The Tasmanian Greens today welcomed the sudden move by the Director of Public Health to ban the use of Atrazine and Simazine by at least one operator in the Macquarie River catchment, after a prolonged river chemical contamination event which was initially detected in July last year.

Greens Shadow Water spokesperson Tim Morris MP said that whilst it is a significant step forward to have a ban on the use of Simazine and Atrazine in the Macquarie catchment it only applies to one, unnamed, operator and only until ‘further advised’, and also queried why there was no explanation provided as to why this has been done or why, if there is such a problem in the Macquarie catchment, then why is there not a ban in all other catchments and for all other operators.

Mr Morris said the announcement was contained at the end of a media statement regarding the latest water monitoring results issued by Minister David Llewellyn today, but without any additional information provided.

“The Greens have been calling for years for a complete statewide ban on the Triazine chemicals Atrazine and Simazine, so it is quite remarkable to discover that the Director of Public Health, Dr Roscoe Taylor, has taken this step, even if it is temporary, for the Macquarie River catchment,” Mr Morris said.

“However the one sentence announcement contained in the Minister’s media statement on this matter raises further questions, such as why is the ban in place for just the Macquarie River catchment, and why for only one operator?”

“Only this week new international research evidence of the negative effect of Atrazine impacts upon humans has come to light, which raises the pressure on authorities to at least review the current health value and allowable limits for this chemical, if not simply ban it permanently all together.”

“This catchment and operator-specific ban on Atrazine and Simazine imposed by Dr Taylor is most welcome but needs to be applied state-wide as a permanent ban, if triazines are not safe for the Macquarie River catchment, then they are not safe in any Tasmanian catchments,” Mr Morris said.

The Tasmanian Greens today said that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s appalling decision to means test the federal rooftop solar rebate increases pressure on the state government to use this year’s State Budget to improve electricity feed-in tariffs and create state-based rebates for energy efficiency measures and solar hot water systems.

Greens Shadow Climate Change Spokesperson Nick McKim MP said that increasing the rate of feed-in tariffs, which are paid to households that sell electricity back into the grid, would encourage faster uptake of distributed generation systems in Tasmania and help reduce Tasmania’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Mr McKim said that other states are taking the lead in this area, with only Tasmania and Queensland not providing a rebate for solar hot water systems, and Victoria recently announcing a feed-in tariff of 60c per kilowatt hour, while Tasmania’s is languishing at under 20c per kilowatt hour.

“The state government is doing nothing to encourage Tasmanians to install solar systems and use less power, and if Paul Lennon wants to be taken seriously on climate change he is going to have act, and act fast,” Mr McKim said.

“Any failure to address these issues in the upcoming state budget will expose Paul Lennon’s supposed conversion on climate change as just another failed makeover.”

“Although there are flaws in the net metering model used by state governments in Australia it is important that the state government at least takes the first step by subsidising a feed-in tariff that is much higher than the retail price on which it is currently based in Tasmania.”

Mr McKim said that increasing feed-in tariffs is not a matter for energy retailers such as Aurora Energy to address independently, but something on which governments need to take the lead.

“The state government needs to step in with a financial package which would allow energy retailers to pay a more appropriate rate for electricity fed into the grid by households with distributed generation systems like photovoltaics.”

The Tasmanian Greens today issued an initial response to the decision by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to grant a carrier licence to Basslink Telecom, welcoming the decision but cautioning that the development did not guarantee an acceptable resolution to the high cost of data transmission across Bass Strait.

Greens Deputy Leader and ICT spokesperson Nick McKim MP said that there is still no guarantee that the Basslink fibre will be commercialised by the end of this year, and said that a duopoly across Bass Strait may not deliver the necessary parity with national prices.

“This is an encouraging development, but there is still a lot of water to go under the bridge before the mess created by the state government has been untangled,” Mr McKim said.

“There is still significant uncertainty about how Basslink Telecom intends to utilise Tasmania’s land based fibre network which Aurora now has the responsibility to commercialise, and where this development leaves the $2m per annum which the state government is committed to paying the owners of Basslink for doing nothing.”

“We have heard many times before that this issue is close to resolution, and I will not be cracking the champagne until we at least have parity with national prices.”

“Basslink undercutting Telstra’s Bass Strait backhaul prices by just 5 or 10% is not an acceptable outcome, and the onus still rests with the state government to deliver an appropriate result.”

Mr McKim maintained that the state government’s decision to allow Hydro Tasmania to sign the initial Telecommunications Contract, which commits the taxpayer to an indexed $2m payment to the owners of the Basslink fibre, is responsible for many of the delays to date.

The Tasmanian Greens today raised concerns over the future of Hobart’s port control tower, which could then precipitate subsequent sale or long term lease of that site, as they also reacted to the revelation that sale of Macquarie Wharf No 1 shed will be advertised by the government prior to any community determination of the preferred use.

Greens Opposition Leader and Member for Denison Peg Putt MP also raised concerns that the Lennon government may have financial difficulties that will see further asset sales announced in the upcoming State Budget.

Sale or Long Term Lease of Macquarie 1 Wharf

“Privatisation of the Hobart waterfront has been a big worry to the Hobart community who have strongly indicated their desire for continued public ownership and access, so it’s plain wrong for the government to be moving to sell Macquarie Wharf No 1 shed without first testing the proposal with the people via extensive public consultation,” Ms Putt said.

“If it’s a long term lease that’s just as bad in terms of effectively privatising the place for 99 years, something that was made abundantly clear when the government tried to squirm out of community concerns over losing public ownership and use by suggesting long term leases of this nature.”

“We were told in Parliament when the waterfront was taken from council and given to an unelected body to administer that the people would be consulted about what their vision of preferred development was for each part of the cove, and then plans would be developed in line with community views, but now the government has junked those promises and is proceeding to a sale or long term lease which they’ve never previously canvassed.”

“This sidelines the community and sets up a situation of potential conflict for developers to confront.”

“Paul Lennon really has to come out of hiding and explain why he has ditched his promises to the people of Hobart about how he would go about planning for the wharf, and tell us what on earth justifies effectively privatising Macquarie Wharf No 1 shed apart from a grab for cash,” Ms Putt said.

Closure of port control tower

“The Greens have received a flood of contacts about behind the scenes moves regarding the wharf, and we have confirmed that a move is also underway to close down the port control tower, meaning that shipping movements would apparently be controlled from Burnie.”

“Obviously this could affect the safety of ships on the river and travelling up river under the bridge, and although a risk assessment is being undertaken I believe that many who use the Derwent River will not be happy with the prospect of closure of the port control tower.”

“Does this signal a change in the mix of users of the port and a presumption that freight traffic across the wharf will be relocated to northern ports?”

