Brand Tasmania pic of Glenn Britton
Last evening, the Chairman of the Forest Industries Association in Tasmania, Mr Glenn Britton (also a native forest saw miller in NW Tasmania) acknowledged that the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Will Hodgman had initiated written correspondence to FIAT to discuss the Liberals ’13-point plan’ forest policy.
Mr Britton’s letter of reply was revealed in an ‘exclusive’ in The Australian newspaper yesterday by its Tasmanian correspondent, Matthew Denholm.
The Australian newspaper appeared to be unaware that the initiative for this correspondence came from the Liberal leader, as Mr Britton explained on ABC radio this evening, rather than FIAT. The newspaper article refers to private correspondence in which FIAT expressed a willingness to engage in Mr Hodgman’s alternative forest plan, even though FIAT is currently a Signatory in the long-running forest talks.
In the newspaper Mr Britton initially denied he had written to Mr Hodgman but later confirmed he had done so.
Mr Britton then confirmed FIAT’s letter to Mr Hodgman and reading from that letter told The Australian thatFIAT would “be pleased to engage further with you [Mr Hodgman] in respect of this policy position”… “to facilitate that engagement we request that you advise what strategies you may have in mind to deal with ongoing market attacks and protest activity”… “having an alternative strategy to deal with this activity could enable us [FIAT] to consider your strategy further”.
The letter stated FIAT would consider the Liberals’ alternative plan “at the same time we are considering whether or not we are prepared to sign an agreement arising from the current peace process negotiations.”
Neither Mr Hodgman nor Mr Britton would release the letter and The Australian’s Tasmanian correspondent writes that after initially denying the existence of any correspondence Mr Britton then read the letter over the phone to Mr Denholm.
References:
The Australian 23 August 2012 – Timber group keen to ‘engage’ with the Libs, here:
A KEY timber industry body negotiating a peace deal with conservationists has privately agreed to “engage” with the Tasmanian Liberals on an alternative plan that stymies protests and offers no new reserves.
The peak Forest Industries Association of Tasmania has confirmed to The Australian that it recently wrote to Liberal leader Will Hodgman expressing a willingness to engage on his alternative plan.
Unlike the deal FIAT is negotiating with The Wilderness Society and the Australian Conservation Foundation, Mr Hodgman’s plan locks in resource security for the industry without a single extra tree being protected.
After initially denying he had written to Mr Hodgman in response to the Liberal’s suggestion of an alternative plan, FIAT chairman Glenn Britton later confirmed he had done so.
Mr Britton also confirmed his letter said that FIAT would “be pleased to engage further with you (Mr Hodgman) in respect to this policy position”.
Interview with Mr Glenn Britton on ABC 936 radio, Drive Program 23 August 2012.
• The Transcript, by David Obendorf:
ABC 936 Drive Program – Interview with Mr Glenn Britton, Chairman of FIAT and NW saw miller 23 August 2012.
http://blogs.abc.net.au/tasmania/2012/08/fiats-glen-britton-responds-candidly.html?site=hobart&program=hobart_drive
Louise Saunders: The revelation that the Forest Industries Association has written to the Liberal Party – the Liberal leader, Will Hodgman – expressing a willingness to engage on his alternative plan – his 13-point plan. With me is the Chairman of Forest Industries Association of Tasmania, also a saw miller himself, Glenn Britton. Good afternoon.
Glenn Britton: Hi Louise.
Louise Saunders: Glenn, do you want the roundtable process, the IGA process, to succeed, in its current form?
Glenn Britton: Louise, can I just explain to you, that ahh… Forest Industries Association is, ahh… ahh… is a major, ahh… in the, ahh… negotiating process and ahh… (pause)… FIAT’s current position is that we’re putting all our endeavours into, ahh… achieving an appropriate outcome from… from the negotiations that have… that have… that have been taking place, and still taking place. As you pointed out there’s a 3 or 4 week lull as far as negotiations go, while extra data etcetera is being… being collated. But… but FIAT are firmly ahh… firmly behind ahh… attempting to achieve, ahh… an appropriate outcome for… for industry and… and the State of Tasmania.
Louise Saunders: What about you? I mean, you are a saw miller, you’re Chairman of the Association, do you have concerns or reservations?
