What Terry and Vica told Leon …

ABC pic of Terry Edwards, left, Vica Bayley interviewed by Leon Compton

Leon Compton: Vica, let’s start with you and the 140 people or so… head off to work for Ta Ann at Smithton and the Huon Valley this morning. Will this deal guarantee a stable wood supply for that company?

Vica Bayley: Look, Ta Ann have got their own representatives in the negotiation and Terry {Edward – FIAT] is speaking for the … so Terry can speak directly for Ta Ann. But what is ahh… what an agreement is … it seeks to optimise outcomes for everybody. It seeks to deliver a comprehensive conservation outcome; that meets the needs of the community and satisfies the scientific demands of protecting HCV forests. It seeks to optimise outcomes for the community more generally in terms of regional diversification, in terms of strengthening regional economies etc … including the industry

Leon Compton: Yeah, sure that the big picture stuff let’s talk about the 140 people head offing to work today. Is this deal going to guarantee a wood supply for that company?

Vica Bayley: Well look, Ta Ann being part of the future industry for Tasmania is something that everybody has accepted so … so, we’re not going to talk about the specifics of what is being modelled here. So … ahh … it’s important that this process … this information is modelled … that these negotiations are given the clear air and the clear space to finalise. But certainly Ta Ann is part of the landscape of the timber industry in Tasmania going forward is something we have heard very strongly from the industry. And we realise is something that is going to be necessary.

Leon Compton: And you’re happy to see a wood supply legislated; a guarantee wood supply legislated for that company?

Vica Bayley: Well look, that’s a very contentious issue. I’m not going to go into the specifics of it. But the critical thing is that for the term of the [existing] contract, there is wood supply for that company.

Leon Compton: And so for people heading off to work in that company, you think that it’s important that futures are guaranteed in the form of wood for the company to prosper and grow?

Vica Bayley: Well look that’s right, that company has, has… ahh…a role in this process through Terry, as a negotiator, ultimately they will have some … they will have involvement into making a decision as to whether, or not, they as a company supports whatever agreement may, or may yet not be reached.

Leon Compton: Well tells talk about the other side of this but with the same company. Can you guarantee that this deal will allow that company – the people that work for it – without people protesting in the markets to which they sell?

Vica Bayley: Well nobody can guarantee anything. All we can do is to give our very best shot. This is about trying to resolve a very deep and a very divisive issue that’s been bubbling away in Tasmania for 20 or 30 years. We will do our absolute best to deliver a comprehensive solution here … and to bring as many people along as possible. But we all know that there’s people on both sides of this debate that are confused, that are concerned and that are at the moment don’t support what we are trying to do or what we are trying to achieve. So I can’t guarantee you anything around that, but what I can do and what I can commit to is to use my best endeavours to ahh ..to communicate to the broader community and all my constituents – if we reach an agreement and if I and my organisation [TWS] agree to it, that it is a … a good agreement.

Leon Compton: Terry Edwards, you talk about earlier… in fact you left this process because of what you felt was the need for durability clauses. Jonathon West described the previous history of forestry deals in Tasmania, he said: “A deal gets done and weeks or months later they are broken; usually by environmentalists and the war continues.” So out of what you’ve come up with I this room, what to stop that happen this time?

Terry Edwards: Well, in real terms ahhm …., I, I can little more in answering that than use similar word that Vica’s used. Except that I would add the difference in all outcome in the past where people have tried to solve the forestry dispute is that it has always been an imposed outcome. The difference here, is that we’re trying genuinely to do is reach an agreement and that is one that all sides will be prepared to sign off on. So we’re having to pledge to each other, in effect the durability issues. That’s one of the issues that’s caused some of the delays in trying to get to an outcome on this issue. If you’re only playing around with numbers and things like that … it’s relatively simply; because it’s inanimate and it’s simple arithmetic, in many respects. But some of these other issues and the deep-felt emotions on both sides of this debate are a little bit more difficult to resolve, and as a consequence our talking has been around trying to find outcome that we can all genuinely sign off on. And commit to each other – and to our constituents – and that we are prepared to live with.

Leon Compton: And so when you came out of the room yesterday. You said, ‘Look we need more time to talk about the verification of timber reserves that might be available and more time to ask the federal government; as I think Labor representatives are doing today from their federal counterparts in Canberra. So you must have come up with the ‘durability clauses’, what are they?

Terry Edwards: (chuckles) Well, I wouldn’t say we’ve come up with the ‘durability clauses’

Leon Compton: So are you saying that needs to be worked out… as well?