“The question also then arises as to whether there could be a subsequent sale or 99 year lease of that area, which is adjacent to the Quarantine shed on Macquarie No 1 wharf.”

Further asset sales?

“It seems clear that the Lennon government is facing some sort of financial squeeze that is precipitating this grab for cash from wharf property, and we are hearing of further asset sales elsewhere that could also be coming up.”

“Yet only a few months ago the government achieved a sale price for the Hobart airport that was three times greater than predicted, so you’d assume they’d be in a better financial position than expected,” Ms Putt said.

“Has the Lennon government got itself into financial difficulties that are precipitating these moves, do they intend to announce further asset sales in the upcoming State Budget, and how could they possibly justify throwing taxpayers money to Gunns and their pulp mill in such circumstances?”

The Tasmanian Greens today said that the Glamorgan-Spring Bay Council was clearly incapable of managing the Triabunna wharf, that has been closed due to the substructure being condemned, and that instead either the Tasmanian Ports Corporation (TasPorts), or Marine and Safety Tasmania (MAST) should be handed responsibility for what is a strategically important piece of state infrastructure as it is critical that the wharf be repaired, or replaced, as a matter of urgency.

Greens Member for Lyons, Tim Morris MP, said that it is most unusual for a local council to be responsible for the maintenance of such infrastructure, whereas both TasPorts and MAST do maintain other similar wharf and jetty facilities around the state, with TasPorts responsible for operating the Strahan and Stanley wharves. which is comparable to the Triabunna facility as it mainly caters to tourism and fishing users.

Mr Morris also pointed out that the Triabunna wharf is located on Crown Land, which again makes its ongoing maintenance and management more logically placed with either TasPorts or MAST.

“The Glamorgan-Spring Bay Council has known for years that the Triabunna wharf was deteriorating and despite their best efforts has been incapable of keeping it operational, so it is probably time to hand the responsibility for this facility to an organisation that has both the expertise and financial capacity to restore the wharf to operational order and manage it in a safe manner such as TasPorts or MAST,” Mr Morris said.

“For example, TasPorts operates the Strahan wharf which, similar to Triabunna, is utilised predominantly by tourism and fishing operators.”

“The Mayor has rightly said that the Council’s current focus is on improving the water situation within the municipality and therefore do not have the funds to fix the wharf and are reliant on funding from the state government to enable the necessary repairs to be made.”

“The Triabunna wharf is important for maintaining employment in the fishing and tourism industries on the east coast and needs to be repaired or replaced as a matter of urgency, before these jobs are lost to the area.”

“Most other major wharves in Tasmania are operated by TasPorts, while most jetties and smaller facilities are operated by MAST and it is unusual for a council to have responsibility for such a facility when they have neither management expertise or the financial capacity to look after the wharf properly.”

“The State government must intervene and offer to redesignate the responsibility for the Triabunna wharf to either TasPorts or MAST as a matter of urgency, and reassure the local community that they will not lose this integral facility,” Mr Morris said.

The Tasmanian Greens today called for a ban on the herbicide Atrazine in Tasmania following the release of a new study from the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), which revealed that "significant effects on human placental cells" occur after exposure to as little as 20 parts per billion (ppb) of Atrazine which is half the Australian Drinking Water Guideline limit of 40ppb Atrazine.[1]

The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) recently reviewed Atrazine and found that it was safe for continued registration and use in Australia, however at the time the APVMA also stated that should "…new lines of research generate legitimate areas of concern, the APVMA will initiate a new review."[2]

Greens Shadow Forestry and Water Spokesperson Tim Morris MP said that the APVMA must re-review Atrazine given that this UCSF Study has completely contradicted the APVMA findings in such a significant manner, and following the revelation that senior UCSF study author Professor Holly Ingraham believes that Australia’s current Drinking Water Guideline of 40ppb Atrazine is "worrying".[3]

"This study from UCSF is the first to identify the full effects of Atrazine on human cells, so we must take note of its worrying findings regarding the feminisation of juveniles and the disruption of human placental cells, and ban Atrazine from Tasmania until it can be proven safe for use around humans," said Mr Morris.[4]

"Since 2001 there have been 246 instances of noxious chemicals detected in Tasmania’s waterways, the Lennon government has failed to publish 130 of these positive results, and Simazine and Atrazine which are both from the controversial Triazine family of herbicides made up 92 of the 130 unpublished test results."

"There are serious questions about whether the Lennon government is deliberately withholding its water testing results and this study from UCSF now confirms that Premier Lennon is risking the health of Tasmanians, and the future health of their children and grandchildren, by allowing Atrazine to be sprayed across Tasmania and then seemingly deliberately failing to publish the related water contamination findings."

"The UCSF study results are extremely troubling for those Tasmanians living anywhere near forestry plantations or private forestry activities, or drawing their drinking water from rural catchments, where Atrazine is still the herbicide of choice for private forestry operators, and where this disrupting herbicide still regularly shows up in drinking water contamination tests."

"While the Greens are aware that Forestry Tasmania has ceased using Atrazine, and that private forestry users are now the main users of this noxious chemical, Forestry Tasmania still uses Simazine which is from the same triazine family of chemicals as Atrazine and which we also believe to be harmful to human health," concluded Mr Morris.

________________________________________

For Further Information:

UCSF Study "The Herbicide Atrazine Activates Endocrine Gene Networks via Non-Steroidal NR5A Nuclear Receptors in Fish and Mammalian Cells" http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0002117

UCSF News Report: “Common herbicide disrupts human hormone activity in cell studies” http://pub.ucsf.edu/newsservices/releases/200805064/

[1] The Australian, 15 May 2008, Matthew Denholm, "Alarm at weed-kill chemical in water"

[2] APVMA, 1 May 2008, "APVMA concludes its review of atrazine," http://www.apvma.gov.au/media/mr0802/shtml

[3] The Australian, 15 May 2008, Matthew Denholm, "Alarm at weed-kill chemical in water"

[4] UCSF News Service, Wallace Ravven, 6 May 2008, "Common herbicide disrupts human hormone activity in cell studies," http://pub.ucsf.edu/newsservices/releases/200805064/

The Tasmanian Greens today rejected the claim by the Minister for Crown Lands, Mr David Llewellyn that the proper processes are being followed in relation to a proposal for a commercial development on Crown Land foreshore at St Helens, saying that the site in question is already leased to the Council and therefore if that lease was to be foregone, it should revert back to the State.

Greens Member for Lyons, Tim Morris MP, said that a development proposal is being considered by the government whilst the crown land in question is, and has been, leased by the Break O’Day Council, and pointed out that if the Council does not wish to continue that lease then they should hand the lease back to the State government and then the government can give everyone an equal chance to apply to lease the land, not just one developer, which is why there are concerns in the local community that a secret deal is underway.

