Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Minister Ludwig. Is the minister aware that the Tasmanian minister for forestry has confirmed in state parliament today that Forestry Tasmania has entered into a profit-sharing arrangement with Aprin Logging to keep the Triabunna woodchip mill open? Can the minister say whether this is a breach of the forest principles agreement commit­ment to no new contracts? Does it jeopardise the Tasmanian and Commonwealth negotiat­ions in the forest peace process?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In terms of the specific issue around the Tasmanian forest principles agreement, as you know, the parties continue to reach agreement in relation to that particular point. Specifically around the issue that Senator Milne has requested, the area of the woodchip bidder—if we use it as the rhetorical question, 'Does the government support the conditions on the side of the Tiabunna mill to the Aprin bidder as being conditional or satisfactory in the progress of the implementation of the forest principles agreement?' and reverse it in that sense, because, if I detect the question correctly, I think that is where Senator Milne is heading—the government is obviously concerned to ensure that the impact of the Gunns Ltd move out of native forest logging on the Tasmanian economy is well managed. Of course, Gunns has signalled to the market that it will be selling its assets to support its move to a new business environment. The government continues its commitment to this process as outlined—that is, to support the continued discussions. We continue to support those discussions. The facilitator, Mr Kelty, is continuing the due diligence assessment—

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. Senator Milne's question was directly about a contractual arrangement involving Forestry Tasmania. The minister has not addressed that question.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point in order. I am listening closely to the minister's answer. The minister has 28 seconds remaining.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. If you are referring to contractual arrangements between the Tasmanian state government and individuals, that is not a matter that the Commonwealth would intrude on. If they do exist, they are commercial arrangements between those entities. What is important to consider is the Commonwealth's position in this. The Commonwealth is working on the statements of principles with the community and interest groups. (Time expired)

Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the minister for not answering the question that I asked. Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Can the minister say whether the forest principles agreement commitment to no new contracts is breached by Forestry Tasmania entering into a profit-sharing arrangement with Aprin?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again, the issues around what the Tasmanian government does or does not do are still matters for the Tasmanian government. What the Common­wealth is doing in this is working through—

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. Senator Milne's question did not mention the Tasmanian government. It was about Forestry Tasmania and Aprin. I ask you to have the minister direct his answer to the question.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on the point of order: Senator Ludwig is 14 seconds into his answer. To expect the minister to have seriously got into the content of his answer in 14 seconds is unrealistic. We seem to be getting a lot of spurious points of order and I suggest to you, Mr President, that there is no point of order. Senator Ludwig is attempting to give Senator Milne a serious answer to a serious question.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Ludwig, you have 46 seconds remaining to answer the question.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. Whether it is a private entity or a commercial entity in Tasmania, those are matters for commercial entities to manage their way through—that is, the commercial contracts they enter into and the terms on which they enter into them. Regarding the Commonwealth's role to date—and that is what I can describe—the government recognises the challenges in getting that statement of principles to an agreement stage. As to what the parties negotiate and the content of that agreement, until it is finally settled, I do not want to second-guess the outcome. We have appointed Mr Bill Kelty to facilitate that process. The parties are working diligently to arrive at a landed position. Senator Milne is asking me to second-guess, in some respects, what the content might finally look like and what the Commonwealth's role may be. I will take what I can on notice to see if there are any additional facts that I can provide. (Time expired)

Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. I ask the minister whether the forest principles agreement has in it 'no new contracts' and, if so, does Forestry Tasmania entering into a profit-sharing arrangement constitute a new contract?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will take what I can on notice. I go back to the primary point. I am not in a position, when the agreement is not finalised, to be able to second-guess all the terms of it and their impact in relation to commercial arrangements that may exist, as to whether they are in or whether they are out and who would be bound by them. The agreement has not been finalised. I think it is important to recognise that, when we land at that place, people can look at the results, look at the agreements that are there and see what conditions need to be met. It is important to keep in mind that it is about the coalition of interests and trying to reach an agreement. The government welcomed the community of interest that managed to get together to resolve what has been a very difficult issue in Tasmania for 30-odd years: getting out of native forest logging. (Time expired)