One thing I would like to see for future controversial developments. A more staged gate approval process rather than all in one. It's too hard to get planning approval for anything these days (at least at the local level). I think the main reason for this is in your comment "I would support a smaller scale pulp mill in a different location." This style of reasoning is almost always offered as the reason for rejection. The 'I'm for it, just not here' response is far too easy and often based on nothing more than a parochial NIMBY attitude.
If a development (e.g. another mill) of a certain size could receive provisional approval on broader matters (e.g. timber supply) prior to a specific location being selected, I'd be all for it. However that's not how it works at present. I think our planning laws are flawed nationwide, this is why they are always being bypassed. Otherwise nothing would get built anymore. NIMBY is turning into BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone). Until the planning laws change, I support the work arounds our governments and businesses are being forced to employ. Otherwise we'd have no industry at all.
GNS Price at posting:
0.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
