The sands of time are shifting, moving rapidly but uneasily across the ever-changing landscape. The travellers grow steadily more weary, the burden of the journey weighing heavily on their shoulders, and on their souls. Their destination is at once alluring, and full with the fear of the unknown – their fate is a mystery that bedevils their waking moments, and haunts their dreams. They know not where they are bound, but they must travel relentlessly onward.
Meanwhile, back in Tasmania, the infamous forests Intergovernmental Agreement is trapped in a tortured no man’s land where ‘forests’ and ‘agreements’ have never co-existed. In this dark, cynical place – littered with the bones of those who have tried, and failed, to bring peace to the forests – today’s self-appointed arbiters of the forests’ fate buzz around in ever-diminishing circles, expending volumes of noisy energy, but achieving nothing. One hopes they have the human decency to follow that path to its logical conclusion, and disappear up their own arses, but I doubt we will be so lucky.
Yet another deadline approaches. The signatory representatives have regaled us with more gobbledygook, the clueless government has allowed more time, and a river of cash continues to be pissed up against the wall, and drip conveniently into the welcoming pockets of the ‘negotiators’.
Seriously, what the fuck are they doing – these doyens of delay, these princes of procrastination, these incorrigible thieves of time? And, while we wait, rendered almost senseless by their inane excuses, we lose sight of one blazing red flag in the IGA document – unless the agreement is given legislative approval within three months of its introduction into parliament, all funding arrangements are open to review (Clause 33).
The clock is already ticking on this provision. Incomplete legislation was tabled in the House of Assembly within the required time frame – just – but there are no figures for the areas to be reserved, or for the allowable forest harvesting quotas.
The legislation must be finalized, and approved by both houses of parliament pretty damn soon. And so I ask – are the proponents of this precarious endeavor borderline delusional? What informs their fanciful reliance on the agreement of the Legislative Council? Are they not aware of the personalities, both collective and individual, of Tasmania’s upper house? A self-absorbed, self-important group that conducts the business of government in the manner of a mildly politicised tea party. Fifteen would-be raconteurs, many of whom are passionately enamoured of the sound of their own voice.
In February this year, 12 of the 15 MLCs publicly announced their disavowal of the IGA process. Activist groups were costing jobs at Ta Ann, they said, and if they kept it up, the government could whistle for its IGA legislation. We are clearly not speaking of mature representatives of the people. The Legislative Council members are more like overindulged, cranky children – pouting and stamping their feet to get their way.
If anyone holds any doubt that they will follow through on their threat, the following pearls of upper house wisdom should promptly dispel them. We begin, of course, with the inimitable member for Huon, Paul Harriss, speaking on 22 May 2012 during budget estimates –
‘Mr HARRISS – We allow the closure of the Triabunna chipmill and then we say there is no market for our chips overseas. Why not? Because there is only one export facility operating from Bell Bay. By some negotiation the facilities in the north-west from Burnie are locked up by some agreement between Gunns and the Greens, so we cannot export out of Burnie. The cost to transport forest waste to Bell Bay from the south is $35 per tonne. The price for sale, around $38 or it might even squeak out to $40, makes it sub-economic. The transport cost to Triabunna is $15 per tonne, not $35. We all know the strategic importance of Triabunna chipmill to exporting residues from the southern forests. There are substantial and growing markets in China. I think McKay Timber currently has substantial markets in China for solid wood products and the residues it is producing.
As Robert Eastman analysed on 7.30 Tasmania a couple of weeks ago, there has been a market shift but that is because we have closed our airport. We have closed the Triabunna chipmill. The Tasmanian forest intergovernmental agreement has a clause in it that says categorically that in the event that it does not open and operate then the IGA is up for renegotiation. Where is the backbone? We put this to Minister Burke when he was here a few months ago: show who is running this place, get the mill reopened or tell Marr and co. that the IGA is up for renegotiation. He will not do it because of the political consequences. What are the political consequences? Their Greens brothers in government, both in the federal arena and in this state, have the hand firmly on the shoulder and are making the decisions.
There was a time not long ago when the State Liberal Party, the opposition, floated the possibility of the government compulsorily acquiring the Triabunna chipmill, which was immediately and roundly criticised by our current Premier. She was suggesting you just cannot do that, you just cannot walk in and compulsorily acquire something like that. I came across a section in the Forestry Act not so very long ago – I do not have it with me but I think it might be section 4A in the Forestry Act – which makes it quite clear that Forestry Tasmania can acquire – this is Forestry Tasmania, and the government does not even have to do it. FT can make its own decision, its board can make its own decision, and compulsorily acquire land and infrastructure if, in their judgment, it is necessary for the advancement of the forest industry in this State. I do not know that that has been –
Ms Forrest – It is a wonder the Greens have not put an amendment up for the Forestry Act.
Mr HARRISS – Can you imagine the outcry if FT, based on a sound business case, decided to do just that.
