Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Hansard source

Those opposite might laugh at that, but this is what is happening under their watch. We all know the impacts of illegal logging are widespread: deforestation, damage to forest ecosystems, the facilitation of organised crime, the use of slave labour and, in an economic sense, a significant distortion of the free and fair operation of timber markets.

As I've said, we welcome this movement by the government, following all the work that we have done. There were two major reviews under us when we were in government. The first was the KPMG review in 2015 examining the impact of the Illegal Logging Prohibition Regulation, specifically on small business. The second was a statutory review of the act that was undertaken in 2018 by the then Department of Agriculture and Water Resources. Each of those reviews shed important light on how we could potentially strengthen our approach to countering illegal logging. As Minister Watt has acknowledged, this particular bill gives expression to two important improvements identified as part of those previous reviews.

Once again, continuity between good policy development and implementation in this specific area when we were in government and action by the current government shows that, when the government follows the approach of the coalition and follows it strictly, you do get good outcomes. But if it doesn't then you don't get those good outcomes. Sadly, we're seeing that in a lot of areas.

What is this bill seeking to do? First, we would like more information around time frames and about how the content of each new regulation and rule might look, because we want to make sure that, when it comes to this bill, the good ideas and good policy turn into good implementation as well.

More generally—and I touched on this previously—one of the concerns we have with the approach being taken by the government is that it is potentially going to lead to us needing more and more timber imported into this nation. One of the things I would say to the environment minister is, 'What you should be doing is making sure, especially when it comes to Tasmania, but in other states as well, that you're honouring the commitment made by the Prime Minister that native forest harvesting would occur in Tasmania.' That was an ironclad commitment that was given and that we would like to see the environment minister come out and back 100 per cent.

We would also like to see the federal Labor government start calling out more and more state governments that are putting an end to native forestry. We're seeing this in Victoria, and we're starting to see the cost and detriment of this approach. In western Victoria we're seeing areas which are being harmed, in particular in and around Raglan in my electorate of Wannon, where the community is absolutely shocked and has been devastated by the Victorian state government's approach to native forestry. We're also seeing it in Gippsland, and it's having flow-on consequences. What it means is that, in order to get timber, we're seeing a move away from native forestry and, once again, an increase in the use of plantations to make up for the fact that we don't have access to that native forest.

Plantation timber, planted in the right areas, done in conjunction with farmers and well planned with our agriculture sector, obviously has a place. But what we're seeing now—and this is deeply, deeply concerning—is our prime agricultural land being used, once again, for plantation timber, without any planning and without any proper consultation with local communities.

We've seen overseas investment—for instance, a $200 million fund just buying into high-value, high-rainfall agricultural land—without the community being reassured about the impact that this might have. This can be devastating. Once again, when it comes to the government, there doesn't seem to be any planning and there doesn't seem to be any proper consultation or any understanding about how we need to manage our land. If we all end up just subsidising one means of production over another, through one form or another, then that can have a huge detrimental effect on our nation, especially when a lot of the value-adding that goes on in our agriculture sector is dependent on, for instance, dairy or beef being produced on that land. So getting this balanced approach right is absolutely crucial. What my communities have seen and are saying to me is that this is not the current approach that we're seeing from the federal government.

We wouldn't be seeing these pressures if there weren't these ideological decisions being taken to stop native forest harvesting. Native forest harvesting has been done properly and correctly in this nation for decades. It has provided jobs in this nation for many, many years—

An opposition member interjecting

Those opposite can laugh, but I can tell them that there are timber communities in Victoria absolutely devastated by the decisions that are being taken. It's not a laughing matter when your job has been lost, and I think that to laugh in such a cynical way is absolutely insulting those timber communities.

We have to make sure in everything that we do that we get the balance right. I want to see some proper planning and understanding that if we don't then what we are going to see is our prime, food-producing agricultural land competing with other forms and means of production. Ultimately, this will mean that we're going to feed fewer people and that is not good for our nation.

The opposition supports this bill because, sadly, it's becoming more and more important that we import more timber. This is because of what's being done to our native forests and our ability to harvest those native forests in a sustainable way. We do need to get this right; we have to make sure that we get the regulatory environment right. It does seem in this one instance that the government is following the very good policies and procedures which were put in place by the previous coalition government. But I take this opportunity to say to the government: getting your planning right as to how we balance plantation timber versus our rural land—our high-producing agricultural land—is incredibly important, and is getting more and more important.

See this speech in context