forest harvest (both export wood chip volume and
pulp mill woodchip volume) over the first 30 year life of the proposed mill.

Gunns refused to do this over the 2 year period of the unfinished RPDC review:

Why? It has been suggested and I would guess this theory is very close to the mark that it was the RPDC’s insistence on Gunns submitting this information that caused them to withdraw from the RPDC
So why wont the Examiner print my comment?? Are the Examiner so cowed by a company that cant tolerate truth in publishing?

#6. In reply to your comment Don.

Many are the people who have written to State and National papers regarding the views that many of us share and feel most strongly about.
The fact that they are not published each time tells us that so often the authors are attacking the very evil that so many institutions thrive and survive upon.
EG: advertising revenues, equipment and supplies, fuels, Banking facilities, even the very people that this evil forestry industry employs in the manner that they do.
(Often at the most meagre rate of pay, so they can boast of profits and successful scrooge manipulations upon their employees.)

Thus the Newspaper owners would rather not print letters that may well upset and gouge into their revenues.

Craig (7).  Back on 22/5/2007, the ABC carried an article on their web site in which John Gay:

“...told the ABC that his company has more plantation timber, including interstate holdings, than it could process in one pulp mill and that Gunns is looking long-term at adding value with a second mill”.

As such, I speculate that Gunns wanted the proposed Long Reach mill approved first, since that’s the “difficult” site.  Getting a second mill approved for Hampshire should be a pushover once the proposed Long Reach mill is built.

The same news story also cited Mr Gay saying in an interview with the Eureka Report: “The size of the plantations by 2012 or 2015 will lend itself to having another pulp mill”.

Given this statement, one has to wonder why Gunns still need any non plantation timber for a mill that couldn’t possibly be operational before 2012?

(8)
  Point taken William, however no matter how anyone cut’s it, ANY comment is better than none at all, so i don’t see the sense in shooting the messenger whilst some of us are getting through, after all, it’s not about personalities it’s about taking advantage of every avenue open to us in order to spread the message and as i have stated many time’s before , anyone who knows of another medium that reaches as many individuals , let them speak up now.
                    d.d.

” for the record this is my last letter to them and as asked ,as much info in as fewer words as possible !   

      It has been conservatively estimated that over fifty million dollars has been wasted by this Govt in eradicating non existing foxes,  with many believing it to be an excuse for the laying of 1080 , itself ! most likely responsible for the killing of many endemic species such as Quoll’s, devils, Hawks, etc.
      With “Rene Hidding” ex Liberal leader vocalising his support for this action , one can only suspect a much closer alliance between Labor / Liberal , forestry @ Gunn’s etc than previously suspected, and also recently alluded to by Ex Lib leader “Robin Gray” in this publication.
      An alliance as so suggested by “Gray”  would indeed relegate Tasmania to the scrap heap, with opinions and aspirations of ordinary Tasmanians deemed as ,  of NO RELEVANCE in regards to the welfare of this state.
                      d.d.