 “Mr Llewellyn has confirmed that a developer is in discussions with the government, seeking the green light to put a Development Application to the council, so perhaps he can also enlighten the community as to what the proposed development is and why no one else at this stage has the opportunity to put forward an alternative proposal, or to indicate that the present use is the most appropriate,” Mr Morris said.

“Mr Llewellyn must also answer the following question. How can a developer apply to lease a piece of Crown Land that is leased by someone else for public purposes without a decision having been made to discontinue that use and vacate the existing lease?”

 “It was not difficult to work out that a development is being contemplated, all that was required was a look back at the published Council agenda for last September where item 17.1 states ‘APPLICATION FOR CROWN LEASE ST HELENS FORESHORE JOHN HORTLE OF ECOAST HOMES PTY LTD (COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE)’ and in the minutes of the October meeting under the Mayor’s communications ‘St Helens — Meeting with John Hortle, Proposed Georges Bay Foreshore’.”

“With the matter again coming to closed council this week, and concerned constituents contacting me it was apparent that serious discussions must have been continuing and that they must now be involving the state government, so it is now high time for Mr Llewellyn to stop trying to shoot the messenger, accept that this very unusual situation naturally is of concern to St Helens’ residents, and provide a full explanation,” Mr Morris said.

The Tasmanian Greens today are critical that the Rudd government has dropped the ball on climate change in their first Budget, saying that this now puts the onus on the Lennon government to deliver serious change in this area in line with the Premier’s claim to have seen the light on this most important challenge to our future.

Greens Opposition Leader and Shadow Treasury spokesperson Peg Putt MP said that funding of a PET scanner for the RHH is welcome after Greens Senator Christine Milne exposed funding problems and created momentum for this vital equipment, but were critical that pensioners and people with disabilities were still missing out.

The Greens also want to know why the forest industry is being showered with yet more public funds, reportedly $20 million, of which $8 million turns out to be for climate change adjustment, querying that this is any more than continued public subsidy to an industry that is yet to admit that logging native forests contributes to climate change.

“In this time of rapidly approaching climate emergency the Rudd government have failed to rethink Budget priorities to combat this serious challenge in a meaningful and timely way, this is not just a disappointment but is seriously worrying because it means it will be even longer before major change away from a carbon based economy takes place,” Ms Putt said.

“It beggars belief that investment in major new renewable energy generation missed out whilst unproven clean coal technology that other countries are bailing out of got the dollars, clearly the coal industry is being allowed to dictate the Rudd government’s course of action.”

“In Tasmania the impact of means testing subsidies for solar photo voltaics which will put off the very people who could actually have afforded to invest will be compounded by the utter lack of state-based subsidies, making a Lennon government Budget initiative on solar subsidies imperative.”

“Because Rudd has dropped the ball so badly on climate change the onus is now on the Lennon government to invest in energy efficiency, subsidies for renewable energy including household installation, rail not road, and more public transport, yet Treasurer Michael Aird is indicating that he thinks Rudd delivered a good Labor Budget and this does not auger well for getting the prompt targeted action we need to tackle climate change.”

“We don’t understand why the forest industry is being showered with more cash, allegedly to assist them on climate change when they won’t even admit that current native forest logging and burning regimes contribute massively to the problem, we fear it would be too much to hope that this will be to secure forests into the future for carbon capture as an alternative to logging.”

“What is this money to be spent on, or is it just another pretext for continued public subsidy, given that the detail reveals that only $8 million of the $20 million is for climate change research.”

“There are things to be grateful for such as the PET scanner at the RHH which will be a real boon to cancer patients and has been a personal campaign of Greens Senator Christine Milne.”

“Similarly, abolishing the controversial refugee Temporary Protection Visa Scheme is a welcome breakthrough, and one that the Greens have long advocated.”

“It seems that genuine battlers, pensioners and people with disabilities, have missed out on what they really needed,” Ms Putt concluded.

The Tasmanian Greens today responded to the Treasurer’s announcement that plans for an ambulance levy are on hold until next financial year, saying that proper consultation with key bodies and the community prior to decisions on ambulance funding were vital to a good outcome, but that there is no evidence the government had learned this lesson, nor that they would prioritise ambulances for public funding ahead of taxpayer support for Gunns pulp mill.

Greens Opposition Leader and Shadow Health spokesperson Peg Putt MP called for a guarantee of increased ambulance funding in the upcoming State Budget and said that the Lennon government had made a mess of the whole issue since it announced plans for an across the board charge in last year’s State Budget, a plan that had proved deeply unpopular and completely unworkable — as could have been predicted from day one.

“The government has been forced back to the drawing board over ambulance funding because they were too arrogant to talk things through with the relevant bodies and the community before they came up with their unpopular and unworkable ambulance charge, and are now running into trouble about how to apply a levy,” Ms Putt said.

“The big picture question is, why would you levy taxpayers additional money to pay for such a vital service as ambulances, yet give away taxpayers money by the $millions to support Gunns unpopular private pulp mill development?”

“The Treasurer may have backed off his plans to impose an ambulance levy in the upcoming State Budget, but he must also assure Tasmanians that he will direct the necessary additional resources into ambulance services nonetheless.”

“The much vaunted Health Plan depends on better patient transport, including putting more into the ambulance service.”

“The north west is experiencing compounding problems with ambulance service provision, yet the need is exacerbated by the decision that ICU will not operate at the Mersey campus.”

“This government must learn the lesson from its year long ambulance debacle, which is that being prepared to consult properly at the outset saves a lot of time and angst in the long run,” Ms Putt concluded.

The Tasmanian Greens today welcomed Anglicare Tasmania’s evaluation of the Private Rental Support Scheme (PRSS) and called on the Lennon Labor government to commit to the continuation of the PRSS beyond June 30 this year. 

Greens Shadow Housing spokesperson Tim Morris MP congratulated Anglicare for their evaluation which found that the PRSS has helped large numbers of Tasmanians remain in private rental accommodation, which in turn has reduced the pressure on Tasmania’s lengthy public housing waiting list.

“The Tasmanian State budget will be released on June 12, but the PRSS is scheduled to cease on June 30 — if the Lennon government waits until Budget day to announce its decision on the PRSS, recipients will have less than three weeks to plan their future accommodation which is not enough time, especially if the government chooses to not continue funding the Scheme which would effectively cancel it,” said Mr Morris.

“Tasmanians deserve certainty when it comes to ongoing accommodation support and I am calling on the Lennon government to commit immediately to the continuation of the PRSS, or else to take responsibility as large numbers of Tasmanians are thrown out onto the streets.”