Ms Forrest – I can.
Mr HARRISS – Of course you can. They would be racing in here to amend that section of the Forestry Act to ensure that it cannot and will not be done.’
And the member for Nelson, Jim Wilkinson, on 23 May 2012 –
‘Mr WILKINSON – I heard only yesterday someone saying that Forestry Tasmania is insolvent. That is just not right. If it was insolvent and still trading they could be charged. Are they being charged? The answer is no. These comments are throwaway comments to spook the community and to endeavour again to do all possible to not have any forests cut except for a couple within the state.’
The member for Western Tiers, Mr Greg Hall, on 22 May 2012 –
‘Mr Hall – You could argue that the greatest threat to the timber industry is not the loss of markets – it is the export blockade that the Greens have basically thrown over Tasmania. You cannot get the stuff out. … The Greens want to see the end of FT, because they know that only FT stands between them and the total annihilation of the forest industry.’
And taking a break from the Fox Eradication Program, the member for Windemere, Mr Ivan Dean, on 22 May 2012 –
‘Mr Dean- I remind members that the Gunns Bell Bay pulpmill will be built in the electorate of Windermere and be assured that it will be built….
I am doing this because a pulpmill, in my view, is the one shining light that this state currently has because if it is built I am of the view it will be a saviour to this state. It will offer so much in the way of employment, it will offer so much in balancing trade, it will offer so much in many, many other areas.’
And, some random comments from the President of the Legislative Council, Sue Smith, Adriana Taylor, member for Elwick, and Tania Rattray, member for Apsley.
‘Mrs SMITH – Who know what happens, but these are the things that happen when we interfere in the marketplace, and we have interfered in the marketplace.
I do not have to talk about Triabunna. It is done, except to say I am pleased the council is taking some initiative. If they cannot get some resolution, perhaps they will consider compulsory acquisition. That is allowed under the Local Government Act. If, for the wellbeing of your community, you need to buy a property or drive through someone’s house, because the road is of benefit to the people, you have the capacity for compulsory acquisition. It would be interesting, would it not, if that happened?
Ms Rattray – Through you, Mr Deputy President – I will be passing that message on straightaway.’ (23 May 2012)
‘Mrs Smith – I continue to be extremely angry that Christine Milne continues to make the comments about the illegal permits of the Tamar Valley pulp mill. I must say, given the history of latter times, I do not have a lot of sympathy for Gunns and I will put that out because I think Gunns have been there, as they should, to look after themselves, but I do object when a member of parliament constantly says ‘illegally approved pulp mill’ when nothing that passes through both Houses of any parliament in any country around the world is illegal if it is passed and approved on behalf of the people. I think we should consistently hit back when those words are used because good people in these places spend a lot of time and a lot of effort to ensure, whilst it took a different pathway to other things, that it was appropriate and it was legal.
I remind members that we should always correct people who make those inappropriate statements and when it comes from a senior member of a party in the Federal Government of Australia they should be ashamed, in my opinion.’ (15 March 2012)
‘Mrs Taylor- Lastly, on forestry I want to make a small comment about the honourable member for Huon and the attacks that are being made on him, in particular I think since he was the catalyst for us coming together to state that 12 of us in this House would not consider further locking up forests until the protests were brought under control. I am getting e-mails and I am sure that some of the rest of you are and the questioning by Mr Booth in the lower House last week and this week, and other attacks that are being made publicly on Mr Harriss, the honourable member for Huon, are related to the fact that if he is going to stand up and be counted and encourage the rest of us to do so, he is the next victim for attack. I just want to say to him, continue to be brave.
Ms Rattray – Through you, Mr Deputy President – I would say ‘look out’ to those people.
Mrs Taylor – Look out to those people.
Mr Harriss – I am very comfortable with myself.
Mrs TAYLOR – I took part as one of the 12 MLCs in that unprecedented step to call on the Government to do its part in promoting the sustainability and the value of our forest industry because I could not see any other way to get this message across to our Government. For me it was far more than the job losses to Ta Ann which were the catalyst for that; it was about the lack of government action to promote and support our forest industry.’(15 March 2012)
‘Ms Rattray-The whole Tasmanian forest intergovernmental agreement process is very difficult to swallow, when we cannot even get basic aspects of the process right. How is anyone going to support something as big as the proposed intergovernmental agreement?’ (19 June 2012).
For many more riveting examples, please read Hansard. The Legislative Council follows a simple formula when it comes to forestry – maintain the status quo at all costs, even if it means compulsorily acquiring private property at enormous taxpayer expense. Lavish support on forest contractors, show steadfast, unquestioning devotion to Forestry Tasmania and the pulp mill, and blame ‘greenies’ for everything that’s going wrong.
These people have Tasmania by the balls – we should all be very nervous.
*The Subversive Voter is known to the Editor
