Letters to editors

Following are letters that James Hardie has written to the Editors of various publications, correcting errors made in their reports about James Hardie's asbestos compensation proposal. Click on a link to open the PDF of the complete letter.

• 11.10.06  Letter to the Editor - The Australian
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Australian in response to the article written by Ean Higgins, "Hardie gets warning on indemnities", which was published in The Australian on 9 October 2006. The article repeats many of the claims made in Mr Higgins' article of 4 October 2006 and, like that article, contains many inaccuracies. 
   22.04K

• 04.10.06  Letter to the Editor - The Australian
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Australian in response to Ean Higgins' article "Indemnity for Hardie directors 'unlawful'" which appeared in the Australian on 4 October 2006. Mr Higgins is wrong in asserting that James Hardie is acting unlawfully by providing indemnity to current and former officers who may be under investigation by ASIC. Indemnities for the purpose described in the company's Form 20-F are standard corporate practice and in James Hardie's case specifically limit indemnification to what is permitted by law. James Hardie believes that all such indemnities are in accordance with the relevant corporations law in each country where they apply.
   32.53K

• 03.10.06  Letter to the Editor - Daily Telegraph
  James Hardie has written to the editor of the Daily Telegraph in response to the article by Peter Gosnell, "Hardie gets another reprieve", which appeared in the Daily Telegraph of 3 October 2006. The statements that negotiations "had been slowed by the Australian Tax Office" and that "changes the ATO made to the final funding agreement...are now prolonging the fund's negotiations" are incorrect.
   16.01K
   
• 22.09.06  Letter to the Editor - The AustralianJames Hardie has written to the editor of The Australian in response to Robert Clow's "Criterion" article published in the Australian on 21 September 2006. The article once again repeats a number of myths which continue to be purported as facts by your newspaper.  Regrettably, this is not the first time these errors have had to be pointed out to The Australian.
   24.36K
   
• 21.09.06  Letter to the Editor - Sydney Morning Herald James Hardie has written to the Editor of the Sydney Morning Herald, noting that Elizabeth Knight's article on 20 September 2006, "Hardie - no gain, plenty of pain", unfortunately suffers from some unbalanced reporting of some key facts.
   23.67K
   
• 21.09.06  Letter to the Editor - The Daily Telegraph
  James Hardie has written to the editor of the Daily Telegraph, in response to the paper's editorial of Wednesday 20 September 2006, "What promises".  The editorial contains a number of myths about James Hardie which continue to be perpetuated by your newspaper as fact.
  
  The statement, "the building products conglomerate has battled every inch of the way to avoid its obligations to former employers (sic)," is incorrect and misleading in the extreme.  (We assume the reference to "employers" should be to "employees".)
   15.6K
   
• 20.09.06  Letter to the Editor - The Australian
  James Hardie has written to the Editor of The Australian, Ean Higgins ("Outrage as Hardie becomes American", 20 Sep 2006) must have been at a different James Hardie AIM from the one I attended. There was one question asked at the AIM concerning the nationality of incoming directors, but to call this "outrage" is a gross exaggeration.  It is a valid question and it received a considered response indicating the rationale behind the company's planned board renewal.
   14.5K
   
• 10.08.06  Letter to the Editor - The AustralianJames Hardie has written to the editor of The Australian in response to the article by Janet Albrechtsen, "Hardie do the right thing? Don't hold your breath" published in The Australian on 9 August 2006. The article suggests Ms Abrechtsen relied simply on previous inaccurate media reports for much of her information and has reached her conclusions without checking her facts.
   49.5K

• 28.07.06  Letter to the Editor - The Australian
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Australian in response to the article by Anthony McClellan, "Politicians smooth the way for Hardie" published on 27 July 2006.  Mr McClellan failed to contact James Hardie in relation to his story and by his own admission relied on the "media overall" as his source.  Given the significant impact media reporting has on shaping public opinion it is disappointing his article was published without any attempt to check the facts. The article is extremely misleading.  An unfortunate result of mistruths being repeated in the media is that those who are not close to the issue end up believing that what is reported is fact. 
   26.83K
   
• 26.07.06  Letter to the Editor - the Daily Telegraph
  James Hardie has written to the editor of the Daily Telegraph to advise that, contrary to the suggestion that James Hardie has "failed to act" on meeting with the Australian Taxation Office ("Hardie snubs Howard plea", Daily Telegraph, July 24, 2006), the company and its advisers have been in ongoing contact and discussions with the ATO for more than 16 months, including discussions in recent days over the Prime Minister's suggestion to meet and resolve the remaining tax issues. This point was made to the Daily Telegraph journalist covering the story on Monday.
   29.7K
   
• 30.06.06  Letter to the Editor - The Canberra Times
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Canberra Times in response to the paper's editorial on 29 June 2006 which the company says contain deveral errors and false accusations.
   26.8K
   
• 17.03.06  Letter to the Editor - The Sydney Morning HeraldJames Hardie has written to the editor of The Sydney Morning Herald in response to a letter to the Editor querying the rationale behind James Hardie's application for tax deductibility for its proposed payments to the voluntary asbestos compensation fund.
   26.95K
   
• 09.03.06  Letter to the Editor - The Daily TelegraphJames Hardie has written to the editor of The Daily Telegraph in response to The Daily Telegraph's article of Wednesday 8 March 2006, Hardie Victims Unpaid. The suggestion that asbestos victims are are not being paid is inaccurate, mischievous and, importantly, will cause undue concern and confusion among claimants and their families.
   26.52K
   
• 07.12.05  Letter to the Editor - The Australian
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Australian to advise that, contrary to the assertion made in Ean Higgins' article in The Australian on Wednesday 7 December, Trailed by Asbestos, at no stage during negotiations over the Principal Deed for asbestos-related injuries did James Hardie Chairman Meredith Hellicar seek release from liability - civil or criminal - for James Hardie directors and officers.
  
  It is a matter of public record that Ms Hellicar attended the initial meeting with the ACTU, Unions NSW and asbestos support groups in early October 2004. Since that time, all negotiations have been undertaken by management and advisers on behalf of the company.  At no stage has any non-executive director, including Ms Hellicar, attended or been involved in negotiations with the NSW Government, the ACTU, Unions NSW or asbestos support groups.  In addition, no non-executive director, including Ms Hellicar, has been involved in discussions with ASIC on the subject of releases or extinguishments of liability.
   22.08K
   
• 07.12.05  Letter to the Editor - The Canberra Times
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Canberra Times, in response to its editorial on December 3, 2005, (Swan gets it wrong on Hardie 'deal'), which from beginning to end is a diatribe designed to portray every activity undertaken by James Hardie in a poor light and which has been written with little or no regard to readily available facts.
   24.97K
   
• 07.12.05  Letter to the Publisher - Australian Financial Review
  James Hardie has written to the Publisher of the Australian Financial Review in response to the paper's article of December 2 2005 Profit will end the pain.  The article stated, "right down to the wire, the company fought to change the deal" and that, "at the scheduled time for signing the agreement, at 11am, [Chairman] Hellicar was still refusing to sign [the final funding agreement] until a clause was changed to give the company more time to sue unions and asbestos victims over past protest actions and boycotts". These statements are absolutely incorrect and defamatory of Ms Hellicar.
   25.47K
   
• 19.09.05  Letter to the Editor - National Indigenous Times
  James Hardie has written to the Editor of the National Indigenous Times in response to Mr Ken Rowsthorne's article in the "A sideline glance" column on Thursday 1 September 2005. In his article, Mr Rowsthorne stated, "James Hardie has delayed the finalisation of the agreement made with the state government and in conjunction with ACTU President Mr Greg Combi [sic] and associate trade unions." This is incorrect.
   22.36K
   
• 12.09.05  Letter to the Editor - Sydney Morning Herald 
  James Hardie has written to the Editor of the Sydney Morning Herald in response to journalist Michael Evan's article in the CBD column on Thursday 8 September 2005, "Hardie can spend loot on victims". Mr Evans suggests that, "Perhaps the group could redirect a few extra bucks it makes out of contracts in Louisiana, Mississippi and other hurricane affected areas to its asbestos victims?"
  