“Anglicare is showing up the lack of commitment in this area from the Lennon government which seems to prefer to make announcements about housing affordability, while doing nothing concrete to actually assist those suffering from rental stress or homelessness.”

“The Premier cannot blame the Federal Rudd government for the escalating housing crisis, in both the public and private sectors, and nor can Mr Lennon just rely on the Federal Budget to fix the problem on its own but must take on the responsibility to act wherever possible.”

“The question mark hanging over the PRSS can be resolved, there is a solution, and the Lennon government must commit now to continuing the scheme’s funding.”

“The Legislative Council recently released the comprehensive Report into Housing Affordability in Tasmania (April 2008) but despite the Lennon government undertaking to consider the report’s findings we have heard nothing since and are still waiting for the Minister’s response,” concluded Mr Morris.

The Tasmanian Greens today called on the Premier to explain his failure to respond to bodies representing port users, explain his government’s plans and planning parameters for Hobart’s commercial port, including Macquarie wharf, and to make a commitment to full community involvement in determining future options, in the context of fears that planning discussions for the railyards site have revealed that the working docks may be closed in favour of gentrification.

Greens Opposition Leader and Member for Denison, Peg Putt MP, said that the deep water working port was a well regarded feature of the waterfront by Hobartians who take pride in this heritage, considerable effort had gone into promoting Hobart as a port for Antarctic resupply and cruise ship visits, and wants to know why Tasports has been left out of the loop over areas under their control.

The Greens are concerned that the Premier has apparently gone to ground over the future of the port and are worried that secret plans may have been hatched by the Lennon government, flowing from their determination of the new hospital site and decision to locate a new transport hub at Brighton.

“The future of Hobart’s waterfront is well known to be of great concern, even more so when the prospect of effectively closing the working deep water port appears to have traction within government and the Premier is failing to respond to port user groups, and it is just not on to try and dump pre-conceived notions about gentrifying the area onto businesses reliant on the port and onto the community,” Ms Putt said.

“Is it that the Lennon government have assumed that the construction of a transport hub at Brighton and designation of the railyards as the site for the new hospital will close Hobart as a working port, something that has never been made explicit and is unacceptable.”

“It is imperative that the people get a say at the outset about the future of our port, not the usual Lennon government version of consultation which is to tell people what will happen, and the Premier has to explain right now what his government’s thinking is on this very important matter and why Tasports have not been included in discussions over the future of areas currently under their control.”

“Why is the Premier in the bunker over this one?”

“Is there more Lennon secrecy in play here, and have any developers been in discussions with government about Macquarie wharf, for example?”

“Nothing is surer than that the people of Hobart will not want a plastic fantastic version of Darling Harbour, and that we need a thorough ranging community discussion about the future of the Hobart port before it is stampeded as the knock on effect of other government decisions.”

“Much effort has gone into promoting Hobart as a port for Antarctic resupply, with China and Russia showing interest in using the port to support their scientific shipping, and we also expect to continue to attract cruise ships.”

“The working port is integral to the character and heritage of Hobart, so more than lip service must be paid to this,’ Ms Putt concluded.

小錢外交魅力無窮 全球綠人聯盟承認台灣的正式完整會籍

相較目前國內的外交醜聞事件，卻也同時有台灣在世界發光的正面外交捷報-「小錢作外交、綠人立大功」的正面外交消息，有87個國家參加的巴西第二屆全球綠人會議(The Global Greens 2008)，台灣代表團證明了搞好外交不需花大錢，台灣綠黨是台灣唯一的國際政黨，全球綠人聯盟(Global Greens)則是極少數承認台灣為正式完整會員(Full membership)的國際組織，台灣也是亞太綠黨聯盟(APGN, Asia Pacific Greens Network)的正式發起會員國，這是中國綠黨僅能以「綠黨之友」間接參與所無法相比的。在「全球綠人的聯合國」裡，以環保、人權、氣候變遷等普世價值、與生態多樣化、和平非暴力、草根民主等綠黨核心價值，建立成功的環保外交。涵蓋各社運領域的22人台灣代表團今日召開外交成果發表會，台灣代表團團長潘翰聲表示：在大會所通過的三項重大決議「聲援圖博人權」與「核能不能作為解決氣候變遷的選項」、「立即釋放綠黨精神領袖貝丹考（Ingrid Betancourt）」中，台灣即推動了「聲援圖博」與「反核」等二項台灣相關主決議；台灣青年代表在「全球青年綠人（GYG, Global Young Greens）會議」所報告的「蘇花糕餅舖」報告分享，被譽為最酷的行動案例、受各國反高速公路運動者支持、日本虹與綠組織也將取經；不只綠色公民行動聯盟總幹事崔愫欣代表亞太綠黨聯盟(APGN, Asia Pacific Greens Network)致辭、讓關切中國議題的全球綠人認同未來就中國事務將諮詢台灣；台灣原住民代表發表氣候變遷對原住民社區的影響與介紹台灣原住民的生態智慧，與各國原住民倡議成立「全球原住民綠人論壇」。

一、如何爬出金錢外交的泥沼- 300萬與十億元的對比

台灣即將進行第二次政黨輪替，但是「金錢外交」有沒有輪替？此次綠人台灣代表團的外交費用約三百萬元，但其成果遠遠超過十億元的弊案。證明「小錢外交」的魅力，環保外交、人權外交的成本效益確實較高。
蠻野心足生態協會理事長文魯彬表示，以環保、人權、氣候變遷等普世價值與核心關注，不必花大錢也能搞好外交與世界接軌，過去數十年錯誤的金錢外交政策浪費太多的資源卻少有效益，台灣應拋棄邦交國數目的迷失。
台灣代表團團長潘翰聲認為，與中國進行的邦交國數目的競賽，在國內是導致無法監督的外交黑箱；在國際，常未能實質幫助我邦交國，部份資源流入有爭議的不穩定獨裁政權，反而招致國際批評。
高成炎也說，與台灣綠黨長期友善的歐洲綠黨聯盟，在歐盟議會裡2002 年、2003年、2005年、2006年，四度主導通過支持台灣加入世界衛生組織(WHO)、四度阻止解除中國武器禁運，有助台海區域和平穩定，都是基於普世價值的正確行動。民間團體基於普世價值在國際空間的實質參與，才是未來外交政策的正確道路，希望提供朝野兩大政黨與社會各界參考。

