Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here’s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

Lennon's New Tasmania

By Peter Henning - posted Monday, 14 April 2008

“If the law is unjust, then access to the law is not access to justice” (Julian Burnside 2006).

On April 2, 2008, Environment Minister Peter Garrett gave the green light to Gunns to start bulk earthwork operations on the site of their proposed pulp mill in Tasmania’s Tamar Valley

This has occurred in the aftermath of the first anniversary of Gunns withdrawing from the legislatively defined planning processes in Tasmania for the approval of Australia’s biggest pulp mill, amid new revelations that millions of dollars of extra public money may be funnelled into essential infrastructure for the mill.


And it has occurred just one month after a senior Tasmanian official of the CMFEU, speaking on behalf of his union on national television, described opponents of the pulp mill as “terrorists”, who should be subject to the full force of the law, by which he clearly meant the Howard anti-terrorist legislation.

During 2007 the standard term used by Premier Paul Lennon for opponents of the mill, whoever they were, became simply “extremists”. The position now taken by the leadership of the CMFEU is a step made possible by this groundwork.

Just as during the bitter divisiveness of the Howard decade, when language was carefully and deliberately crafted to create fear and prejudice about difference for crass political gain, for example by transforming political refugees from “asylum seekers” to “queue jumpers”, to “illegals”, the language used in Tasmania against critics of the pulp mill has gradually proceeded in the same direction.

It is a process, as Australia’s pre-eminent human rights lawyer, Julian Burnside, has said, which enables language “to smuggle uncomfortable ideas into comfortable minds”. The notion of citizens who oppose Gunns’ pulp mill as “terrorists” is but a small step from Lennon’s term “extremists”, just as “queue jumpers” soon became “illegals”.

The Premier of Tasmania, if nothing else, is a keen apprentice of John Howard, especially in the politics of division as a means to implement a neo-liberal agenda in the interests of corporate power. How better to do that than by putting all dissent into the “extremist” tray, courting the “battlers” in true Howard fashion, and leaving the Liberals me-tooing about the main game of all-and-everything for the big end of town - or in this case the biggest end of town - Gunns.

The result has been predictable enough. In relation to the pulp mill there is a political-corporate-union-business alliance, involving both main parties, Gunns, employer groups and the CMFEU. Lennon Labor, Hodgman Liberal, the CMFEU, the Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Gunns are cosily all arm-in-arm. It is in the context of this odd and unhealthy political alliance that a judgment can be made about the statement of mill opponents as “terrorists”, and perhaps equally significantly, of the silence that has greeted this pronouncement in the main corridors of power.


Just over one year ago, soon after Tasmania’s independent planning authority, the RPDC, informed the Premier’s Department that Gunns’ plans for the pulp mill in the Tamar Valley were still critically deficient in some key environmental areas, Gunns withdrew from the legislatively defined planning-assessment process and Lennon quickly established a special fast-track process, designed specifically for Gunns.

The areas identified by the RPDC as requiring additional information from the proponent were not now pursued. Lennon then turned the Tasmanian parliament into a “planning” authority to replace the RPDC as both the recommending authority and the decision-making body, and all politicians of both main parties, and a majority of “independent” upper house members, agreed to pass legislation, already perused by Gunns, in a very tight time-framework mandated to suit Gunns’ stated timetable.

In this way the Pulp Mill Assessment Act 2007 became law in Tasmania in July 2007, as did Section 11 of the Act, headed “Limitation of rights of appeal”, which reads as follows:

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

First published in the Tasmanian Times on March 31, 2008.

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

9 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Peter Henning is a former teacher and historian. He is a former Tasmanian olive grower, living in Melbourne.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Peter Henning

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 9 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy