In Brief:
The Victorian Sate election outcome ( HERE ) creates serious implications for environment groups participating in forest peace talks in Tasmania.
The forest peace talks that were on offer in Victoria (subject to the election of former ALP Premier Mr Brumby) is now history. During the election campaign, most Victorian Environment groups also publicly rejected the idea of a decisive logging ban in the Melbourne water supply catchments.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/state-election-2010/brumby-makes-pledge-on-state-forests-20101111-17pe5.html
Environment groups preference was to keep forestry union boss Michael O’Connor on side when he threatened to walk from peace talks if there was a logging ban in Melbourne catchments. O’Connor described the catchment logging ban as a “quick fix” to the logging debate. So did most large environment groups.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/state-election-2010/no-forest-quick-fix-union-20101027-173w2.html
(and see my press release on Tasmania Times, HERE )
However the Victorian electorate has rejected the green offerings of both the ALP and Green parties.
The Victorian electorate has voted for the status quo logging under Regional Forest Agreements, the policy of the Liberal / National Party.
So instead of a quick fix, there will now be no forest preservation outcome in Victoria for the next four years at least.
Mr O’Connor must surely be happy.
Gunns, will also be very happy. Gunns sawlog supply from the Melbourne water supply catchments is secure for the next four years at least.
The Liberals hope to legislate logging under the RFAs until 2018.
Gunns claim that they want to exit native forests is looking very unlikely in Victoria.
Clearly the native forest wood-chipping industry was the winner in the Victorian State election. Did the major environment groups in Victoria allow themselves to get manipulated?
The fact forests preservation was off the political agenda for Victorian voters now undermines the 20 year hard-line campaign for a total logging ban in native forests in Tasmania.
The logging industry groups will be quick to point out that the polls they did during the Victorian election campaign demonstrated there is no universal public support for a total native forest logging ban in Victoria. They will claim this to be the case for Tasmania.
http://www.vafi.org.au/documents/MRs/22112010Victorianforestry-VAFIMR.pdf ( Download: VAFI_22oct_1.pdf )
The ACF, Wilderness Society, Environment Tasmania and Greens Political Party now need to take a very hard look at their expectations. These environment groups have regarded “compromise” as a dirty word since they failed to resolve the forest debate through the Salamanca Agreement back in 1990.
The major conservation groups and Tasmania Greens Party need only look across Bass Strait to see the future if they are not realistic about solutions to the Tasmanian forest debate.
For a start, all large environment groups should immediately desist from claiming that the Tasmanian forest peace talks is a model process for the rest of Australia. They must first earn the right to say this once the Tasmanian forests they are trying save, is in legislated reserves.
Let’s hope the major environment groups have an open mind on this issue; it might be another 20 years before another opportunity comes along to preserve more Tasmania tall forests. As many have claimed, the current forest peace process is a once in a generation opportunity. This means you only get one chance at it.
Simon Birrell led the campaigner that drove a campaign that has stopped all logging of bio-diverse native forests on public land in the Otways, the tall mountain forests along the Great Ocean Road.
see www.oren.org.au