二、外交實質參與—台灣以正式會員參與兩項決議文的起草與表決

台灣以正式完整會員地位，首度參與重要國際會議的主決議文的起草推動，是外交實質參與的外交成就。
全球綠人大會以多數共識決通過的三項重大決議「聲援圖博(Tibet)人權」與「核能不能作為解決氣候變遷的選項」、「立即釋放綠黨精神領袖貝丹考（Ingrid Betancourt）與政治犯」中，台灣即推動了「聲援圖博」與「反核」等二項台灣相關主決議。
聲援圖博人權與改善中國人權狀況，一直是全球綠黨基於普世人權的關注焦點，至於採行全球抵制的行動或柔性勸說以促進中國的和平轉變，未有一致看法，但是促進中國與西藏的理性對話則有高度共識，大會通過「聲援圖博(Tibet)人權」的重要主決議，相信仍有重要影響力，而台灣於決議形成過程的積極發言討論，對於中國政治狀況的了解與語文優勢，讓關切中國議題的全球綠人普遍認同，未來不論是在圖博人權事務與跟跨國環境污染與勞動條件的監督等，將把台灣作為重要諮詢對象。
而台灣與日本共同的提案「核能不應作為氣候危機的解決方案」則指出，全球面臨氣候暖化危機，卻也造成部分國家開始推廣核能，作為對抗氣候暖化的工具，然而核能隱藏的風險、龐大經費、溫室氣體排放，以及對弱勢原住民族的權益侵害，卻未被提及和妥善處理。台灣代表綠色公民行動聯盟秘書長崔愫欣表示，「在全球綠人憲章當中，反核已是基本價值。然而面對氣候變遷危機，部分國家政府卻以此作為藉口，重提核能計畫。」這項提議要求各國會員，綠黨和環境團體，應敦促各國政府提供多樣的能源來源和節約政策，而非強力推廣核電廠的興建。

三、青年原住民為台灣發聲—台灣在會議的能見度

由台灣青年抗暖化聯盟3位大學生帶來的「蘇花糕餅舖—青年成功阻擋高速公路興建」案例分享，讓各國與會人士驚豔，現場掌聲不斷，譽為最酷的行動案例。青年抗暖化聯盟說明他們如何透過架網站、印說帖、製作廣告和動畫、舉辦論壇工作坊等行動，成功阻擋蘇花高興建，並讓議題深化，讓更多人關心高速公路興建對環境永續造成的問題。台大保育社代表張傳佳說，簡報後在不只日本地方議會有相當實力的「虹與綠」組織代表，主動向他們索取反建蘇花高的動畫，要帶回日本作為行動參考，各國反高速公路運動者也高度肯定、詢問後續國際串連行動。另外也成功募集各國綠人的照片與簽名，讓反建高速公路的行動國際化，得到40多位青年的支持，未來將在蘇花糕餅舖上留下全球青年綠人的聲音。
台灣原住民代表與各國原住民代表，基於氣候變遷對原住民社區的影響，有深入緊密的互動，曾參與「聯合國原住民論壇」的台灣原住民代表溫俊賢向各國介紹台灣原住民的生態智慧，與各國商討核廢料傾倒、採礦等對原住民的危害與環境正義問題，溫俊賢與畢小樂並與各國原住民於大會中共同倡議成立「全球原住民綠人論壇」。

四、綠色行動未來: 從全球綠色憲章到2008聖保羅宣言、21世紀的21點

全球綠人（The Greens）是指以綠黨或環境及社會改革運動為志業的綠色政治運動者。他們承諾用和平非暴力的手段，在國家、社會及個人間進行合作，以作為全球安全的基礎。第一屆的全球綠人大會在2001年於澳洲坎培舉行，當時來自全球各地的綠人決議設置一個負責組織這個定期會議的網絡－The Global Greens。當時也訂定出一套經過認可的全球綠色憲章（Global Greens Charter），以作為全球綠人的原則信條及政治行動綱領。在此次2008年的第二屆全球綠人會議，延續訂定了「能源生質能、後京都提案、永續城市、綠人未來、氣候變遷」等五大議題的「聖保羅宣言」，以及「給21世紀的21點」（21 points for 21th century）作為未來全球綠色行動的指引方針。
台灣代表團涵蓋環保運動者、勞工運動者、農民、學者、空間規劃專業者、台灣原住民、大學生、及隨行媒體等，各社運領域的22名成員廣受注意，而在等主議程起草討論、參與各工作坊的積極發言，推動與會各國代表的實質交流，各國綠黨籍國會議員表達訪問台灣的意願，希望台灣綠黨安排，不少各國綠黨代表也願意回國後，幫助台灣提昇國際空間的外交工作。

五、後續計畫: 爭取主辦2009年亞太綠人(APGN)會議與21世紀21點的在地化

全球綠黨的政治實力不容小看，全世界超過70個國家有綠黨，就地域別以歐洲綠黨聯盟、美洲綠黨聯盟、亞太綠黨聯盟、非洲綠黨聯盟等運作。各國綠黨國會總席次超過350 席，其中在歐洲有250席，在歐盟議會綠黨席次有42席，是第四大黨。全世界綠黨籍的內閣部長有12席，在許多聯合執政的歐盟國家，綠黨大多取得環保部長與外交部長等重要職務。在美洲，巴西國會議員有23席、墨西哥國會議員有14席。在亞太地區，澳洲國會議員有5席；紐西蘭國會議員6席、日本一席。以推動「政治代理人」著名的日本「全國市民政治網路」，除了參議員一席、包括四席東京都議員在內、51席的區議員或市議員，在全國有140縣市區町層級的議員，促進政治公開透明化與掃除地方黑金派系。
大會中另一項熱門話題是2009年亞太綠黨聯盟年會的主辦權，為了與全球綠人的實力接軌、壯大綠色力量，除了台灣，韓國、巴基斯坦、蒙古也競相爭取2009年主辦權，目前將視各國計畫延至八月決定，但此行全球綠人大會台灣代表團的積極表現有目共睹，相信對爭取台灣主辦權大有助益。
此行所累積影音記錄，將剪輯拍成記錄片，作為國際串連與草根培力的影音資料庫。而後續台灣綠黨與全球綠人台灣之友會將於國內各地舉辦60場座談會，將基於綠黨核心價值的2001年坎培拉年會的全球綠色憲章、2008年會的聖保羅宣言與21世紀21點方針，作在地化的草根培力。