Terry Edwards: We have a number of ‘in principle’ positions on a piece of paper between us. We haven’t – any of us – talked to our constituents to date. We haven’t yet briefed either government – in detail – about the content that is on the table; about what we have discussed. And in fact there is genuinely nothing – that we would call an agreement – on the table at the moment, because the very modelling we’ve asked them to do needs to verify whether or not the work that we have done is capable of being implemented. Until we know that, it’s not possible to put our hand on our heart and say, ‘Yeah, we’ll sign up to that.’ We need a proper scientific process to tell us whether or not, the issues we’ve been discussing can be implemented – the ground, in a way that will give the durability that you’re asking about.

Vica Bayley: Look, what we did come out with yesterday Leon, against ahh … the expectations of many, including ex-Premiers and a whole bunch of other commentators who would, I think, like to see this fail. We came out saying ‘we have ahh …made substantial progress in closing some very, very large gaps ahh … uhm … in terms of both the practical issues and also the philosophical and some of the personal issues. We’ve made substantial progress in closing those gaps; substantial enough to trigger this final modelling of a scenario – of a specific scenario – that will give us guaranteed data upon which to base a decision on … a, a final agreement. So…

Leon Compton: But, but…so you’re also saying you haven’t worked out what happens if this deal gets broken? [Pause] The durability clauses, the … the thing s… the great concerns in the community. That this deal will get done, and then broken and the protests will resume in short order. Where … where are the durability clauses … you haven’t thrashed them out or you have?

Vica Bayley: Durability is not about what’s gonna happen if this deal gets broken – in terms of penalities or anything like that. Durability is we are trying to build in mechanisms and confidence ahh … amongst us – as signatories and our constituents – that, it will be lasting. It’s not about how to enforce an outcome on people; it’s how to encourage support and encourage people and bring people along for a journey. So, there are absolutely things that are not tied off yet, Leon. That’s why we are not presenting; we could present governments with a final agreement yesterday. But as I say substantial progress has been made and ahh … enough to push the button on this modelling so that we can an informed decision on a final agreement … within two weeks.

Leon Compton: Does the deal guarantee – I mean does the deal – have you come up between yourselves with guarantees that the Triabunna woodchip mill will re-open?

Terry Edwards: Well it’s an issue… the whole issue of how we are going to use residues from processing and harvesting has been debated intensely – during the negotiations. Again we are not going to go into the specifics of what we do have to the table….

Leon Compton: I’m not asking you for the specific Terry. I’m asking you if you’ve worked it out? And do you have… have you come up with a

Vica Bayley: Triabunna is not something that we [the signatories] can agree, Leon. Triabunna is owned by a private company that makes its own decisions so ultimately it is a commercial decision for that company as to how they operate their facility. So all we can do is use our best endeavours to ahh … to reach an agreement that meets the needs of that company and ensure that there is good conversations going on between industry and the company about what are their respective needs … are, both the industries needs and the company’s needs.

Leon Compton: I’m imagining Terry Edward’s side would want it re-opened. Terry Edwards have you come up a plan that sees this re-opened or some other use for timber residues (chip). That might help the viability of native forest harvesting or plantation harvesting?

Terry Edwards: Look we absolutely do want to see the Triabunna mill re-opened at the earliest possible time. It’s a crucial issue for the industry. But Vica’s answer is appropriate. We need to have further dialogue with the owners of that mill; they’ve made it clear they want to see the detail of any agreement we’ve reached before they’ll made any commitments to us as to when and under what conditions that mill might open. So it’s chicken and egg to some extent, in respect of Triabunna. In terms of residues generally, we’ve, we’ve had a lot of conversations about that. We’ve teased out a few ideas and we need to tease them out over the next few days whilst this modelling is being undertaken and try to reach a landing on that along with a myriad of other issues.

Leon Compton: One of the things when it came to residues that was raised last year I think was the idea of biomass. Of generating energy from residues. Environmental groups hated that instinctively because of a concern that Forestry Tasmania … we, we would a process whereby chip … was used, you know. Forests were being cut down to generate power. Is it possible that you will strike an agreement that will satisfy you that biomass will part of…, that energy from biomass might be the future of this deal.

Vica Bayley: Well look, without the agreement anything is possible, Leon. But certainly our position is we don’t support biomass and renewable energy certificates for biomass are incredibly problematic. And that is a key issue that the environment movement has made ahh … its voice very clear about.

Leon Compton: Ummm… the Liberals are flatly opposed to this deal, Terry Edwards. They say it is bad for Tasmania. Why do you, why do you disagree with that… why are you still in the room?