  Mr Evans appears not to have noticed that James Hardie agreed, in December 2004, the commercial principles of a deal which will have exactly the effect he is advocating.
   25.3K
   

• 05.09.05  Letter to the Editor - The Australian
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Australian in response to journalist Michael West's article in The Weekend Australian on Saturday 27 August 2005, "Hardie ha-ha". In his article, Mr West ignored the facts and reiterated a rumour created by The Australian newspaper that James Hardie is looking to leave Australia. Mr West's assertion that "Team Hardie is set to be working up another restructuring. This time, the aim is to sell off the Australian business to fund the compo payout while relisting in the US," is false and unsupported. Please refer to our letter to The Australian of 18 August 2005, debunking this ludicrous claim.
   22.72K 

• 26.08.05  Letter to the Editor - The Herald Sun
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Herald Sun in response to the paper's editorial of Tuesday 23 August "Insult to Injury" concerning the issue of tax and payments proposed to be made by James Hardie to an asbestos compensation fund. The editorial makes a number of claims that are untrue and unfairly demonises the attempt by James Hardie to develop a sustainable Principal Deed to meet asbestos compensation claims.
   20.76K 

• 26.08.05  Letter to the Editor - The Sunday Herald Sun
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Sunday Herald Sun in response to the paper's editorial of Sunday 21 August, "Shame the shameless". By making a number of statements that are untrue and selectively editing statements made by James Hardie executives, the editorial generates an inflammatory article critical of James Hardie and its management.
   21.85K 

• 26.08.05  Letter to the Editor - The Australian
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Australian in response to the paper's stories of Saturday 20 August, "Hardie stalls on $1.7bn payouts" and "Hardie may quit Australia as US operation gains strength". Contrary to what the articles suggest, James Hardie remains committed to its operations in Australia.
   21.23K

• 18.08.05  Letter to the Editor of the AustralianJames Hardie has written to the Editor of The Australian in response to The Australian's story of Saturday 13 August, "Hardie board bid to desert victims".
  
  This article makes a number of claims that are untrue, unsupported and highly damaging to efforts by James Hardie and the NSW Government to achieve a Principal Deed in the best interests of claimants and the future viability and growth of the company. Contrary to the article, the Board of James Hardie is united and committed in its aims of achieving the Principal Deed as soon as possible.
   28.58K

• 13.08.05  Company announcement
  James Hardie rejects accusations as scare-mongering
  James Hardie continues negotiations with NSW Government
  James Hardie rejects inaccurate and inflammatory statements made in today's Australian newspaper claiming there is a split within the company's Board and that some directors have favoured James Hardie leaving Australia.
  49.17K
   
• 22.07.05  Letter to the Editor
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Australian stating that The Australian's article of July 18, 2005 "Fresh US law suits threaten Hardie" by journalist Ean Higgins, contains misleading, inflammatory and inaccurate statements which misrepresent James Hardie and may cause unnecessary concern to Australian compensation claimants and James Hardie stakeholders.
  28.35K
   
• 06.06.05  Letter to the Editor
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Australian, stating that The Australian's article of May 30, 2005 "Carr's Moral Ground Erodes" misrepresents the findings of the Special Commission of Inquiry (SCI) relating to the cancellation of partly paid shares of former James Hardie subsidiary ABN 60 in 2003.
   37.46K 
   
• 23.05.05  Letter to the Editor
  James Hardie has written to the editor of The Australian in response to recent articles in The Australian that contain statements that are inaccurate, inflammatory and misleading.
  50.22K 
   
• 02.03.05  Letter to the Editor
  (revised from 01.03.05) James Hardie has revised its letter to the Editor of The Australian responding to recent errors of fact.
  22.86K
   
• 22.02.05  Statement
  Articles recently appearing in The AustralianRecent articles published in The Australian newspaper concerning James Hardie's exposure to potential asbestos-related claims in the United States (US) significantly misrepresent the facts.
  47.19K
  
  

  The Australian published today an article discussing cases pending against James Hardie subsidiaries in a Californian court. The company does not anticipate receiving a significant number of future legitimate claims for asbestos compensation from the US, as outlined by James Hardie CFO, Russell Chenu, during the company's third quarter results presentation (February 14 2005). James Hardie has never manufactured products containing asbestos in the US.