全球綠人大會台代表團
1. 文魯彬 蠻野心足生態協會 理事長（環境影響評估）
2. 溫炳原 台灣環境行動網理事（綠色政治）
3. 潘翰聲 台灣環境行動網理事（綠色政治）
4. 崔愫欣 綠色公民行動聯盟總幹事 (反核/紀錄片工作者)
5. 高成炎 台灣綠黨創黨召集人（生質能源）
6. 林震洋 台灣綠黨中執委（綠色青年）
7. 李涵茹 台大保育社（反蘇花高青年）
8. 張傳佳 台大保育社（反蘇花高青年）
9. 李宣衡 台大保育社（反蘇花高青年）
10.柯逸民 人民火大聯盟代表 (工運組織串連)
11.蘇雅婷 人民火大聯盟代表 (工運組織串連)
12.周佳慧 專業者都市改革組織代表（永續城市）
13.余素慧 專業者都市改革組織代表（永續城市）
14.李佩珍 蠻野心足生態協會秘書（都市設計）
15.劉志中 蠻野心足生態協會代表 (永續能源)
16.曾瑾珮 水患治理監督聯盟秘書（水患治理）
17.陳欽全 台中農民代表 (永續農業)
18.張婷華 全球綠人台灣之友會籌備處秘書（公衛與氣候變遷）
19.李育琴 環境資訊協會 (環境新聞報導)
20.溫俊賢 原住民代表（聯合國原住民論壇）
21.畢小樂 原住民代表 (紀錄片工作者)
22.鄭渟渟 荒野保護協會（抗暖化）

The Tasmanian Greens today called on the Minister for Crown Lands, Mr Llewellyn, to come clean with the community about the ‘process’ that exists in Tasmania for developers who target Crown Land, following the revelation that the Lennon government is in the process of doing a deal with a developer over public land on the foreshore at the St Helens Esplanade before there being any public notification that a local foreshore playground is being targeted.

Greens Member for Lyons, Tim Morris MP, said that while there is a process for applying to lease Crown Land for development it is presumed that such applications must fit with the appropriate zoning determinations, but this particular secret deal is of grave concern because it appears to be in breach of the playground site’s recreational zoning classification.

Mr Morris also revealed that there already is a large crown lease, already zoned commercial available for purchase nearby, and has called on both the Break O’ Day Council and the Minister to reject the developer’s request for access to the playground on the grounds that there is other land available that is zoned appropriately.

“It appears that under this Labor government developers are able to select a piece of public land, no matter its tenure or zoning, and then secretly get the thumbs-up from the Minister and the local council, prior to any public notification which only happens effectively after a decision has been made,” Mr Morris said.

“The Minister for Crown Lands, Mr Llewellyn, and the Break O’Day Council have been exposed after the Greens revealed yesterday revealed that the council is tonight going to discuss in closed council a proposal for a commercial development on land zoned for public recreation on the Esplanade foreshore at St Helens.”

“Additional to this, the Greens have since learned that there is a large crown lease, already zoned commercial available for purchase nearby, so it is totally inappropriate for any developers to target land that is zoned and used for recreation in this way.”

 “It is now incumbent upon both the Council and the Minister to say clearly that the answer to the developer’s request is a loud “NO”, you cannot access this parcel of public land, because there is another site that is both available and zoned appropriately.”

“Are we seeing in St Helens another Ralphs Bay-style process, where a developer selects a prime foreshore site on public land and then is able to have secret negotiations and get some sort of pre-approval from the Minister, and even the local council, prior to having any obligation to make their intentions publicly known?”

“This secretive process regarding access to Crown Land results, once the proposal is made public, in the presumption being in the favour of the developer, and the community is virtually ‘dared’ to raise concerns, and it is high time that presumption is challenged especially when it comes to access to public assets.”

“The public land along the coast of Tasmania should not be for sale or for commercial development, unless it is zoned for commercial use and the Minister should make a public statement to that effect, after all we have been through an extensive Crown Lands Assessment and Classification (CLAC) process and I am sure that this land was not identified for selling or development to benefit a private operator,” Mr Morris said.

Further Information: Link to an advertisement for nearby land that is available

http://www.robertsre.com.au/cgi-bin/clients/robre/profile.cgi?gid=23278&search=1&region=2&searchid=5&ForRent=0&proptype=&pcid=0&lower=0&upper=0&lowerr=0&upperr=0&arealowersqm=0&areauppersqm=0&type=ForSale&propertyid=1707613

 

The Tasmanian Greens today called on the Minister for Crown Lands, David Llewellyn, to either confirm or rule out that there is a secret deal being done between the Government, Break O’Day Council and a local developer to hand over parts of the Crown Land on St Helens foreshore for commercial development.

Greens Member for Lyons, Tim Morris MP, said that rumours were rife in the St Helens area that the Government was in discussions with the Break O’Day Council and a private developer about the possible construction of a large commercial development just north of the boat ramp on the Esplanade, ever since surveyors were seen working in the area.

Mr Morris also said that the Break O Day Council Agenda for Monday’s meeting lists for discussion under the Closed Council Meeting section, “Crown Land Lease, St Helen’s Foreshore”.

 “I call upon Mr Llewellyn, the Minister for Crown Lands, to clarify whether or not the government is in discussions with anyone about a change of use for the crown land foreshore at St Helens, and if so to immediately disclose to the public the nature of those negotiations,” Mr Morris said.

“It would be totally inappropriate for any development to occur on the Esplanade foreshore without there being an explicit change to the Planning Scheme, following extensive public consultation and without a specific development proposal in existence;to do anything else will reek of a special deal for another Labor mate.”

“I have already submitted an FOI request for information, but hope the Minister can make an unequivocal statement that his government will not allow developers to pick sites that take their fancy on public land and then have the government enter into secret negotiations for them to alienate it for commercial development.”

 “Of further interest is the fact that the Break O Day Council agenda for Monday night (tomorrow) there is listed for discussion as part of a closed meeting, “Crown Lease St Helens Foreshore, Georges Bay (COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE)”, and there is increasing community concern that this item relates to the rumours about the government having done a secret deal over public land north of the boat ramp on the Esplanade.”

“The St Helens community deserve straight answers about whether this significant piece of Crown Land is about to be handed over to private developers, instead of being informed of the outcome as a fait accompli, and they deserve to know what is going on before tomorrow’s closed Council meeting,” Mr Morris said.

 

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

Agenda Item from Break O’Day Council meeting on the 12 May 2008 and a Link to the Agenda

Pursuant to Regulation 15 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2005 that Council move into Closed Council.

05/08.18.0 CLOSED COUNCIL

05/08.18.1 Questions on Notice — Clr D Clement — Crown Lease St Helens Foreshore, Georges Bay (COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE) — Closed Council Item Pursuant To Section 15(2)F Of The Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2005

05/08.18.2 St Helens Foreshore - Closed Council Item Pursuant To Section 15(2)H

Of The Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2005

http://www.bodc.tas.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/Council_Agenda_12_May_2008_Public.pdf

Advertiser Letter to the Editor (unpublished) on WorkCover 10 May 2008

The Tasmanian Greens today said that a State government submission to the Federal government, which fails to mention the possibility of commercialising the Basslink fibre optic cable, demonstrates the lack of a Cabinet strategy to deliver broadband services in Tasmania, and is a tacit admission that government bungling has lead to a situation in which it is extremely unlikely that the basslink fibre will be commercialised unless the government steps in with extra funding.

