Signatories to Tasmania’s Forest Deal expect it to last only 12 months at the most, according to Rumney MLC, Tony Mulder.
The Wilderness Society’s Vica Bailey, in an interview on electronic media on Thursday 28/03/13, objected to The Mulder Forestry Bill amendment ( TT here ) to slow down reserve creation because it would push it out past the federal and state elections.
“The hasty grab for 80% of the proposed reserves without any real durability, shows that the ENGOs have little faith that the forest deal will last more than a year,” Mr Mulder said.
“State government and industry are probably supporting the deal to get their hands on Commonwealth money before the ENGOS resume the war to destroy the remnant native forestry industry!
“Under the current Forestry Bill ‘Peace in our time’ might not even last as long as Neville Chamberlain’s.”
“The amendments that I have proposed will strengthen the Bill putting an obligation on all sides to continue durability well into be future.– not just till the next election,” he said.
“In its present form, the TFA gives the appearance of a conspiracy to defraud the Commonwealth and steal 400,000ha of publicly owned resources”, Tony Mulder said.
• David Obendorf: The tail wagging a dog called Bill
The Legislative Council has been forced to amend the [i]Tasmanian Forest Agreement Bill[/i] 2012. These legislators have picked up their pens (and wielded their words) to remedy a very poorly drafted statute.
Eleventh-hour attempts by the ENGOs to place band-aids on this Bill were announced on 21 March. The leader of Government business in the Council, Craig Farrell tabled a letter from the ENGOs reassuring the Council about Forest Stewardship Council certification for Tasmanian forests in permanent production zones.
[i]‘We note the importance of marketplace security for the durability of the agreement… we express our strong support for this key aspect of durability’.
A further key aspect of marketplace security is FSC certification for Tasmanian wood products. … As signatories to the TFA, our organisations are committed to actively supporting FSC certification for the Permanent Timber Production Zones land as a matter of priority…’ [/i]
Reference: Letter to all Legislative Councillors tabled by Craig Farrell [dated 20 March 2013] signed by Lyndon Schneiders [TWS], Vica Bayley [TWS(Tas)], Phill Pullinger [ET Inc] and Don Henry [ACF]
In committee discussing amendments to the Bill, MLC for Rumney brought forward his amendments on the afternoon 21 March.
[Hansard]
Mr MULDER – As a point of procedure, there are four amendments to this particular clause [clause 13] standing in my name. They are contiguous, and relate to each other. It would be ridiculous to pass any one of them without passing all of them, or defeat any one of them without defeating all of them. I am wondering, from a protocol position, whether it is possible to run them all together as a block?
Mr MULDER – Mr Chairman, I move –
That clause 13 subclause (5) be amended by inserting after paragraph (b) the following paragraph:
(c) subject to subsection (5A), obtain advice from the Forestry Corporation that [b]Forest Stewardship Council[/b] certification has been obtained for forestry operations in [i]permanent timber production zone[/i] land.
This deal is all about a viable timber industry into the future, in exchange for reservation of land. There are processes for all of this. It also became very clear from the evidence we heard that the future of the industry depends upon being able to put Forest Stewardship Council certification not just on the products, but also on the processor and forestry operations in Tasmania. It is crucial for future markets, and for all this talk about the supply side, the bottom line is the industry is not sustainable. I do not know of any business that is not in the business of selling something, be it goods or be it a service. In the end, if you are not selling stuff, you are not in business. This is important to the future of the forest industry; it is important to the vision as articulated in the bill, which does not exist yet because we have not passed it. It is important to the vision in the bill for the future of the Tasmanian forest industry that we have a viable industry. As such, forest certification has been identified and demonstrated beyond doubt through our hearing process as being crucial to the future of forest operations and of the forest industry, particularly the native forest industry in this state, but also, I might say, to the private native forestry and also to the plantation group.
This is an important issue of durability that needs to be built in – not just the seeking of it but the obtaining of it. If we just said ‘progress towards’ or ‘seeking it’, it would mean that we have given over the reserves and we have not actually obtained anything yet. This is about making sure that this is a proper exchange: the conservation outcomes of reserves in exchange for a viable future of the forest industry. That is why this is crucial to the survival of this deal.
Mr DEAN – As I have said, I am clear throughout in my position on this. If this Bill were to get up, then it is important to ensure that it becomes a better Bill. That is the reason I am participating throughout this process. I will support this amendment being put forward by the member because I believe it does, and really will, put some pressure on the position of a number of people in relation to getting FSC certification throughout this process. That was talked about a lot during the select committee. We had a number of people talk to us about that process.
I want to read from a comment emailed to me in relation to this and this specific amendment. I am not going to identify the author other than to say that the author is a well-known Tasmanian identity. I think that suffices at this time. He says this:
I understand that neither Mr Bayley of TWS, Dr Pullinger of ET Inc nor the ACF representative ever participated in the FSC process; this work was delegated to others. Individual representatives of the Signatory ENGOs can commit themselves to support the FSC certification process for permanent timber zones and offer of a letter to the Legislative Councillors (date 20 March 2013 and tabled today) but those Tasmanian citizens have no special advantage over anyone else on the formulation of FSC processes and criteria.
It will put the pressures back on this system as to whether FSC certification will be provided because I have been told by a number of people that FSC certification is highly unlikely where it deals with native forests. This Bill identifies logging in native forest areas.
Mr Chairman, in that regard, I will be supporting this amendment because, as I said, it would strengthen this Bill if it, for heaven’s sake, gets through.
[b]Amendment agreed to.[/b]
Mr MULDER: The other thing I want to make clear about both this and the previous amendment is: I am talking about full FSC certification; I am not talking about that interim little thing where they whack a stamp on your material. There are two levels of certification, as I understand it. One is a certification of the product to say that we certify it comes from a non-controversial source. The other one is a full FSC certification which has the three chambers – the environmental group and the other two groups, where they have all got together and given the certification. [3.03 p.m.]
When I talk about obtaining the certification, and my intent when I am putting this bill and your intent when you pass these amendments, is for full certification, not the interim rubber stamp.
Mr HALL – I want to ask the honourable member to clarify this tranche of amendments that he has here. To get my understanding clear, the third amendment and the fourth, this is for FSC to be in place prior to the second tranche of reserves? Is that right?
Mr Mulder – Yes.
The leader of Government business in the Council tabled another letter from the ENGOs foreshadowing amendments on ‘sovereign risk and the Forest Practices Authority’ … ‘to be proposed by Ruth Forrest, MLC for Murchison’.
[i]Should you have any issues you wish to discuss in respect to the legislation and amendments please feel free to contact us.[/i]
Reference: Letter to all Legislative Councillors tabled by Craig Farrell [dated 21 March 2013] signed by Lyndon Schneiders [TWS], Vica Bayley [TWS(Tas)], Phill Pullinger [ET Inc] and Don Henry [ACF]
Download:
Two_Letters_from_ENGOs_dated_March_2013_to_Legislative_Councillors.pdf
