No, that wasn't in 2022, but in 2009, on a committee that included former Windermere MLC Ivan Dean and chaired by former Rosevears MLC Kerry Finch.

Thirteen years later kanamaluka/Tamar Estuary is managed with a "advisory body" described as essentially a toothless tiger by river health advocates and an estuary system that has not seen improvement in the last 16 years of environmental reporting.

A quick Google search will show you that there have been at least eight reports detailing the "future health of kanamaluka/Tamar Estuary" since 2009.

And that doesn't factor in 16 years of reports every second year from the Tamar and Esk Rivers project, run collaboratively with Tamar NRM, that documents the seven zones of the estuary and their environmental report card.

READ MORE: Where is the funding for women's legal services?

The same report card that's shown the Launceston zone has been in poor ecosystem health for the entirety of the reporting period, except for one year when it was in failure.

That, by any means, is not an exhaustive list, there is likely to be many more and iterations of the same report, such as implementation plans (the same as the one we are now waiting on from the state government) and draft management plans.

The Rockliff Liberal Government has shown that it's not afraid to take action on divisive topics - restoring the House of Assemby to 35 seats is proof of that.

So why does it take report after report, plan after vision, to see any real action on a project that will held in stead not only for this generation but for future generations?

The Tamar Estuary clean up would provide future generations with tourism and would provide an icon for the community, so why has nothing changed in years?

Health of the Tamar Estuary has been gracing the pages of The Examiner for decades. The front page of The Examiner on August 3, 1998 declared the state's political leaders of both parties would be unveiling dedicated policies to managing the sediment.

The silt levels had reached "critical levels" with the skipper of the Lady Stelfox reporting up to three trips a day were cancelled. Environment Minister at the time Peter Hodgman called it a "very serious issue" and Opposition Leader Jim Bacon said he would release a policy to address the issue.

READ MORE: Titmus and Baker claim opening day gold medals at Games

There were fears then that rising waters and the build-up could inundate Launceston in a flood event.

In 2007 the City of Launceston infrastructure manager Geoff Brayford said a "significant flood" down the Tamar was needed to clear out the accumulated sediment.

An advertising feature called Our River in 2017 looked at the issues facing the estuary, with advocates such as developer Errol Stewart and the past leaders of NRM North discussing the issues of sediment and the impact of reduced flows.

The Tamar Estuary is Tasmania's largest estuarine system and encompasses 70-kilometres of catchments from Bell Bay to Launceston.

It is also the confluence of the North and South Esk rivers, literally ground zero for where the tidal flows come together.

Historic and human intervention have combined to add stressors to the Tamar Estuary, such as the traditional management of effluent and fertiliser run-off during agricultural practices, along with a combined stormwater and sewerage system in Launceston.

The old system has not been upgraded to cope with Launceston's growing population, and as such, can't cope with peak demand during wet weather.

The overflow system means that it discharges untreated sewage into the estuary to cope with the increase in demand and adds to the pathogen levels in the water column.

Those are the issues that face the Launceston to Legana zone, but the estuary is also has marine zones that face other pressures.

READ MORE: Tasmania Police provide update on stabbing incident in Devonport

The estuary is one of the most diverse ecosystems in the world, despite its challenges and all the solutions to improving its health are costly - that's the first thing.

Any government or leaders needs to put their money where their mouth is - and it's quite likely the Tasmanian Government has other competing priorities for funds (health? homelessness? housing?).

In 2009 a Legislative Council committee made 11 recommendations to the Labor Government of the time regarding the health of the Tamar.

At the top of the list was the establishment of a statutory authority to manage the Tamar Estuary and Esk Rivers.

Former MLC Ivan Dean, who was a member of the committee said during his 16-year career in politics the Tamar Estuary's health was the number one constituent issue brought to his attention.

"It's a disgrace, that in 2022 we are dumping raw sewage into the estuary...you wouldn't see that in a third world country," he said.

"It's appalling that there has been little to no action done on the issue, politicians see it as being too hard," he said.

Mr Dean said he'd raised the issue in Parliament a number of times and had been dissatisfied with the response.

READ MORE: Tributes continue to pour in for young Tasmanian boxer Danielle Clayton

He said he understood dredging all the sediment would be far too costly and environmental degrading an exercise, but there were actions that could be done now to improve the estuary.

"The release of sewage into the estuary is a disgrace," he said.

Mr Dean said he would stand by the recommendations of the Legislative Council inquiry in 2009 and said a statutory body was overdue to be established.

"It's absolutely disappointing that any solution to the river has been stalled," he said.

"At that time there were 10 or 12 groups responsible for the Tamar, but no one really in charge, what it needs is one strong statutory authority."

The increased pollution of the Tamar Estuary and the lack of action doesn't fall down on one of Tasmania's leaders. Rather, it's a failure of successive politicians of all colours.

In 2009, when the Legislative Council first floated the idea of an independent statutory authority to govern the Tamar, the Labor Party was in power in Tasmania.

Environment Minister was long-term Labor member Michelle O'Byrne, who has been a strong advocate for the Tamar Estuary in the past.

Ms O'Byrne failed to respond to a request for deadline on this story, despite having several days to do so.

However, the other tipping point in the story of the Tamar is arguably in 2017, with the establishment of the Launceston City Deal.

One of the key aims of the Launceston City Deal was $140 million in funding for "river health improvements", namely to the combined sewerage/stormwater system.

A state government spokesperson said the 2009 Legislative Council report was rejected by the government of the day.

However it said it remained committed to reviewing governance.

"TEMT is an advisory body to government to improve and deliver a healthier estuary. Its primary purpose is to oversee the delivery of the Tamar Estuary River Health Action Plan, leveraging $140 million through the Launceston City Deal to improve the health of the kanamaluka/Tamar Estuary. This work is well underway and due for completion in 2025," the spokesperson said.

Estuary champions have long criticised the role of TEMT, with prominent Launceston developer Errol Stewart saying it had failed in the role it was set up for.

Mr Stewart, the architect behind many developments along the riverbank, including the Seaport Marina and the Silo Hotel, has floated many plans to improve sediment in the area.

He also owns the land near Kings Wharf, which he hopes to develop in the future.

Other advocates such as the Yacht Club and the Rowing Club have argued TEMT has not consulted them, as river users, on how best to manage current and future needs.

The spokesperson said it "would be irresponsible" to make any decision on governance without considering all implications.

"The Tasmanian Liberal Government committed to reviewing governance models for the Tamar Estuary in the 2021 election. State Growth is currently undertaking work on future governance arrangements which is expected to be provided to the Government for consideration later this year," the spokesperson said.

"It would be irresponsible to make any decision without taking advice and carefully considering all of the implications, including current regulators responsibilities so as not to duplicate functions or increase red tape.

"The governance review sits independently to TEMT which manages any perceived or potential conflict of interest they may have in their own existence, and as such it was not appropriate for it to be part of the 10-year vision."

What do you think? Send us a letter to the editor: