Home Politics Australian Politics NSW Nationals motion on the Forestry Industry, 31 May 2023

NSW Nationals motion on the Forestry Industry, 31 May 2023

June 1, 2023

Here are the speeches in reply to a motion in NSW Legislative Council as recorded in Hansard – 31 May 2023 – Proof

FORESTRY INDUSTRY

The Hon. SARAH MITCHELL (21:21): I move:

(1) That this House notes the decision of the Victorian Labor Government to bring forward the end of the native timber industry in Victoria.

(2) That this House notes that native forest harvesting in New South Wales is carefully managed under a robust regulatory framework to ensure the right balance is struck between environmental protection and forestry operations.

(3) That this House notes the important role that the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union will play in ensuring a balanced and vibrant future for forestry in New South Wales.

As the Leader of The Nationals in this place, I move an important motion. The forestry industry is really important to regional New South Wales. While in government, the New South Wales Coalition always supported regional communities to ensure that native forest harvesting in New South Wales was carefully managed under a robust regulatory framework to ensure the right balance was struck between environmental protection and forestry operations. The forestry sector in New South Wales is worth around $2.8 billion, and it supports more than 19,000 jobs. In government, our priority was always to protect our environment, improve our sustainability and ensure our economic productivity in the long term.

Unlike its Victorian cousin, NSW Labor has generally been silent on native forest harvesting, but now they find themselves on the Government benches and it is time for their position to be clarified. New South Wales has 20 million hectares of forested area, of which 8.3 million hectares is managed by the Government. The rest is privately managed. Of the forested area managed by the Government, 67 per cent is set aside for nature conservation with no timber harvesting and 24 per cent is managed by Forestry Corporation. Of the forested area managed by Forestry Corporation, 50 per cent is unavailable for forestry activity. Of the remaining 50 per cent, up to 30,000 hectares is harvested a year on a 30-year rotation, which is 0.1 per cent of the total 20 million hectares of forested area in this State.

New South Wales has an integrated framework to support the sustainable management that is regulated by the Environmental Protection Authority. This State is a world leader in sustainable forestry management and attracts experts in ecology and science to help manage its forests to a global standard expected by the community. New South Wales has dedicated agencies that specialise in sustainable forestry management. It is important that our State forests not only remain open for the critical timber resource they provide but to ensure that communities continue to have a strong connection to nature through the many activities State forests offer.

We should also be proud of the timber products our State forests produce and the hardworking people in regional areas employed in the timber industry. If we talk about investing in manufacturing jobs in New South Wales, we need to start by supporting our timber workers. We already have an army of skilled workers in the timber industry turning harvested trees into materials that can be used to construct buildings, furniture, flooring, timber products and other items. Our mill workers, timber contractors and transport workers are a vital part of our regional communities, especially on the North Coast. I know I speak on behalf of my colleagues in the other place when I say they understand how vital the forestry industry is for their communities.

It is also important to recognise the work of the Construction Forestry Maritime Mining and Energy Union [CFMEU] in standing up for forestry workers. The forestry industry has faced a number of significant challenges over the past three years, including the Black Summer fires and the recent floods that have impacted timber harvesting across the State. As supply decreased in mills and the timber supply chain suffered as a result of those dual disasters, the CFMEU continued to stand by timber workers. Without them, we would not have the incredible products that we rely on each and every day. Advocacy on behalf of timber workers is important. We stand by those who are looking to support the important industry.

As I said, we need to make sure we have the products that we rely on every single day. Not only is native hardwood timber a critical material, but we use it in our everyday lives. Native timber goes into flooring, cladding, panelling, residential building structures, fencing, boat and ship construction, power poles, bridges, furniture and firewood. Recent media about what has happened in Victoria shows that the industry is having a tough time. Victoria under the State Labor party is poorer for fast-tracking the end of their hardwood industry. Shutting down the hardwood timber industry sacrifices hardworking jobs, and the demand for timber does not cease. At a time of critical timber shortages in the construction and manufacturing sectors, the announcement by Victoria is a significant blow to regional economies and the environment.

To fill the demand for hardwood timber, consumers will end up buying imported timber from other countries with weaker environmental standards. That is a perverse outcome. New South Wales should be proud of its timber industry and support timber workers who provide a critical resource while adhering to the highest possible standards set out at State and national levels. I appreciate the opportunity to move a motion about an issue that impacts many people across regional New South Wales. The State has almost 20,000 people employed in the forestry sector. I look forward to the Minister’s contribution to the debate on the motion. This is an important debate. The Government needs to give the sector and its workers clarity and certainty about what plans, if any, it has in New South Wales. If the Government is intending to go down the path of its cousin in Victoria, this is an important debate. I look forward to members’ contributions to the debate.

