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.