Greens Deputy Leader and Shadow ICT Spokesperson Nick McKim MP said that the submission to the National Broadband Network Panel of Experts, which was signed on behalf of DPAC Secretary Evan Rolley on 28 March 2008, also admits to major problems in broadband services in Tasmania.

Mr McKim said that the submission made admissions including:

“…the backhaul cost structure [across Bass Strait] prevents national ISPs from being able to profitably offer their national internet package deals in this State.”;

“…the Tasmanian government announced State-owned utility Aurora Energy as our strategic partner to commercialise this [state government fibre optic] network on the strength of their commitment to lower wholesale backhaul prices [across Bass Strait] …”;

“However, contestable backhaul across Bass Strait is critical to the success of this strategy [commercializing the state government fibre optic network]”;

“The key telecommunications challenge facing Tasmania is a lack of infrastructure competition and from this lack of a commercial incentive to provide nationally available broadband services in Tasmania. The incumbent currently has a monopoly on backhaul access across Bass Strait and on fixed line telecommunications infrastructure within Tasmania. Market quotes over the past two years indicate that the cost of capacity via the incumbent’s infrastructure from Hobart-to-Melbourne is about five times higher than from Melbourne to Adelaide and up to 10 times the rate between Melbourne and Sydney.”

 

“The submission acknowledges the massive problems which have Tasmania languishing at the bottom of every national measure of connectivity, and its failure to propose the commercialisation of the Basslink fibre is an admission that the government has completely bungled the contract negotiations with CitySpring.”

“Tasmanian businesses and online communities deserve answers, and Treasurer Michael Aird must now emerge and explain exactly what the contractual situation is with CitySpring, and why the Basslink fibre has not been lit.”

“It has become blindingly obvious that Tasmania needs a Minister for ICT to drive strategic thinking and government focus on this crucial issue.”

Mr McKim also labelled Premier Paul Lennon’s assertion that Tasmanian needed federal government assistance to provide data transmission competition across Bass Strait as ‘absolute rubbish’.

“The Premier has pulled out the old ‘blame the Feds’ line in an attempt to divert the debate away from the incompetence of his government, but all he’s done is make a complete fool of himself.”

“If Mr Lennon knew what he was talking about he would realise that any fibre laid across Bass Strait under the Federal government’s NBN process will not be available for many years at best, and will likely also require significant state government investment.”

“It’s frankly embarrassing that Tasmania has a Premier who is more concerned with pulping our forests than 21st century technology like broadband.” 

The Tasmanian Greens today said that the response to their Department of Justice Freedom of Information request for all documentation relating to the magistrate candidate selection process, that precipitated the downfall of ex-Deputy Premier Steve Kons, has revealed that the Department has failed to retain a copy of the Cabinet brief relating to the appointment of Simon Cooper a magistrate, despite receiving confirmation that the Department had drawn up such a document.

Greens Shadow Justice spokesperson Nick McKim MP, who submitted the FoI request on the 8th of April this year, said that he hoped that the document had not been destroyed to protect the government from political embarrassment, and demanded that the Government explain why it was not retained by the agency.

“It is extraordinary that the original Cabinet Brief to note the appointment of Mr Cooper should not be available from the Department responsible for its drafting, and this revelation raises serious questions,” Mr McKim said.

“This is a disturbing twist to the Shreddergate saga, to discover under our FoI request that the Justice Department, which was responsible for drafting the Cabinet brief noting the intention to appoint Mr Cooper as Magistrate no longer exists in their records.”

Mr McKim said that the response to the Greens’ FoI response contains a background briefing note that confirms that the Justice Department had drawn up the Cabinet Brief regarding Mr Cooper and the magistrate position, but the briefing paper then goes on to say that the ‘…Brief in relation to Mr Cooper was not retained by the agency’.[1]

“So it now seems that not only did the ex-Attorney General Steve Kons seek to destroy the hard-copy in his possession at the time, but that the Justice Department also destroyed its copy or copies.”

“Why did the Justice Department not retain the original Cabinet brief in relation to Mr Cooper, was the Department requested or instructed to remove such files, and is it standard departmental practice to alter historical records in this manner?”

“This latest twist in the Shreddergate saga makes Mr Kons’ excuse that he had merely changed his mind over his preferred magistrate appointee look more and more feeble, and instead increases concern that political interference was behind the sudden withdrawal of Mr Cooper’s appointment.”

“The FoI Background Briefing Note also makes it clear that the Cooper Cabinet Brief was drafted by the Department ‘in early August’ but then was required to prepare a new Cabinet Brief nominating Mr Glenn Hay which was signed by the Attorney on the 8th of August — and we have yet to receive from Mr Kons a satisfactory explanation as to what happened to cause him to change his mind in such a short and hurried manner.”

Mr McKim also said that the Greens are currently exploring appeal options as well as whether this failure to retain documentation breaches the Archives Act 1983.

[1] Briefing Note from the Justice Department Secretary to the Attorney General, 8 April 2008;pg 2.

The Tasmanian Greens today called upon the Minister for Infrastructure, Mr Lennon to guarantee that the Fingal rail line will remain open and to get his head out of the sand and do something to stop Pacific National continuing to close the Tasmanian rail operations train by train.

Greens Shadow Infrastructure spokesperson Tim Morris MP said that last year Pacific National stopped carting coal to Boyer, despite the opportunity to get a back load of coal from the Kimbolton mine and now it is possible that the Railton contract may be lost;forcing the already over loaded roads to become even more crowded and dangerous, whilst the railway rots.

 “It is a clear failure of the Lennon Labor Government that it is not proactive;it either gets a commitment from Pacific National or finds another operator who does actually want to run trains in Tasmania,” Mr Morris said.

“The Department of Infrastructure seems to be continuing with its lazy approach by claiming it is just a commercial decision for the companies involved, when it is actually a key strategic decision for the state government about minimising the heavy freight on our roads and maximising the use of the very under utilised rail network.”

“It is time that the Infrastructure Minister came to grips with the fact that he is supposed to be looking after the states infrastructure instead of spending his time running around the country trying to get a football team in the AFL;he has a Sports Minister for that job.”

“Empty coal wagons are already sitting at Conara because this Government was not proactive in ensuring the Boyer contract was continued causing a significant increase of trucks on the Boyer Road, Midlands and Esk Highways and if more wagons are piling up at Conara it will be a monument to the Lennon Labor Governments ineptitude,” Mr Morris said.