Glenn Britton: Oh, look, it would be fair to say everyone has reservations and ahh… the reason why.. that to date the agreement hasn’t been achieved is because of the, ahh… the huge gap that’s still apparent between sufficient forest to supply the, ahh… the, ahh… the appropriate or required level of, ahh… level… or volume of sawlogs and peeler logs and special species timber by… by volume and by quality, and size and age class etc… to sustain a viable industry into the future on the one hand and on the other hand, ahh… having that; allow sufficient, ahh… ahh… forest to, ahh… add to the current one and half million hectares of forest reserves already in Tasmania.
Louise Saunders: Bearing in mind the reservation, as you say, many people have but FIAT’s commitment to the current process. Why did you write to Will Hodgman about his alternative approach?
Glenn Britton: Louise, let’s get this, ahh… particular issue which has been bandied about today in its proper… in its appropriate context… rightful context. A couple of weeks ago, as Chairman of FIAT, I received a letter from… from Will Hodgman expressing ahh… a desire to meet with our Board at an appropriate time so that they [the Liberals] could outline their… their, and reiterate their 13-point plan or their plan for the future as they see it.
Now that’s all been well documented, in recent times, right throughout the media on television, print and radio etc. I was just reaffirming that and ahh… expressing a willingness to work with Labor to try and achieve ahhh… you know, issues such as resource security and, ahh… legislated production forests to produce that etc…
I received a letter from Will Hodgman outlining that and suggesting a meeting with… with… with my Board. Now that was the first step. The second step as a matter of courtesy I replied to that letter to Will Hodgman reaffirming yes, that at an appropriate time we would, ahh… when, when our next Board meeting is, is… date is set, that we would offer them the chance to come and, ahh… put that position to us.
Louise Saunders: So, he [Will Hodgman] approached you. Was he asking you to take any steps away with FIAT from the IGA process in favour of his alternative plan?
Glenn Britton: No, not at all. No.
Louise Saunders: Was he indicating that he expected the IGA process to collapse and he would then be in a position to perhaps make more mileage from his 13-point plan?
Glenn Britton: No, not at all.
Louise Saunders: Ok. And you will be willing at some point following the conclusion – one way or the other – of the IGA process, to sit down and discuss this with Will Hodgman?
Glenn Britton: Louise (pause)… ahh… the forest industry and FIAT in particular have always enjoyed bipartisan support for our industry by both Labor and Liberal Parties, State and federally. We wish that to continue and, ahh… therefore we will always have dialogue with both Parties to try and maintain the best position for our industry in this State.
Louise Saunders: Just finally on the issue of protest. The implication in the news story today is that you’re seeking an end to protest by environmental movements that disrupt in Tasmanian forest products as part of any ultimate agreement. Is that the case?
Glenn Britton: Oh… absolutely. Absolutely, I mean… (huffing) … the main issues surrounding the, ahh… the negotiations at the moment would be wood supply on one hand, ahhm… forest for reservation on the other hand, but coupled with that is the durability of, ahh… of… of… any agreement. In other words, ahh… ahhm… if there was an agreement on those first two issues, then there has to be some durability on… on… to that, because this is all as you well know… and the public will know has always been touted as a ‘peace process;, [spells out each word] P E A C E , ahh… process. And to date there’s not been much evidence of, ahh… peace from ahh… from the radical green elements. And we’ve seen that on Dateline [SBS-TV] on Tuesday night and other media outlets. However, the ENGOs around the table are claiming that they can… they can rein that in. And, ahh… they’ve gotta prove that they can rein that in, because we’re… we’re not prepared to commit to… to… to further forest reservation and if… if there’s appropriate forest reservation… if there’s no peace… there’s no, ahhm… ahh… sustainable peace.
Louise Saunders: Is that going to make it difficult to further negotiate with either with the Liberal Party or Labor, because as Will Hodgman acknowledged in this studio earlier this week. He accepts the validity of some of these groups that are now on the scene – such as Markets for Change – and that there is a need for politicians to work with those groups to achieve a sustainable forest industry. You seem to be a little at odds with him there?
Glenn Britton: (pause)… I’m not aware of what Will Hodgman said about Markets for Change etc, but ahhm…
Louise Saunders: Groups like that you don’t accept as being valid?
