Raff Ciccone (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It's good to start this parliamentary week on such an important topic: our forestry and ensuring that we not only conserve our forests for future generations but also support a very important industry that employs thousands of people right around this country, particularly in my home state of Victoria. I note the comments by Senator Duniam as a former minister in this portfolio. It is a very important industry in his home state of Tasmania.

However, I want to just also make the point that the last election demonstrates, sadly, how irrelevant those opposite have become. The decision to bring forward this private senator's bill in the first period of private senators' business in this 47th Parliament says a lot and is just another example of how the opposition are scrambling to find any form of relevance right now. For a whole decade, there had been an absence of policy agenda, particularly when it came to forestry. Faced with the very first opportunity to put forward in the Senate a bill that will deliver jobs and actually strengthen the industry, the opposition bring forward a bill that is effectively out of date. It's superseded by events of last year. It really is concerning to see that, at the first opportunity, the shadow minister for forestry brings to this chamber a bill that no longer has any practical meaning or practical effect. I know it's not his bill, and I should note that for the record. It is a bill that was put forward by Senator McKenzie in the previous parliament. But this bill, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Regional Forest Agreements) Bill 2020, is not really a serious legislative venture. Indeed, it has never been.

The bill was originally conceived by the former minister, Senator McKenzie. She effectively used this bill to wedge the previous administration during her time out of the ministry. This bill is nothing more than a stunt. It is nothing more than an attempt by the National Party to embarrass their Liberal colleagues.

Senator Scarr, I'm doing you and your colleagues a favour. It started as nothing more than the Nationals trying to do wedge politics against the Liberal Party when they were last in government.

The matter to which this bill pertains—that of the May 2020 decision of the Federal Court—has, just like those opposite, long since lost relevance. For those who are unfamiliar with this and are listening in to the chamber today, the decision by the Federal Court came as a judgement in the matter of Friends of Leadbeater's Possum v VicForests. That decision's impact upon the forestry industry was devastating, in my opinion. I note that there'll be others who will have very different views. Just to be clear on that particular decision, in her interpretation of section 38(1) of the EPBC Act, Her Honour found that, in breaching the Victorian Code of Practice for Timber Production 2014, VicForests was no longer operating in accordance with a regional forestry agreement and thereby lost the so-called exemption from part 3 of the EPBC Act. I know that the intricacies of such legislation and regulation, particularly when it comes to the environment and the forestry industry, can be lost on a lot of people. However, I appreciate that it's complex, but it's a policy area that is so important for thousands of people who rely on a very strong industry, an industry that does employ people in our regions. As I said, it is a particular area of interest here in the Senate. I can assure you that, for me, and for thousands of workers in my state who rely on this industry to make ends meet, these interests are hardly niche; they are of vital importance. The implications of the Federal Court decision were very significant for the forestry industry in this country. They threw in doubt the legal framework within which forestry activity operates.

Regional forestry agreements are essential legal instruments for the Australian forestry industry and are each tailored to a specific geographical area. These agreements provide forestry operators with the certainty they need to carry out their very important work. Recognising the significant environmental approval processes proposed forestry activity must complete before proceeding at a state level, regional forestry agreements allow these processes to stand as those that apply to the forested area, rather than those of the EPBC Act. Indeed, it was never the intention of the EPBC Act to provide the legal framework for forestry operations. This is why regional forestry agreements exist.

With great relief to me and many others, in May 2021, the full bench of the Federal Court handed down a unanimous decision which upheld VicForests' appeal against the previous Federal Court decision, reinstating the longstanding status quo regarding how regional forestry agreements interact with the EPBC Act. This was a big win, a major win, I might say, for the industry and for the thousands of workers that rely on its continued existence for their own economic security. The later decision by the High Court of Australia to deny leave to appeal this second decision was just as much of a relief. It provided industry with the certainty it needed, certainty that was lost in the first Federal Court decision.

Unfortunately, those opposite appear not to be aware of these essential and very important facts. This should hardly be a surprise. After all, those opposite aren't really interested in delivering for very key industries in my home state like forestry, and it really is disappointing to see them rehashing old bills from the previous parliament. But there is something that is more disappointing, and it was probably not even acknowledged in the contribution by the good senator Senator Duniam, someone who I've worked very closely with on a number of issues in this place. One of the recommendations that came out of the Senate inquiry into this bill—and I'll read it out for the benefit of new senators—is:

Recommendation 3

2.71    In the event that the Federal Court decision of 10 May 2021—in relation to VicForests' appeal to the decision in Friends of Leadbeater's Possum Inc v VicForests (No. 4) [2020] FCA 704—is appealed and at that time the Australian Government has not legislated the outcome required by Recommendation 1, the committee recommends that the Senate pass the bill.

The only thing about that recommendation is that the appeal was actually denied. Therefore, if you take the Liberal Party's recommendation from the previous inquiry, we really should not even be here today debating this bill. The recommendation was that we should proceed only if the appeal was successful, but it wasn't. So, quite frankly, this is redundant. I'm surprised we're even wasting the Senate's time this morning debating such a bill. But, as I said earlier in my contribution, it is no surprise, given those opposite are scrambling to find bills to even debate in this place.