Petitions
NATIVE FOREST LOGGING
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The House will now consider the electronic petition signed by 20,000 or more
persons that is listed on the Business Paper. It is about native forest logging and was lodged by the member for South Coast. Before I call the member for South Coast, I again welcome to the public gallery and the Cooper Gallery those who have joined us for the debate. I am aware that there are strongly held views on the matter we are about to discuss. Parliamentary debate allows that those with opposing views are able to express them freely without interference. I therefore ask that those in the gallery refrain from clapping or distracting debate in any way, including verbally or visually.
The question is that the House take note of the petition.
[NSW Parliament, Legislative Assembly, Hansard, 13 October 2022]
The Echo, 14 October 2022:
Yesterday in Sydney the public gallery in the NSW lower house of parliament was packed with citizens hoping to hear their representatives support the community’s calls for an end to the logging of our public native forests.
The debate was forced by the success of a petition with over 21,000 signatures that calls for a rapid transition out of logging our native forests.
Tens of thousands of people
Greens spokesperson for the environment and agriculture Sue Higginson MLC said that tens of thousands of people from across the state have come together to call for an end to public native forest logging. ‘The time has come and the case has been made that our public forests are worth more to us standing.
‘The government has made no plans to transition out of this destructive industry and into sustainable plantations in the full knowledge that communities and workers will be left behind by their policies.’
Ms Higginson said that much public native forest estate has been impacted by drought, fires and floods. ‘We need to change our perception of native forests to recognise them as a vitally important line of defence against both the climate and the extinction crisis, but this senseless government is determined to destroy them.
The petition
The parliamentary petition calls on the NSW parliament to:
Transition NSW’s native forestry industry towards sustainable plantations by 2024.
Immediately place a moratorium on public native forest logging until the regulatory framework is introduced.
Urgently protect high-conservation value forests through gazettal in the National Parks estate.
And ban biomass fuel, made from native forest timber.
 |
| North East Forests campaigner Sean O’Shannessy. Photo supplied. |
‘The
response to the petition from the Minister for Agriculture Dugald
Saunders was bitterly disappointing.
Tens of thousands of people are
calling for our forests to be protected and the minister has
completely dismissed what’s best for communities and the
environment,’ said Ms Higginson…..
‘Clarence MP Chris Gulaptis heckled his Liberal Party colleague Shelly Hancock as she introduced and spoke for the petition on behalf of her constituents.’
Mr O’Shannessy said the is a rapidly dawning realisation among all rational participants in the public discussion of the future management of native forests, that logging is not going have a place there.
‘Sustainable plantations will supply our timber needs and our forests will be protected in properly managed reserves. We can not afford to keep subsidising the destruction of our carbon sinks, water catchments and koalas homes,’ said Mr O’Shannessy.
The Government’s idea of ‘sustainable’
Ms Higginson said that the Government claims that sustainable native forest management includes cutting down critical habitat for threatened species, including koala habitat, clear felling areas of our forests and cutting down hollow-bearing trees which are essential for the survival of forest-dependent threatened species like gliders, owls and bats.
‘Bizarrely, the Government claims that cutting down our forests is good for the climate crisis in complete contradiction to scientific consensus. Old trees sequester more carbon than young trees, which on its own should be enough for us to be doing everything we can to protect them.
‘The end of public native forest logging is inevitable and we are so close to finally seeing the transition out of this industrial scale destruction.
‘Parliament could do this tomorrow if the government would stop blocking this important reform and develop a plan that delivers economic security for communities and protects our precious forests,’ said Ms Higginson.
For interested North Coast Voices readers the 39 minute ‘take note’ debate of this petition can be found at:
https://api.parliament.nsw.gov.au/api/hansard/search/daily/pdf/HANSARD-1323879322-128218. Commencing at Page 58.
Below are some debate excerpts and it should be noted that all misconceptions, misinformation, unfounded beliefs and downright political lies voiced are actually found in remarks made by the Nationals MLA for Dubbo and Minister for Agriculture & Minister for Western New South Wales Dugald Saunders, as well as in remarks by Nationals MLA for Clarence Chris Gulaptis who retires from parliament at the March 2023 state election. Yellow highlights of some of the largest whoppers are my own.
Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS (Clarence) (16:12): I speak in response to the petition tabled by the member for South Coast. I acknowledge the petitioners in the gallery for their efforts in obtaining 20,000 signatures, because it is an effort. I know that and I understand why they are present today. But I am really disappointed with the contribution by the member for Ballina, because it is misleading. One of the problems when we talk about native forestry in this country, and in this State in particular, is that a lot of the proposals that have been raised are based on a range of misconceptions, misinformation and unfounded beliefs.
When it comes to which side of the House manages forests better, this side manages forests better. That was shown when Bob Carr declared State forests national parks back in the eighties, because they were managed so well by what is now ForestCorp. They are managed well. It is like your garden: You cannot let your garden be overgrown with weeds; you have to manage it. Unfortunately, that is what the problem is. We let our national parks overgrow and when the bushfires came through, five billion native species were killed in 7.2 million hectares of national park. That is what happens in a national park when they do not have the resources to manage it.
Mr Jamie Parker: You're in government. Why don't you manage it?
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: Because the resources would have to come out of Health or Education.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Balmain will come to order.
Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: They would come out of Health or Education. The forests are managed in a responsible way, and we see that. Do we want native timbers from Borneo and attack the—
Mr Jamie Parker: We're about plantations.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Clarence will direct his comments through the Chair.
Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: We have plantation timbers and we also have native forests. The reason the forests were created in the first instance was to provide a resource for the inhabitants to build their houses and to construct this city. Parliament House is constructed from timber from our forests. That was the whole purpose of them, and still is. We want affordable housing, but where is the construction material going to come from? Members opposite talk about affordable housing, but how will it be provided if we do not cut down trees? Forestry Corporation plants four million seedlings every year to replace the trees it cuts. If that is not carbon sequestration, what is? It is a joke when members do not look at the evidence and the facts.
Mr Jamie Parker: We have looked at the evidence, mate, don't worry.
Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: Yes, look at the evidence. Five billion native species were killed in a hot fire because those national parks did not have the resources to be managed effectively.
Mr Jamie Parker: Well, give them the resources. You're in the Government.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: Yes, and we will take them from Education and Health, because that is what you are saying.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Clarence will direct his comments through the Chair.
Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: Yes, I will. The fact of the matter is that the Government's resources are finite; they are not unlimited. We cannot use a credit card and spend wherever we want to. State forests are managed effectively. They produce revenue that goes back into managing the forests and looking after feral animals and noxious weeds. Where is that revenue going to come from?
Mr Jamie Parker: It makes a loss.
Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: Do our national parks make a profit? No, they do not. Of course they do not. Native forestry is heavily regulated to ensure that there is long-term ecological sustainability, and robust science consistently demonstrates that those regulations are effective. The proposal to create public native forests would have substantial negative impacts on the State's economy and finances. We must remember that the forestry sector is worth around $2.8 billion. It directly supports almost 20,000 jobs, 40 per cent of which are in regional New South Wales. I call on the Labor Party and members opposite to stop vilifying the timber industry and support the productive and sustainable approach that the Coalition Government has put in place to manage this incredible resource that has been used as a building material since Jesus was a boy. It is a terrific sustainable product, so why do they vilify it?
Ms JANELLE SAFFIN (Lismore) (16:18): I make a contribution to debate on the petition, which has some 21,000 signatures. I take umbrage at what the member for Clarence said. I am not vilifying the industry, but I want to be part of the debate because I have been involved in it in my area for some 40 years. The issue has been so divisive so many times, so we must resolve it in such a way that we get a sustainable industry. That is the objective that most people are going for. That is the objective of the people who signed this petition. Somehow we have got to get there. I understand that it is important. So many people in the Lismore electorate and beyond are passionate about this issue.
My electorate has huge environmental movements, including the North East Forest Alliance, whose members are here today. The Nature Conservation Council was also here this week. Local constituents have written to me in support of the petition. Local forestry and timber industry workers, as well as the unions, have also spoken to me about the petition. I understand the passion and the emotion in it. As I said, I have lived it for a long time. From what is happening in my area and on the South Coast—based on what I heard from the member for South Coast—and what I have heard in this debate, I can say that we are at the vortex of the issue. At the heart of it is the desire to have our forests protected from fire, flood and pestilence, and to have habitats for animals and rare plants that are free of weeds and predators, or at least minimally affected.
