Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans’ Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) acknowledges that:

(a) some of Australia's leading forest scientists have acknowledged we have the knowledge, practical skills and regulatory framework to sustainably manage our native forests, including for timber harvesting on small, carefully targeted areas;

(b) we have a world-class and sustainable native hardwood timber industry in Australia which delivers social, economic, cultural and environmental benefits for our nation;

(c) timber industry workers provide invaluable skills and practical support to their communities during times of natural disasters, particularly bushfires;

(d) banning native timber harvesting in Australia will result in more imported timber products, often sourced from countries with poorer environmental protocols; and

(e) a sustainable native hardwood timber industry is part of the answer to reducing Australia's carbon emissions as timber products sequester carbon in our floorboards, furniture and other timber products;

(2) notes that the Victorian and New South Wales state governments have made illogical decisions to ban native hardwood timber harvesting which is based on political science, not environmental science; and

(3) urges the Government to:

(a) recognise that the sovereign capability to maintain a sustainable native hardwood timber industry is an issue of national importance because of the impact on house prices, supply chain considerations, carbon sequestration, biodiversity and community safety;

(b) support a taxpayer-funded public information campaign to explain the importance of the native hardwood timber industry and dispel the myths perpetuated by environmental activists; and

(c) resist any further attempts to ban the sustainable harvesting of native hardwood timber.

I must confess to a sense of deja vu here if not complete futility in bringing this motion to the attention of the House, because those opposite have demonstrated complete and utter contempt for the forest industry in Australia over the past 20 years. Driven by their desperate need to secure Green preferences in the city they have sold out blue-collar workers in regional communities, thousands of jobs have been lost, communities have been destroyed and the regions are less safe because we have lost the equipment and the skilled workforce which we've always relied on during major bushfire events. Labor governments in Western Australia, in Victoria and in New South Wales have either completely banned the native hardwood timber industry or decimated it to the point that it will struggle to remain viable. This is all in the name of political science. This has nothing to do with the environment. I've said many times in this place that you have two choices when it comes to timber: either you use your own in an environmentally sustainable way or you use someone else's.

Our nation already has a multibillion-dollar trade deficit in timber products. We have states like Victoria taking hardwood from other areas. Think of St Kilda pier, the West Gate Tunnel artwork project, Gippsland Lakes jetties in my electorate—all that timber came from other states. How is it a positive environmental outcome to be shipping and trucking timber thousands of kilometres to Victoria because the Victorian government banned the native hardwood timber industry in its own state? We have some of the strict environmental standards in the world, and when we ban harvesting of timber in Australia it's a very bad day for orangutans, because we just import more timber from developing nations. We have a world-class sustainable native hardwood timber industry in Australia which delivers social, economic, cultural and environmental benefits for our nation, and those timberworkers provide invaluable skills and practical support to their communities during times of natural disasters, particularly bushfires. I'd also add the sustainable native hub timber industry is part of the answer to reducing Australia's carbon emissions, as timber products actually sequester carbon in our floorboards, furniture and other products.

As the motion indicates, some of Australia's leading forest scientists have acknowledged we have the knowledge, the practical skills and the regulatory framework to sustainable manage our native forest, including for timber harvesting in small, carefully targeted areas. This is not dodgy science from environmental activists who they buy to get a compliant voice and mouthpiece to trump up their unfounded claims; these are real scientists with peer reviewed papers and years of practical experience. I refer to an article in particular, published earlier this year by four leading scientists, which called out the misinformation in the forest debate. Dr John Raison and Dr Sadanandan Nambiar are both former CSIRO chief research scientists, Dr Glen Kile is a former chief of the CSIRO division of forestry and Dr Tony Bartlett has extensive experience in managing native forests and is a leading expert in forest fire management and suppression. The article I refer to is worth reading for anyone with actual interest in the facts when it comes to forestry and the threat to biodiversity from wildfires in poorly managed forests. At a time when we are trying to build more homes, harvesting cutbacks by state governments have led to more imports and we are fed the lies that harvesting equals deforestation. Under our laws, harvested areas must be regenerated. Timber is the ultimate renewable resource. I will quote from their conclusions:

The public, policy makers and politicians should be wary of the increasing selective and unbalanced use of science wrapped in ideology to promote anti-forestry views.

They go on:

Rural communities and the nation can benefit in a number of ways by adopting science-based policies and management practices.

They go on:

… 'theoretical' claims that timber harvesting increases the intensity of wildfire, leads to greater net C emissions, reduces catchment water yields and threatens koalas have all been discredited in several detailed scientific analyses during the last few years.

I urge those opposite: read more about the native forestry debate. Don't rely on your pet scientists. Don't rely on the best money science can buy, like Professor David Lindenmayer. Trust the science from people have not been bought off to promote this religious ideology that all timber harvesting is bad. Ignore the zealots in this debate. This is dangerous for our communities. People and native animals die because of poorly managed forests, and the Labor Greens aren't just killing industry; they are killing regional communities. I urge the Labor Party to stop selling out blue collar jobs in the regions for Greens preferences in the city and support the Australian native hardwood timber industry.

See this speech in context