Administrative Decisions Tribunal decision will allow the community to see true cost of logging the NSW's native forests

 

The Daily Examiner 29 October 2012:

 

An Administrative Decisions Tribunal decision in late September will allow the community to see "the true cost of logging the state's native forests for the first time", according to the Nature Conservation Council of NSW (NCC), the state's peak environment organisation.
The NCC had appealed against a Forests NSW decision refusing to give information about wood supply agreements in the state's north.
In its judgment the tribunal stated "there is a clear public interest in an agency that is dealing with public assets being accountable for the manner in which it contracts to sell those assets."
For years we have been told by governments and bean counters about the importance of the "user pays" principle. This undoubtedly means the costs of an operation should be covered by those reaping the benefits of the operation.
There are both administrative and infrastructure costs to the public purse in providing logging companies with access to the community's forests.
While logging companies have been paying royalties for the trees they have harvested, their payments have not covered these costs. Indeed Forests NSW has been running at a loss for years, particularly with regard to its native forests operations.
Given various state governments' concerns about expenditure and recouping costs, it is astounding that State Forests has for so long been able to operate at a loss. Perhaps the fact that wood supply agreements have been kept secret has helped delay any move to remedy this situation.
North Coast Environment Council (NCEC) president Susie Russell stated, "For too long the high price of the environment and the community is paying to see the state's native forests being cut down has been kept secret. This decision will now contribute to more sustainable management of our native forests."
A 2009 auditor-general's report into native logging found that if existing pricing arrangements were rolled over without being subject to careful and fair review the community would incur economic loss. Hopefully, now that the existing arrangements can be made public, there will be an increased incentive for the government to ensure that the community's timber resources will be appropriately priced.

Leonie Blain

Clarence Valley Conservation Coalition