Glenn Britton: (pause)… Well, absolutely not. They’re… they’re… they’re… they’re… Markets for Change and GetUp! they have one… one… absolutely one aim of … to, ahh… to the destruction and cessation of the forest industry in Australia , not just in Tasmania.
Louise Saunders: So ultimately a move towards a resolution and a sustainable forest industry in this State means: an end to environmental protest… in what? In any form?
Glenn Britton: (pause)… ‘in any form’ is a pretty…
Louise Saunders: Ok… in any form that could be understood to damage Tasmania’s reputation or industry then?
Glenn Britton: To that, I’d say, yes.
Louise Saunders: Ok… on whose assessment?
Glenn Britton: (pause)… Look, I… (pause)… common sense, I would suggest Louise… common sense.
Louise Saunders: Just finally, can I ask, the letter that The Australian had… that you returned, that you wrote back to Will Hodgman. Do you know how they [The Australian newspaper] got hold of that?
Glenn Britton: (long pause)… No, I don’t, ahhm… (pause)…
Louise Saunders: Do you regard it as a private correspondence with Will Hodgman?
Glenn Britton: Oh, well… (pause)… any, any correspondence like that,I guess, is private. But I don’t believe the… no, the ahh… (long pause)… the letter that Will Hodgman wrote to FIAT and the letter I wrote back, ahh… they’re not public documents and…and there’s nothing contentious in either of those … in either of those letters. They were both courtesy letters – quite frankly – from them to us; from us to them. And ahh… but, what happened there was, ahh… another letter, I think, sent out from the Liberal Party to… to various members of industry and Party members whereby it was, ahh… stated that Will Hodgman had received… had received a letter from FIAT, ahhm… outlining, ahh… ahh… acceptance, ahh… of, ahh… Will Hodgman’s views such as on resource security etc. So… so that was where that came from.
Louise Saunders: Just asking, because I’m wondering whether you feel in any way that your response to an initial approach to Will Hodgman; your reply to him is, in any way, being used to perhaps indicate a split within the forest peace process. That you’re being used to that end?
Glenn Britton: (pause)… Well, I’ve no doubt that, ahh… you know, certainly reporters and that probably, ahh…probably have, ahh… (pause)… tried to, ahh… swing it that way. Ahh… ahhmm… I mean, it’s put to me, it… you know… the fact that we… I’ve written a letter to Will Hodgman, ahh… upset the ENGOs. Well I, I personally I don’t think it would [upset them] at all because like I said, purely and simply, it was a courtesy letter from Will Hodgman to… to Glenn Britton as chairman of FIAT and, and one in reply to Will Hodgman, a courtesy letter. So there’s nothing… nothing untoward, nothing contentious in that. And I’m sure the ENGOs around the table would, ahh… view that as such, and you know, and, ahh… in answer to, to the… the innuendo in that article [Matthew Denholm’s article in The Australian] I suggest that, ahh… the ENGOs will probably be more… more concerned at the moment regarding the scurrilous attacks on the industry and Ta Ann in earlier in the week from, ahh… Markets for Change, etc.
Louise Saunders: Well, I guess just a final one on that given that, Will Hodgman has given a comment to the newspaper on that… that he could have circumvented any suggestion that the letter was your [FIATs] initial approach by indicating that he wrote to you first. Could he?
Glenn Britton: Yes, exactly.
Louise Saunders: I’ll leave it there, Glenn Britton….
Glenn Britton: I, I, I mean I think that was just a… was just a simple oversight. And quite frankly something’s being made outa… outa, outa nothing. I can assure you of that. I mean we… we don’t work that, that way… we ….
Louise Saunders: Good to clarify some of those points with you this afternoon.
Glenn Britton: Yeah, my pleasure, thanks Louise.
Louise Saunders: Thank you. That’s Glenn Britton, a saw miller himself and, ahh… Chairman of the Tasmanian Forest Industries Association.
• UPDATE: Louise Saunders 24 August 2012 follow-up on the Glenn Britton interview on 23 August 2012
… the letter he [GB] wrote was in response to Will Hodgman’s ‘open letter’ and Glenn Britton making it clear that they [FIAT] were happy to engage with people who approached them. So we [the ABC] put some questions yesterday and again today to Will Hodgman’s office indicating that there was a quote from Will Hodgman in the [newspaper] article so if he had spoken to The Australian journalist why didn’t he clarify that he had initiated the letter with FIAT and was not offering negotiations off their own bat.