The Tasmanian Greens today released leaked documents that formed part of Bell Bay Power’s 2006 proposal to the Lennon State government, before Labor decided to sell-off the power station, which reveal that the government had before them a proposal to transform the station to become a stand alone viable sustainable generator competing in the National Energy Market (NEM), and which would also have remained in public hands.

Greens Shadow Energy spokesperson and Member for Bass Kim Booth MP said today that the leaked documents, which form a 22-page power point summary of Bell Bay Power’s business case, revealed another sorry saga of deception and incompetence by the Lennon government, and which raises serious questions about the motives behind the sale of Bell Bay Power Station, as well as the true net benefit to Hydro Tasmania that was received.

Mr Booth also called on the government to explain serious discrepancies between the information contained in the documents and statements made in the Parliament by the then Energy Minister, David Llewellyn, regarding the cost of the pipe line capacity.

“These leaked documents that summarise Bell Bay Power’s Business Case that they presented to the Labor government in August of 2006, reveal yet again a sorry saga of government incompetence when it comes to secure the best energy options for Tasmania, as well as revealing the extent Labor will go to misinform the public about the decisions they make,” Mr Booth said.

“The Lennon government sold the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Bell Bay power station last year to Alinta, claiming a sale price of $120 million which included $90 million for the pipe line capacity agreement. At the time, Energy Minister David Llewellyn told parliament that, ‘the net benefit of the sale to Hydro Tasmania is $120&nbsp;million.&nbsp;Alinta will provide an up-front cash payment of $30&nbsp;million, and will purchase the assets and site. The pipeline capacity agreement between Hydro Tasmania and Alinta, which secured long-term gas supply for the power station, will also be terminated early, saving Hydro Tasmania $90&nbsp;million’,”[1]

“However this leaked document tells an entirely different story, revealing that Hydro Tasmania had already written off the pipeline capacity agreement to zero in its accounts (see slides 4 and 7), a fact that raises the possibility that Energy Minister Llewellyn misled the Parliament over the true net benefit of the sale of Bell bay Power Station.”

“The document also reveals that the Lennon government ignored advice to create a stand alone SOC (State Owned Company) that would have retained public ownership of the power station while delivering approximate Earnings Before Interest d Tax (EBIT) of over $32 million (see slide 15), as well as “[r]emoving revenue leakage from State electricity businesses to interstate entities’.” (see slide 16).

“The Greens were the only party to vote against the privatisation of the Bell Bay Power Station and raised the issue of the low return to the taxpayer, noting the fact that Hydro were still obliged to pay around $56 million for the three newly purchased gas turbines which went with the sale.”

“This effectively meant that the government gave away Bell Bay Power for a net loss of $16 million plus as yet undisclosed costs of de contamination of the site.”

&nbsp;“The leaked documents reveal that the Lennon Labor government acted against advice that would have seen the public retain control of its energy generation assets and earn between $16 and $20 million per year profit that could have gone into investment in renewable energy projects, concessions on electricity tariffs or gone back into health and education.”

“The documents also show that under this proposal the power stations was to “become a stand alone viable sustainable generator competing in the NEM.” (see slide 22)

“Bell Bay Power station was ruthlessly slaughtered on the altar of privatisation by Lennon Labor who turned their back on the projected $16 to $20 million profits per annum available under public ownership.” (see Slide 15)

“Bell Bay Power is strategically important in our generation mix and it beggars belief that the government would give away a valuable public asset when advice showed that retention in public ownership was a viable and profitable alternative that met all Nation Competition requirements.”

‘Lennon’s Basslink gamble has saddled Tasmania with a $92 million dollar per year cable rent and now we discover, by leaked documents, that this incompetent and unaccountable government has torn up a massive $16 to $20 million projected profit per year that could have gone to other public projects.”

“Lennon Labor has axed a valuable plum tree that would have yielded fruit for generations to come and must now come clean with the truth about the reasons why they sold it in the first place.”

“The government has some serious explaining to do to answer the discrepancies between what Parliament was told at the time Bell Bay station was sold, and the details contained in this documentation.”

“Did Labor get bedazzled by the prospect of quick cash, so they convinced themselves to sell of a public asset that could now be assisting Tasmania as it faces an energy shortage?”

“It appears that at the time Labor was too keen to spend money promoting ill-advised projects such as the pulp mill, and racecourses that is was too quick to tear up public assets at fire-sale prices,” Mr Booth said.

Background Information: Relevant quotations from Hansard:

[The proposed sale of the Bell Bay Power Station represented] ‘the best possible scenario that could have been anticipated by the Government,’ [David Llewellyn, Hansard, Wednesday 18 April 2007, Part 2, “HYDRO-ELECTRIC CORPORATION ACT 1995 - SALE OF BELL BAY POWER STATION”]

“the net benefit of the sale to Hydro Tasmania is $120&nbsp;million.&nbsp;Alinta will provide an up-front cash payment of $30&nbsp;million, and will purchase the assets and site.&nbsp;The pipeline capacity agreement between Hydro Tasmania and Alinta, which secured long-term gas supply for the power station, will also be terminated early, saving Hydro Tasmania $90&nbsp;million.&nbsp;[David Llewellyn, Hansard, Wednesday 18 April 2007, Part 2, “HYDRO-ELECTRIC CORPORATION ACT 1995 - SALE OF BELL BAY POWER STATION”]

[1] David Llewellyn, Hansard, Wednesday 18 April 2007, Part 2, “HYDRO-ELECTRIC CORPORATION ACT 1995 - SALE OF BELL BAY POWER STATION”

The Tasmanian Greens today said that the ‘deafening silence’ from Treasurer Michael Aird on the government’s failure to commercialise the Basslink fibre optic cable is an acknowledgement that the government’s incompetence has failed consumers of broadband services in Tasmania.

Greens Deputy Leader and Shadow ICT spokesperson Nick McKim MP also said that the state government should follow the lead of the Rudd federal government and many other states and create the position of Minister for Broadband and Information and Communications Technology (ICT).

“The government’s failure to provide competition in data transmission across Bass Strait is disadvantaging Tasmanian business and online communities, and Treasurer Michael Aird is treating these people with contempt by failing to engage with the issue.”

“Given the importance of broadband to Tasmania’s social and economic future, Mr Aird must come clean and explain how the current debacle was allowed to occur, and release some specific timelines for resolving the issue.”

Mr McKim said that the Federal government and most state governments have Ministers for ICT, and Tasmania is suffering due to the lack of focus on these issues resulting from the government’s failure to understand the importance of broadband to Tasmania’s future.

“If Tasmania had a Minister for ICT the government would have someone responsible for developing strategy and implementing programs, but Tasmania unfortunately is lagging behind in this crucial area.”

“Victoria even has a Broadband office of Broadband Access, something that Tasmania’s consumers of online services can only dream about,” Mr McKim said.