Terry Edwards: I’m not saying I disagree with it. What I am saying is… we were presented with a process. The process gave us with an opportunity to address some of the deep divides over forestry that have existed over many years. I don’t think it’s saying too much to say that one of the reasons we’re in the room is because of the market activity of some environmentalists which has had adverse impacts on my members and, and other people operating in the forest industry. And we, we … from that understand there is a very genuine need to try and resolve this issue in a durable way for the sake of all Tasmanians. I think everyone in Tasmania, and most of us … all of us around the table included, are absolutely sick of this ongoing war that has waged over forestry in Tasmania; it’s entirely unnecessary. And what we’re trying to do here is put a peaceful negotiated outcome on the table and say this is a way we can try and all move forward together in a way that removes the divide; removes the emotive rhetoric from both sides. And hopefully produces a long-term durable outcome that everyone is prepared to sign off on… and to sell to their constituents. The alternative is to have another go at trying to use an imposed solution. Any you’ve quoted earlier from Professor Jonathon West where he puts forward the very real proposition that that’s not worked in the past. The proof of that is evident by the fact that the protests are ongoing even today. So we needed to find a different way. And that’s what we’re trying to do.

Leon Compton: Well has that potentially worked? I mean yesterday or as soon as this morning, after you come out of the room yesterday, Miranda Gibson from the tree visited by Bob Brown, the spiritual leader of the Greens around Australia; he goes up there, talks with her. She says: ‘There was some hope yesterday a deal would be reached between industry and environment groups … but there has been no such agreement so far. World Heritage Forests are still under threat I’ll continue my vigil, I want to renew my vow I made 7 months ago. I want the world to know I’m not going anywhere until the forest is safely protected from logging’. Isn’t this an example of things, considering she doesn’t seem particularly confident in the process as it’s unfolding.

Terry Edwards: Well Leon, as I just said a moment ago, the protests are continuing… that’s proof positive of that. You know, and I think that statement is a bit unfortunate. And I think it’s reflective of the fact that none of us in the room have had any opportunity to brief our constituency about where we are up to in this process. We’ve literally been meeting well past midnight every night this … in the past week. And this has been an incredibly intense and whilst we’ve tried to have as much dialogue as possible with all our constituents on the way through. None of us have had the opportunity for a detailed debrief to our constituencies to show them where we’re up to, what we have been discussing, what we intend from here and why this extra two weeks is necessary. So I’m hoping that ahhh … that Miranda Gibson and Senator, former Senator Bob Brown can understand when they have the opportunity to be properly briefed how momentous this agreement … providing we reach one will be and what it does do.

Vica Bayley: And fundamentally Leon we to have to remember ahhm … that while there has been ahh … various incarnations of this agreement: Statement of Principles, the IGA… ahhm the protests, you know, have continued because we have been unable to stop the logging in those contentious forests. You know these are world heritage value forests … some of them are; most of them were verified as important by the, the independent verification group which was part of this process and ahh … they are still being logged to meet the needs of the industry. As a result of course, ahhm… people will rightly voice their concerns. What we need to do is work through that in a constructive way and, in the negotiation space, we’re, we are trying to ahh, I guess tackle those issues the immediate short term logging issues and then of course the protection of … the legislated protection … the legal protection in national parks and reserves of those forests so that people can have confidence that the logging is shifted out. [15.15]

Leon Compton: Vica Bayley what type of protection is being discussed for those areas that would be given reserve status?

Vica Bayley: Well the legislation has been tabled before Parliament and ahh it proposes to protect these forests under the Nature Conservation Act. So there’s no specifics around what level of protection under the NCA but that means ahh … every thing from national parks, state reserves, conservation areas. We also have very real aspiration around world heritage extensions ahh … ahh …and nominations. Areas such as, you know, the Weld, the Styx, the ahh, ummm, Butler’s Gorge in the central highlands – extensions to the existing WHA and of course conservationists have aspirations more broadly around World Heritage for the Tarkine region.

Leon Compton: And do you accept as, also part of this, as Jonathan West mentioned, any solution will need to have some sort of mixed use for some of these forest reserves that may exclude forestry but include mining and human access that exist at a level beyond what exist in a national park?

VicaBayley: Well, look we are negotiating a forest agreement here, so…. But as conservationists we’ll be going in and batting for obviously the highest level of protection possible. Ahhm… but that is a decision ultimately for government. So that’s conversation that we’ll be taking with government. And ultimately it’s a decision for the Parliament. And ahh … if we reach agreement within two weeks time … ahh, that will be just the first step. Agreement itself, ahhm … doesn’t deliver the peace, doesn’t deliver the reserves, doesn’t deliver the security to industry. Ultimately it’s up to the Parliament to ahhm … pass legislation, to pass the reserves and to … basically implement this agreement. So that ahh … we can move on.