We were told though that was a quote from the Opposition Leader that had been given earlier. The other question too that we had was whether the ahh… Opposition Leader’s office or the Liberals had actually provided a copy of that letter to The Australian journalist. Ahh… from a statement from the Liberal Leader’s office, they say that they didn’t give the letter between Glenn Britton and Will Hodgman to The Australian they said – in their quote – ‘we are always happy to talk to people in the forest industry. [4.25 pm]
• Jan Davis’ Tasmanian Country column today
The Tasmanian Farmers and Graziers Association remains unconvinced by current the forest peace talks, despite the government’s apparent belief that the war is all over bar the shouting. I think we all know better than that. I have a finely-tuned spin detector and it tells me that all I can see and hear at the moment is hype and wishful thinking.
This is a train wreck waiting to happen.
The parties who are seeking to divide between them the spoils of the public forests have reached a singularly unimpressive interim agreement. It is full of poorly-worded motherhood statements and tells us nothing about the final claim they have put to Forestry Tasmania to assess. It is a memorandum of understanding that essentially says little more than that they would like to agree to agree to something down the track – but they are not game to tell us what it is. There’s no detail at all of the two key issues – how much goes into new reserves; and how much timber will be available to secure current and future timber users. It is repetitious self-interest that excludes everyone else in the community. It even excludes the majority of people who actually own forests in their own right – private forest owners, who are, by and large, farmers. They own a quarter of the total forest cover – but they don’t get a look in as the foundations of a great Tasmanian industry are fatally undermined by continued uncertainty and sovereign risk.
From where I sit, from the conversations I have, from the e-mails I read, any agreement these people might reach will not have a hope in Hades of being enacted.
It will not meet the conditions set by the original and overarching Statement of Principles – there is not (and will not be) peace in the forests; Triabunna mill will not be reopened; talk of a pulp mill has been conspicuously dropped from the agenda; and private foresters are being severely impacted by this manifestly flawed process.
It was meant to be a one-in all-in agreement – if one party does not agree, then the deal is off. There is still some hope that one or more of the groups around the table will stick to their principles – and step away from the table. If that doesn’t happen, the next hurdle is the Legislative Council. We hope MLCs stick to their guns too and say they will not have a bar of it – in line with their recent pronouncements on this issue.
Most Tasmanians are affronted by the spectacle of unelected and unaccountable groups trading away valuable state owned assets to achieve personal agendas.
I draw your attention to the fact that, in the secrecy surrounding the so-called agreement, we are given no inkling to its durability. If the conservation groups around the peace table have given guarantees about gagging the likes of Markets for Change, let us see them. The Huon Environment Centre will not be bound by the agreement; the Tarkine National Coalition will continue its campaign in the north-west forests; the Greens want another 585,000 ha in World Heritage or national parks.
Where’s the durability in this? We know that there can be no guarantees to end the economic sabotage of this industry by those hell bent on its destruction, so why pretend?
It is a crying shame that all the effort that has gone into closing down the forest industry could not have been directed at strengthening the sector, in developing markets rather than undermining them.
People seem to have lost sight of the fact that the Tasmanian forestry industry already meets best practices standards for sustainability. Many of the countries that will supply timber to Australia when the Tasmanian industry is closed down can make no such claim. Biomass is a major source of renewable energy in many developed countries across the world – but it is not practical here because the Greens have said their will be no recognition of improved processes. Why are things so different here?
People also seem to have lost sight of the fact that, in essence, forestry is a long rotation crop. We don’t know what opportunities will open up in the future, what products will be developed that we’ve not even thought of yet, or how the balance of world markets and opinions may change over time. Why on earth are these people proposing to lock up this important resource and throw away the key? We don’t bulldoze shearing sheds when wool prices are down; and we shouldn’t be irretrievably locking away forest resources either when there is a market downturn.
More than 50% of Tasmania is already in formal reserves or in other forms of environmental holdings. Tasmania needs to be opening the doors to opportunity; not slamming them shut. Enough is enough – it is time to draw a line under this failed process.