We all want a sustainable logging industry, wherever it takes place. I have recently read that under Premier McGowan—and I would hardly call him a radical Premier of any kind—Western Australia is moving to end native forestry logging. I note that Victoria is doing the same under its more progressive Premier Andrews. Those desires and objectives speak to management, and that has been the problem that I have seen for so many years.
We know that before European colonisation the forests, which were extensive, were managed. Of course, Indigenous nations practised cultural burning, which, thank goodness, so many are embracing now because they see the value in it. One thing that the member for South Coast said that really struck me was that this petition was a message to the Government and all members that we must take heed, and we certainly do.
I draw the attention of the House to the Legislative Council inquiry into the long-term sustainability and future of the timber and forest products industry. I read the report only recently.….
The committee's findings and recommendations are telling about the state of the industry and what is going on under Forestry Corporation. There were 11 findings, and I draw attention to finding 2, 3 and 5. Finding 2 states:
In the last decade, there has been no increase in additional hardwood and softwood timber plantations.
Finding 3 states:
The lack of expansion of timber plantations by the NSW Government has significantly contributed to the current timber crisis which has only been further exacerbated by recent events, including the 2019/20 bushfires.
We heard about those from the member for South Coast. Finding 5 states:
The reduction in harvestable areas of public native forests and failure to expand native hardwood plantations has resulted in the loss of wood supply …..
Recommendation 1 states:
That the NSW Government identify and implement as a priority a long term funded strategy for the expansion of both softwood and hardwood timber plantations in New South Wales.
We can all agree that has to happen. Recommendation 2 states:
That the NSW Government establish further state-owned timber plantations
Recommendation 4 states:
That the NSW Government provide long term support to workers in the timber and forest products industry transitioning away from native forestry to other parts of the sector with access to worker transition services, training and retraining support, relocation support, and counselling.
They are some of the results from the inquiry.
Mr DUGALD SAUNDERS(Dubbo—Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Western New South Wales) (16:33): I thank the member for South Coast for tabling this petition. I have listened to the debate with great interest. I will clarify a few misconceptions. First, logging does not occur in State forests; selective harvesting occurs in State forests. The Environment Protection Authority is in charge of activating the regulations around that, and it does so regularly. The sawlog part of a tree is not used for biomass production; it is the roots, the bark and the other parts that cannot be used for anything apart from chipping, burning or pulping. It is about turning that waste into energy rather than leaving it to become a bushfire concern. That is the point.
As far as State forests, as the member for Oxley mentioned, only a tiny percentage of State forests are used for timber harvesting. We are talking about 1 per cent of the State forest that is harvested—that is, about 0.1 per cent of the broader forested landscape. It is a tiny amount, it is a managed amount, and it is not done in a way with disregard for the environment. That is the point.
Ever since I have been the Minister in this space, I have said that I hold Forestry Corporation to the highest level of compliance. That is absolutely what we need to do. On this side of the House, we all agree that there is no room for things to be done incorrectly. But to suggest that timber and State forests do not work hand in hand and do not support communities is just incorrect. It is also worth mentioning that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recognises that managing forests for sustainable timber production is one of the best ways to mitigate climate change. Removing trees, allowing more sunshine through the canopy and growing new trees actually sequesters great amounts of carbon, and we have a fantastic renewable, organic and regenerative resource that we love as humans.
State forests also support things like native-based tourism. State forests are already doing that. We are expanding the mountain biking, the horseriding, the picnicking and the walking trails. They are all managed because we have State forests that are managed to support those activities. I am interested to see what Labor does around forests as a policy matter, because we have complete support from a number of workers up and down the coast and inland who are saying they want support for native forestry. On this side of the House, we absolutely provide that support. It is worth $2.8 billion and thousands of jobs. We have their back, but we also appreciate the petition.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I thank the guests in the public gallery, who were visiting today to listen to the debate. I also extend thanks to those members of the public who have been listening online.
Petition noted.
