Tasmanian forestry agreement will hurt industry
Fri 21 October 2011
Teale Kuskopf-Dallas, Bachelor of Journalism
The forestry deal designed to protect Tasmania’s native forests could lead to job losses, according to Forestry Industries Association of Tasmania chief executive Terry Edwards.
The $A276 million intergovernmental agreement (IGA) was designed to end a 30-year conflict between the forestry industry and environmentalists.
In 2010, environmentalists, industry groups and the CFMEU began a series of roundtable meetings, instituted by former Tasmanian Premier David Bartlett.
They discussed the future of the depressed Tasmanian forestry industry and agreed to a statement of principles, upon which the IGA was based.
The battle between the different groups was re-ignited, however, with claims that the IGA was fundamentally altered at the eleventh hour.
Forestry Industries Association of Tasmania (FIAT) chief executive Terry Edwards said significant changes were made to the IGA based on a report by independent arbiter Professor Jonathan West.
“FIAT, along with all of the signatories, were provided an opportunity to consider to read and consider a draft copy of the IGA on Thursday 4 August,” Mr Edwards said.
“The final IGA, which is dated 7 August, contained a number of significant changes.”
Among the changes was the removal of the government’s commitment to permit access to interim reserve areas while the IGA was being implemented.
That would have allowed industry groups access to wood supply to meet their contractual obligations.
Mr Edwards said the decision showed a “fundamental inability” to understand the complexity of forest modelling and wood flow analysis.
“All of our worst fears have been realised,” Mr Edwards said.
“Both governments have now been formally advised by Forestry Tasmania that they cannot meet their contractual obligations.”
Another change was the removal of legislature to ensure that wood supply requirements would be met for sawlog, rotary peeled veneer billets and special species timber.
“In combination these two changes have fundamentally undermined the confidence of the industry that its resource needs will be met,” Mr Edwards said.
“They have been reduced from a position of primacy to being subjugated to the reserve's agenda.”
Mr Edwards said the secretive changes have resulted in a loss of confidence by the forestry industry.
“Investment confidence has been significantly impacted and employment intentions have been significantly reduced,” Mr Edwards said.
Mr Edwards said this would have a highly adverse impact on the vulnerable regional communities, which rely on the forestry industry to survive.
Yet $A45 million of the deal was being spent solely on assisting forestry workers to leave the industry.
That’s more than six times the amount that the Federal Government was spending on annual management of the 430, 000 hectares of forest that would be conserved as national forests.
An additional $A120 million was to be spent over 15 years to diversify the economies of communities which depended solely on the forestry industry.
Huon Valley Environment Centre spokeswoman Jenny Weber said the IGA signified a “heartening future” for Tasmania.
“We definitely recognise that the IGA may deliver the protection of some of the most incredible forests that the world has,” Ms Weber said.
“For us it’s a step in the right direction insofar that the industry and environmentalists are sitting down at the table, and have been doing so for a while.
“The industry has realised that it is in crisis.”
Environmentalists also had their concerns, particularly regarding the slow timescale for the implementation.
“The thing that’s really worrying is that the transition out of native forestry is very far down the agenda of the IGA,” Ms Weber said.
“Ending deforestation would be a very quick and effective way to reduce the effect of climate change.”
A study by Australian National University climate law expert Andrew Macintosh agreed that a reduction in native forestry logging could significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Ms Weber disagreed that the IGA would bring about adverse economic impacts.
“The economy is highly depressed with the forestry industry,” Ms Weber said.
“There are people losing their jobs, losing their livelihoods because the forestry industry is not sustainable.
“They’ve been a declining industry for a long time now.”
Ms Weber said Tasmanians needed to start looking for sustainable ways to invest in the future.
“There are jobs in protecting forests,” Ms Weber said.
Ms Weber also cited the South Australian forestry industry, which had seen great economic success since it moved from native forestry into plantations.
“There is a real potential for Tasmania to be a place people want to live because of the natural environment,” Ms Weber said.
Tasmanian Opposition Leader Will Hodgman said the deal was an attempt by the state government to appease the Greens.
“The Green-Labor Government has no mandate to implement this appalling deal,” Mr Hodgman said.
“If Ms Giddings won’t do the right thing and tear up the agreement, she should call an election and let the people finally have their say.”
Image(s) designed by Rodney Ross
Enter comments about this article
Submitted Comments
Great article Teale
Sharon WRight