The Hon. TARA MORIARTY (Minister for Agriculture, Minister for Regional New South Wales, and Minister for Western New South Wales) (21:26): The Government’s position is pretty straightforward, and the motion is not the wedge that the Opposition thinks it is. The Government is committed to a sustainable New South Wales forestry industry. That is not a secret. Labor members said it during the campaign and committed to it during the election campaign, and as the Minister I commit to it right now. The forestry and wood products industry in New South Wales is one of the State’s key levers for economic recovery and net zero emissions and is central to the viability of many regional communities. I met with members of the industry and the workers, even before I became the Minister. The Government absolutely supports the jobs across the industry.

Equally important is maintaining the balance of environmental protection while the industry is supported, and Labor will get that balance right. The State has to manage how it deals with the relationships across the sector. I note that paragraph (c) of the motion refers to acknowledging the work of the Construction Forestry Maritime Mining and Energy Union. The Government supports that union. I should probably move an amendment to also include the Australian Workers Union, which is very active in the forestry space and supports its members who work in that space. I will work with them closely on the Government’s position because jobs are important. There are roughly around 22,000 forestry jobs across the State. We will be working with the industry to maintain those.

The Government has committed to undertaking a comprehensive economic assessment to guide support for local jobs and communities. That will be achieved by supporting sustainable softwood and hardwood plantations across the State, the construction of trails and tourism infrastructure so that places can be used for all kinds of activities, effective fire and tree management conservation, and tourism facilities such as visitor centres in newly reserved areas. The Government will also undertake a skills audit to guide investment and incentives to encourage new economic opportunities in the forestry industry. The Labor Government supports forestry and wood products industries, which employ more than 22,000 people across New South Wales. During the election campaign we pledged to work on expanding the plantation estate. Getting the balance right is essential, and the Government will do that. We will not handle this in the same ridiculous way as the previous Liberal-Nationals Government. We will work across portfolios to make sure that we deal with the timber industry in the appropriate way. Rather than look at what happened in Victoria, which is not the same as New South Wales, I encourage the mover of the motion to look at what happened in her Government.

The Hon. MARK BANASIAK (21:29): I contribute to the debate particularly around the decision by the Victorian Labor Government to end native forest harvesting, which was a disgraceful decision based on chardonnay socialism. The Victorian Treasurer cannot explain where the State will get its timber from, so I smell dead orangutans on the horizon. The decision came down to people like forestry contractor Brett Robin. Fighting the 2019 Bunyip fire, he risked his life and drove through flames to rescue a trapped operator. His reward will be to lose his job in 2024. In the 2006 fires, the industry used its machinery to create firebreaks to protect Melbourne’s two largest water catchments. After 2024 Victoria will never have that protection again.

The Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party is unashamedly supportive of the timber industry. We do not pick and choose moments to support it, like the major parties do. Unlike The Nationals during the election campaign, we did not gag our members from talking about the proposed great koala national park. I pay tribute to the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union and thank its members for their support at the polling booths. They support the party because it has shown, through its words and actions, that it does not pick and choose when it supports them.

I draw members back to my inaugural speech, where I said both sides of politics have had equal experience in stuffing things up, and that rings true for the timber industry. Last year the Coalition inserted the great koala national park as a force majeure clause in new wood supply agreements, signalling what it would do if it were returned to government. Bob Carr started this rot with the reserve system—and it is a rot when you look at the facts. Eighty‑eight per cent of native timber in New South Wales is excluded from harvesting and 12 per cent is available to harvest at a rate of less than 1 per cent each year. That means that the 88 per cent, which should have wildlife returning to huge numbers because it has been locked up for conservation for so long, is the problem. There should be no endangered animals if The Greens rhetoric around parks is to be believed.

The 88 per cent locked up for conservation is clearly not delivering on the promised conservation outcomes, so why is the Government continuing to do it? All the evidence is there. The facts that The Greens shout from the rooftops actually spruik their own failures on conservation outcomes. I will not hold the Labor Government accountable for the sins of its weird, creepy Victorian uncle, but the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party is watching it on this issue. How does the Government plan to build the great koala national park without a net loss to timber supply? That would be a great feat. If nothing else, in the past four years I have proven that I am a dog with a bone. I stand steadfast with the timber industry in our State and across the country.

