Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Minister for Agriculture) | Hansard source

I just want to address a couple of the questions raised in the debate thus far on the amendments and the reason the government is putting forward a wood-processing facility and a wood-fibre-processing facility. Contrary to the Greens' claims, this is an incredibly positive amendment. The bill currently covers saleyards, abattoirs and aquaculture facilities. To suggest that our foresters and our forest industry—70,000 Australians are employed in the forest industry, which is worth $23 billion to this economy—can't be protected from the illegal criminal activities of trespass, harassment and intimidation is a joke. This is not about lawful protest; this is about people who are inciting harm. Our forest industries are incredibly productive. We have the most sustainable forest industries in the world. We should be standing up for our forest industries, which are completely sustainable, and ensuring that they can continue to provide much-needed employment in rural and regional areas. Covering these sorts of facilities, as we're covering aquaculture, abattoirs and saleyards, is not a huge expansion; it's just understanding that primary production in this country includes farming, fishing and forestry. That is the definition, so it all makes intense sense.

In terms of Senator McKim's question about public land, because this goes to incitement of trespass, it has to be on private land or public land that's leased, if that answers your question.