Leon Compton: I wonder how members of the Upper House will feel; their views are pretty well known, or their scepticism has been pretty well known in the last 6 months or so around this process. So I wonder what will be involved in convincing them of the value of whatever it is that comes out of the next two weeks of negotiation, discussion, assessment … and of course the request for more money.

Terry Edwards, how much more money will be needed and why do you need it?

Terry Edwards: Look, there’s, there’s a number of implementation issues that will arise out of the agreement … ahh, in the terms that it’s currently structured and assuming the ahh, the modelling proves up the issues that we had on the table … ahhm, there will be a range of different areas, including some research and development activities. There’s some ongoing roles in implementation for a range of the groups that are currently around the table. There are a range of issues around the utilisation of resources and things of that nature that need to be considered. And again I don’t wish to go to the specific, because they remain confidential to the parties at this time. But there are implementation issues and they are issues that can only be resolved with some funding; they weren’t foreseen at the time when the original IGA was signed … ahhm they are now clearly evident to us after our extensive negotiations. And we will make an appropriate submission to government to seek their assistance.

Leon Compton: Is it because you have accepted that you’ll be … it’ll be necessary to – for this deal to work – to give up more forest reserve and to buy out more of the jobs in forestry at the moment?

Terry Edwards: No (Pause)

Leon Compton: What other conclusion is there to come to about the need for more money?

Terry Edwards: There are a number of conclusions you could come to if you use your imagination (chuckles).

Leon Compton: So, more research and development?

Terry Edwards: Research and developmentwork around the utilisation of the resource; better utilisation of the resource. Ahhm … there may well be some changes in resource mix for some of the people involved in the industry; they may not too. There’s a number of things that need to be looked at … but most importantly here is that, once this agreement is struck that is not the end of the issue. We’ve committed to each other to actually oversight the implementation of the agreement; which is going to be quite complex. It’s going to take a considerable amount of time to roll out properly. Ahhm … as Vica’s pointed out, there’s a range of legislative issues that need to be considered not just the passage of the current bill before the Parliament but subsequent ahh … ahhm … visits to the Parliament on durability reporting; on a range of technical-administrative issues that the DPIPWE need to go through, in determining the very issue you asked Vica, about what status of reserve protection some of these areas may have. And that’s all gotta be dealt with in a long-term administrative way; which means there’s ongoing administration by the signatory groups. There’s …there’s also a number of other implementation issues – there’s issues that will impact on Forestry Tasmania. Ahhm… if you remove some of the forests from their balance sheet and place them into a reserve status, they can no longer earn income from those forests. So there’s issues like that; there’s existing roading; there’s potential for new roading; a lot of issues arise. And, and there will be some funding assistance required to see us to be actually be able to make the transition from where we are on the journey to where we are going. [20.41]

Leon Compton: This started with Gunns and ahh … and progress towards a pulp mill. Did they play any part in the discussions that are happening at the moment; a pulp mill for the Tamar Valley?

Vica Bayley: Look, no. A pulp mill is not a point of discussion. Ahhm … this, this has – from our perspective – has come about because of the ahhm, err, the crisis across the native forest industry. So where there is change happening; and there has long been change happening across the forest industry. There ahh, will continue to be change and what this process seeks to do is support and guide that change; support people through that change, ahh …

Leon Compton: But there will be no support for a plantation-based pulp mill out of this? Which was the place where it started originally.

[Pause and sniff]

Vica Bayley: No.

Leon Compton: Terry Edwards?

Terry Edwards: Look a pulp mill in our view remains… an important infrastructure project ahh… for the industry. And, indeed for Tasmania, and we continue to support the pulp mill. But given where that project is at; it’s no lack of support – either by politicians or the industry or anyone else that’s necessarily holding back that project. [Pause] Ahh … the company needs to obtain the financial backing that it’s been seeking. And that’s the trigger point for, for that project either proceeding or not.

And I don’t think there’s anything around the room, in the room that we could have done, as part of these negotiations, that would have advanced that project at all. So, no it hasn’t been part of our considerations in any specific sense.

Leon Compton: You both came out of that meeting yesterday and looked like you were feeling… more confident than many in the community about ahh, about this. Vica Bayley, why do you think this will conclude … this could lead to a, to a process that changes the game in forestry and protest and on … in Tasmania.