The Hon. EMMA HURST (21:32): I contribute to debate on the motion on behalf of the Animal Justice Party. I am well aware that the motion has been moved by the Opposition in an effort to try to wedge the Government and stick it to a core promise to industry. Nonetheless, I congratulate the Andrews Government on taking decisive action to bring an end to native forest logging in Victoria by January 2024 and call on the New South Wales Government to do the same. Our native forests are extremely important. They provide critical habitat for wildlife and play a vital role in carbon capture and storage. However, they are quickly being destroyed by the logging industry. TheNSW State of the Environment 2021 report found that habitat destruction and native vegetation clearing were the greatest threats to biodiversity in our State.

Logging is incredibly harmful to animals, which are often killed or injured when trees are cut down or logs are processed. Those that survive are at increased risk of dying from starvation, predation, exposure to the elements and other threats. Logging is also a key threatening process for dozens of threatened species in New South Wales, including koalas. Decades of the practice has meant a catastrophic decline in eucalypt tree forests. The fragmentation of native forests means that koalas are forced to travel from one area to another to seek food and shelter, making them more vulnerable to being hit by cars as they cross major highways and falling victim to diseases such as chlamydia.

New South Wales koalas are now formally listed as endangered and show no signs of recovery. We need bold action to protect koalas now if we are going to bring them back from the brink of extinction, and a key part of that recovery plan must be a ban on native forest logging. On top of all that, there is no commercial argument to keep the native forest logging industry going. Forestry Corporation of NSW is losing taxpayers’ money in its native logging operations. Ninety per cent of the State’s timber products already come from plantations rather than native forests. Banning native forest logging is one of the single biggest actions Parliament can take to turn around the climate and extinction crises. If the Government wants to prove it is serious about protecting animals and the environment, it needs to take action urgently on this issue.

The Hon. WES FANG (21:32): I believe the Hon. Sarah Mitchell moved this motion because the timber industry is quite important to the State in general, not just to rural and regional New South Wales. Many of our houses, furniture and infrastructure are made from timber. Timber is an amazing resource for building. It can be structural or used for floorboards or furniture. When it grows, it captures and stores carbon. If the State does not have its own timber industry, it will have to be brought in. In her contribution the Minister spoke about supporting more plantations—effectively more planned forestry—which I think is a great idea. But some private native forests are in areas that are under threat of being locked up because they are considered to be core habitat for X, Y, or Z.

If this State, and this country, does not have a sustainable means of producing its own timber, we will either have to bring it in from somewhere else or use another means to build houses—like steel, which everybody knows is more carbon intensive. If we want a sustainable product for the construction of houses, furniture and all the things we use on a day-to-day basis, we need a timber industry in this State. That is what is really worrying about what has happened in Victoria. At the end of the day, softwood and hardwood are used for different things and their plantations are different. Some private native forests being grown at the moment are at risk of being locked up. As much as I acknowledge the view of The Greens that we need more hardwood and softwood plantations, in reality what will happen is they are likely to be locked up halfway through their growth. Investment is needed so the State has a timber industry into the future. Plantations take 40 years or longer to grow, so the industry needs certainty, which is what the Opposition is calling for in the motion.

Ms SUE HIGGINSON (21:38): It currently costs taxpayers $417 per hectare to log our public native forest estate. That is about 1.5 million hectares that is managed for logging. At the moment, our plantation estate, which provides over 85 per cent of the State’s high-end timber, comes from plantations. It has returned $94 million over two years, whereas the hardwood estate has cost taxpayers $28 million. We are emitting 3.6 million tonnes of carbon by logging our public native forest estate. The money tells us we just cannot afford to be doing that. If we stop logging now, that is a $2.7 billion carbon saving between now and 2050 based on the current cheap price of carbon per tonne of around 36 bucks. We know that will increase massively as we go forward. We have just seen a report on the table that states if we stop logging in the north now it would be a $294 million return in revenue by 2040. The fact is we cannot afford to keep logging.

Members just heard about the Victorian decision. It is coupled with an $875 million price to make sure workers are looked after. If this is honestly about workers then we need to wake up. Members are having the same argument in this Chamber that was being had 30 years ago. It is time to grow up. We are decision-makers. We must take responsibility for workers, the environment and the economy. Right now the mere fact that the Opposition is proposing in this Chamber that this is all about looking after the CFMEU somehow—after 12 years of what it has done in terms of unions, workers, capping wages and so on—is unbelievable. The hypocrisy is outrageous. That is not wise when we are actually talking about the future of our grandchildren’s children. I move:

That the question be amended as follows:

(1) Omit in paragraph (2) “carefully”, “robust”, and “to ensure the right balance is struck between environmental protection and forestry operations”.

