Michael Ferguson (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to bring to the attention of the House and all members the need for a number of economic and community development initiatives in my community of Northern Tasmania. There has been a great deal of activity in my electorate of Bass, especially in recent years, thanks to the strong economy that is manifest in all parts of our nation under the management of the Howard government. I would go so far as to say that Bass, in fact, is not the same place that it once was. While there are still challenges that lie before us that need to be tackled, I think it is worth reflecting on the positive changes that have occurred. I think we dwell on the bad things too much in this country. The standard of living that our community enjoys today is far and away better than it was as recently as 1996 when John Howard took the reins.

Perhaps one of the most reliable indicators as to how a community is faring is the unemployment rate. After all, this is the place of economic activity and wealth creation for people and directly reflects the strength or otherwise of the local economy. In February of 1989, in fact back when I was in high school, 12.5 per cent of the workforce in the northern region of Tasmania was unemployed—by workforce, of course, I refer to those people participating in the labour market. In August of 1993, the figure was 12.7 per cent. By March of 1996, in the dying days of the Keating government, while lower, the figure was still an unacceptably high 11.5 per cent. The latest data demonstrate that that figure is now as low as a flat six per cent. Those figures are regional, from Northern Tasmania. The figures by electorate are similarly striking and demonstrate a reduction in the unemployment rate in Bass from 9.9 per cent in March of 1996 to just 5½ per cent in June this year—which is the latest figure available to me.

I will close my remarks on unemployment on this point. The almost complete demolition of unemployment in this country must be seen as remarkable for an additional reason. It represents an obvious drop in the number of unemployed, but amazingly it has occurred in the same period during which participation—that is, the number of people in the job market—has increased markedly. Across the nation, the Howard government can now quite correctly take credit for having created 1.8 million new jobs—a record, I suspect, which has never been matched before. The results of good government are there, but we do have more work to do and this includes in my electorate of Bass.

Gunns Ltd has proposed a bleached kraft pulp mill on the East Tamar industrial estate at Bell Bay, south of George Town. At face value, I believe this proposal holds enormous value for the Tasmanian community and indeed the Australian community. At a cost of $1.4 billion to develop, the mill will be elemental chlorine free, will value-add timber resources currently being exported to overseas pulp makers and will not use old growth logs at all. The proposed mill will initially produce 820,000 air dried tonnes of pulp and will have capacity in the future to produce up to 1.1 million tonnes. If this development were to not go ahead then the same value-adding would continue to take place in other countries, employing non-Australians. This is just the sort of development that we need in Australia—a value-adding project that benefits Australians. This will contribute to the sustainability of Tasmania’s forest and forest products industry and put beyond doubt our community’s ability to create jobs by taking hold of economic development opportunities for the benefit of our regional communities and our nation as a whole.

It has been estimated that, beyond the construction period of the mill, the operational employment effect for Tasmania will be more than 1,600 jobs, taking in direct and indirect employment outcomes. Formal approvals are still needed from both the Tasmanian and the Australian governments. The local George Town Council has already enthusiastically endorsed the project. If approved, construction should begin next year and be fully operational by 2009.

Having regard to the sensitivities of some people who are concerned about what they might have been told by the political opponents of the pulp mill, I would like to simply say that, as a federal representative, I have no interest in blindly supporting any proposal. I have no interest in turning a blind eye, so to speak, to environmental considerations in the blind pursuit of industry. However, the fact is that Tasmania’s Resource Planning and Development Commission has already devised a best practice set of guidelines to which any proponent must adhere. If developers cannot make it viable in meeting their environmental obligations then they cannot build it in Tasmania.

The second point that I would like to make in this regard is that I have seen the integrated impact statement produced by the proponent and I regard it as a very sophisticated and comprehensive document. It details the proposal and its impacts are taken from many social, financial and environmental perspectives. As a statutory authority, the RPDC is pro development but fiercely independent of government and is charged with the responsibility to ensure that the planning scheme is firm and fair. It can be relied upon to assess the IIS and to make a fair judgement as to the development proposal.

If Mark Latham and Labor had been successful at the last election, their forestry policy would have spelled the end for many working families and businesses in Northern Tasmania and would have rendered any thoughts of a world-class pulp mill just pure fantasy. It simply would not have been possible. We all know that, and we also know that there are many in the federal Labor Party today who are politically green before they are pro worker. That is certainly the case, even for some federal Labor members and senators from Tasmania. These are the ones who either vocally supported Mr Latham’s foolish forest policy or simply went quiet on the issue—it was one or the other. Mr Deputy Speaker Adams, I do not wish to reflect on you; I had in my speech that I discount the member for Lyons from that group, but him alone. All others are culpable on this issue along with Mr Latham, who continues to carry the stigma of cynically wanting to shut down jobs as an election platform to win Greens preferences in mainland states—a platform which apparently did not work. It was bad policy and bad politics.

My colleague Senator John Watson last week raised a motion in the other place which condemned green sabotage of legitimate business interests, such as green groups’ continual harassment of customers of Gunns and other timber companies in Tasmania. It also noted the vital role in the Tasmanian economy played by the forestry industry and the need to support this industry and, indeed, the building of a pulp mill in Tasmania. Interestingly, the Labor Party in the Senate sided with the Greens in opposing this motion and still resist calls to give a proper explanation for themselves other than to say that ‘the motion moved by Senator Watson did not go far enough’. They sound like weasel words to me.

I nonetheless welcome the recent motion, which saw bipartisan support—something which I would like to see more of—rather than petty one-upmanship from a desperate and embarrassed opposition in the Senate. I say to Labor: stop petty pointscoring designed to send secret messages to the Greens that you are one of them, while at the same time trying to claim support for job-creating industry. It is impossible to walk on both sides of the street. Flip-flopping is wrong and annoying. Sometimes you just have to say what you believe, develop your policies and live by them. To the Northern Tasmanian community, I publicly pledge in good faith my continuing support of our timber industry—accepting that, like any industry, it can be continuously improved—and a stronger economy that will benefit the people to whom I answer.

There are many economic opportunities which are becoming apparent in Northern Tasmania and I am an enthusiastic supporter of them. Time does not permit me to go into them in detail. However, I wish to mention the Musselroe resort, which is proposed for the north-east of Tasmania, the Norfolk project and the East Tamar Highway upgrade. I remind the House that, importantly, in order to be able to support these valuable community projects which enhance economic development, you need good government—a government that is prepared to take difficult decisions. Strong economic management at the government level will allow us, as governments and representatives of the community, to support projects with the proceeds of a better and stronger budget. I thank the House.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time for the grievance debate has expired. The debate is interrupted and I put the question:

That grievances be noted.

Question agreed to.