Vica Bayley: Well look, I … I’m optimistic. I don’t know whether confident is the right word. But I am optimistic ahhm … Look, we are very conscious of community expectations around this process; it’s been a long process and as I say, it’s on a divisive issue. We, as negotiators and as organisations – I think- shoulder a huge burden of responsibility ahh … over this process. Ahh, we take that responsibility very seriously and we will absolutely be giving it our best shot. Once this [modelling] data comes through to conclude an agreement in the next two weeks; to present to government and then see that agreement through. So, I’m optimistic…

Leon Compton: Will the community be able to see it then? I mean a caller asking: ‘Why can’t the community start having a look?’…at what’s being agreed at the moment, given that there are so many parties not in the room?

Vica Bayley: Well look, there is no agreement. And absolutely, the community … and getting community support for anything that is agreed and the outcomes that flows from it is incredibly important. But this is a … this is an incredibly delicate issue; it’s got a very, very long history. Ahh … the groups that are at the table … ahhm, are at the pointy end, I guess, of that history. And, ahh … we are looking forward and, as I say, optimistic ahh … that we can produce an agreement within two weeks. It will absolutely,ahh, ahh … be available publicly and we need to absolutely to our job of explaining that to the community and bringing the community along.

Leon Compton: Terry Edwards do you think you’ll be able to – if a deal can be struck – convince those that you represent, big business and others across the Tasmanian landscape, that this is a deal for them?

Terry Edwards: Look, like Vica, I’m, I’m reasonably optimistic that an agreement can be struck. Ahhm there are going to be significant challenges in presenting the agreement to, to all sides of this. There … obviously on the way through, we’ve all needed to make some compromise and that’s going to be difficult for some people to understand and accept. And in a way that goes to answering the question you raised from, from your caller. Ahhm, if we put out what we’ve got at the moment without have been able to prove it up through the modelling process – we need to undertake – we will build up a community expectation that ‘X’ might be the outcome, whereas the modelling may well demonstrate that ’X’ cannot be the outcome. So, it’s better to make sure that what we’ve got will work before we put it into the public arena.

Leon Compton: Good luck over the next two weeks.

Terry Edwards: Thanks, Leon,

Vica Bayley: Thanks, Leon.

• SIGNATORY WORKING GROUP CONTINUING NEGOTIATIONS PROCESS

The Tasmanian forests Signatory working group are continuing their intensive negotiations towards
an agreed solution which optimises wood supply and conservation outcomes, and ensures the longterm
durability of any agreement.

This includes detailed modelling and analysis to verify assumptions that have been made to date,
and provide the conclusive data required to enable finalisation of the negotiations.

The Signatories Working Group will not be publicly commenting on details of negotiations or
modelling as that would be prejudicial to the process and the confidentiality that is required to
progress very sensitive issues.

The signatories working group is required to report back to the State and Commonwealth
governments with a final position on Monday 6th of August.

The Signatory Working Group is:

Jim Adams representing Timber Communities Australia Ltd
Jane Calvert representing the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
Dr Hans Drielsma representing the Australian Forest Products Association
Terry Edwards representing the Forest Industries Association of Tasmania
Dr Phill Pullinger representing Environment Tasmania Inc
Vica Bayley representing the Wilderness Society Tasmania Inc
Lyndon Schneiders representing the Wilderness Society Inc
Don Henry representing the Australian Conservation Foundation

• David Obendorf: Foes set to sign forest peace deal, says The Australian

According to sources informing The Australian newspaper’s Tasmanian correspondent, ‘foes are set to sign the forest peace deal’ that will, subject to acceptance of the final modelling : –

• Protect 475,000 ha of nominated high conservation value (HCV) forests
• Offer another 50,000 ha – outside the original area nominated for protection
• Relax the Forest Practices Code in the remaining public production forests to allow greater harvesting
• Reduce the sawlog quota from the interim IGA figure of 155, 000 c. metres per year to 130,000 c. metres p.a.
• Possibly reduce Ta Ann’s entitled quota access to 265,000 c. metres p.a. of peeler billets to about 170,000 c. metres p.a.

The Australian newspaper source claims that this proposal was ‘endorsed by the Giddings government on Monday’. This plan will be modelled by Forestry Tasmania and ‘independent experts’ to assess the resulting reduction in wood volumes.

[Reference: Foes set to sign forest peace deal – by Matthew Denholm, The Australian 25 July 2012 page 7 ]

Question: Who benefits from leaking this information to a national newspaper?

First published: 2012-07-25 12:23 PM