Comment on the third five-year review of the Tasmanian RFA was due today but has just been extended.
1. The public submission period for the third five-yearly review of the Tasmanian RFA has been extended by two weeks, until 5 pm, 12 June 2015.
The review process is a part of the RFA and covered by clauses 45 and 46 of the RFA as well as 47. They apparently give rise to no legal obligations.
2. The nominees on the Joint Working Group (assisting the review) are;
a) By the Tasmanian Government – Director of Resource Policy, Department of State Growth, and the General Manager, Natural and Cultural Heritage, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment.
b) By the Australian Government – Assistant Secretary Forestry, Department of Agriculture and Assistant Secretary Biodiversity Conservation, Department of the Environment.
3. The Joint Working Group Support Team are drawn as required, from Tasmanian and Australian Government departments and are as appointed by each party. Sadly the names of the appointees have not yet been disclosed.
The review of public submissions and synthesis of public submission are key actions for the ‘independent’ reviewer, Dr Glen Kile. He will be assisted by the Joint Working Group and the Joint Working Group Support Team. See Scoping Agreement.
Several relevant documents can be found at:
http://www.stategrowth.tas.gov.au/forestry/rfa
If you need someone helpful to talk with over it all Don Riddell, Senior Policy Analyst State Growth will I am sure be delighted to take your call whilst he reflects on his time as Huon District Forester with FT.
Note the absurd exclusions dating back to August 2011, which Governments are seeking you observe. They include the TFA for example. See the Summary document.
If you are making a submission on the review and want it to be considered you must complete the cover sheet.
We are concerned by the lack of openness that appears to predominate over this review.
Our association is a stakeholder in any RFA which affects Tasmania. We are not represented by any other party or organisation. Our association has long worked on forestry and forest conservation issues, including through the whole of the CRA and RFA under the NFPS. We consider that both areas, as they pertain to Tasmania, remain deeply and unabidingly unsatisfactory.
Obviously and sadly Governments are contemplating the extension of such a manifestly failed agreement as the Tasmanian RFA and that process design aspect is a part of this review which makes it more significant.
See clauses 7, 8 and 47 of the RFA.
In such a situation Governments really do need to urgently consider the current parlous state of the forestry industry in Tasmania including the multiple collapses of MIS driven corporations, the end of Forestry Tasmania (as we know it) and the massive contraction of the industry as an employer of any note and the ongoing pillage and clearance of high conservation value forests leading to the decline of threatened species.
Limiting the review to information (data) some time around 30th June 2011 is thus completely ludicrous.
• Richard Colbeck, Paul Harriss: More time to comment on Tasmanian Regional Forest Agreement