(2) Insert in paragraph (3) “plantation” after “vibrant future for”.

Those amendments would make for a reasonable and salvageable motion that is fit for this Parliament on this day in 2023, when we have serious decisions ahead of us regarding the public forest estate. That estate belongs to all of the people.

The ASSISTANT PRESIDENT (The Hon. Peter Primrose): Has the member provided a written copy of her amendment to the Clerk?

Ms SUE HIGGINSON: No, I have not.

The ASSISTANT PRESIDENT (The Hon. Peter Primrose): I ask that you please do so. I urge honourable members who seek to move amendments to please put them in writing and make them available to the Clerk.

The Hon. PENNY SHARPE (Minister for Climate Change, Minister for Energy, Minister for the Environment, and Minister for Heritage) (21:41): I support the motion of the Hon. Sarah Mitchell. I reflect on two issues in debate. The first is the concern of the member in bringing this motion to the House, which we welcome and support. But I note that the former Minister sat around the Cabinet table for a very long period in the previous Government. She would be aware of a number of reports that never saw the light of day, blocked from public release as a result of the actions of the National Party. It has been an incredible week, with the Liberal Party indicating it has done work on ending native forest logging and those reports that apparently may or may not exist. I reflect on the interesting and fun time that the previous Government had in relation to forestry; meanwhile, significant issues within the forestry sector were identified in the timber inquiry that went completely unaddressed. If the former Government was serious about that, it would have addressed it.

People are talking about the great koala national park, which Labor is absolutely committed to establishing. I have mentioned several times in the House the process we would undertake in relation to that. But there is ongoing debate regarding some forestry operations within the notional boundaries of the great koala national park. In particular, I put on record the issue of Pine Creek. Within those areas plantation forests will be harvested. I make it very clear that Labor supports plantation forestry. Those trees were put in the ground to be harvested. We must be very clear about what is plantation and what is native forestry and the way in which that is managed throughout the process of creating the great koala national park. It is not Labor’s intention to have plantation forests included within the great koala national park.

For all of the talk about the support for plantation, we have plantation trees that have been growing for many years that are ready to be harvested. We must work with that. Obviously we need rules about how that harvesting occurs as well as an absolute precaution in relation to any threatened species. But it is important to draw the distinction because I am asked about it every single day. We must be very clear that we will be very careful. We are working closely with Forestry Corporation on the operation of planned forestry activity into the future. Importantly, plantation timbers—which everyone seems agree needs to happen—must be allowed to be harvested.

The Hon. SARAH MITCHELL (21:44): In reply: I thank all members who contributed to debate. There were a few remarks that this was a wedge motion, but it was not. It was an opportunity to have a genuine conversation about an issue that is really important to regional New South Wales, which is why I moved it. It is not my normal area of policy expertise—I confess that. I have been learning a lot in the past few weeks. But as Leader of The Nationals in this House, people have personally been in touch with me about it. They want clarity and information about the Government’s position on these issues. I thank members for that because this is exactly what private members’ day is for: to have good, robust discussions about important policy issues that matter to the people we represent.

The ASSISTANT PRESIDENT (The Hon. Peter Primrose): The Hon. Sarah Mitchell has moved a motion, to which Ms Sue Higginson has moved an amendment. The question is that the amendment be agreed to.

The House divided.

Ayes 5

Noes 29

Majority 24

AYES
Boyd (teller)	Faehrmann	Hurst (teller)
Cohn	Higginson

NOES
Banasiak	Jackson	Moriarty
Borsak	Kaine	Murphy
Buttigieg	Lawrence	Nanva (teller)
Carter	MacDonald	Rath (teller)
D’Adam	Maclaren-Jones	Sharpe
Donnelly	Martin	Suvaal
Fang	Merton	Taylor
Farlow	Mihailuk	Tudehope
Farraway	Mitchell	Ward
Houssos	Mookhey

Amendment negatived.

The PRESIDENT: The question is that the motion be agreed to. Is leave granted to ring the bells for one minute?

Leave granted.

The House divided.

Ayes 29

Noes 5

Majority 24

AYES
Banasiak	Jackson	Moriarty
Borsak	Kaine	Murphy
Buttigieg	Lawrence	Nanva (teller)
Carter	MacDonald	Rath (teller)
D’Adam	Maclaren-Jones	Sharpe
Donnelly	Martin	Suvaal
Fang	Merton	Taylor
Farlow	Mihailuk	Tudehope
Farraway	Mitchell	Ward
Houssos	Mookhey