This is a unique moment in time to set a path for a new and Sustainable Tasmanian Economic world view.
Resolving the forest wars constructively presents just that symbolic opportunity.
Unfortunately the lower house has been unable to get their heads around the systemic nature of reforms required; the community now relies on the Legislative Council to make it happen, through amendments. Failing that, reject the bill and let the Forestry Tasmania/ TaAnn cesspool collapse of its own weight and call for a Royal Commission to ensure we learn new lessons for Government Business Enterprise governance.
The dawning urgent necessity for carbon taxes/credits combined with the new Federal Forest Products Imports bill, which puts an end to the ‘race to the bottom” in
timber pricing for state forest industries; industries that previously had to compete with illegally and unsustainably logged global forests.
Local timber can now be priced at its cost of production and the incentive to invest in quality is restored.
The reform process will hinge on a shared vision-driven ethical conversations, a process that must be made immune to capture by vested interest groups.
The systemic reforms required revolve around:
• ownership of the truth,
• separation of powers,
• transparency to the community and auditing.
All issues highly problematic in the forest institutions of the past and present.
Who owns the truth on forestry matters. Look carefully at who provides advice. Past failure to reform forestry in Tasmania is because the incumbent forest
culture has been the source of advice. Independent advice is available from the International Union of Foresters.
Separation of powers Governance at State and Federal Levels recognizes its importance in its institutional powers. In this case it is necessary to minimize the
pervasive low level corruption and collusion of the past; Forest management that has to balance the management for all values ie) water, biodiversity, carbon capture, soils, heritage, landscape and timber, needs to be separated from the timber industry.
Transparency Secrecy has allowed low level corruption and conflict of interest to flourish. Commercial-in-confidence is a shelter inappropriate to the management of public resources.
Auditing, ensuring things are done as they claim to be done. This could be tendered to community based teams who have a vested interest in balanced management outcomes.
These issues could be implemented in detail by an independent commission, such as a hypothetical “Forest Land Stewardship commission”. Such a commission could manage both reserved forests and forests available for timber production to minimize duplication and optimize resources. To prevent duplication of resources roading and fire management could be delegated to localgovernment.
A Timber Production commission could then coordinate the efforts of the stakeholders and oversee log auctions guaranteeing transparency. Market based mechanisms such as futures could manage price risks.
In conclusion the vital role of councilors is not to decide detail but to put in place robust and ethical process of implementing the details; To remove the process from the polarization of day-to-day politics that always negate balanced and integrated outcomes to complex issues.
If they can’t be sure of this, reject the bill.
Same-old, same-old is not an option for Tasmania moving forward.
Duncan Mills is a Social Ecologist focusing on how we learn from experience to deal with change. Having retired from 30 years in Agriculture, he is familiar with the challenges of balanced and ethical land management.
