Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of report No. 12—the Senate Standing Committee on Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts report Conserving Australia: Australia’s national parks, conservation reserves and marine protected areas. I commend the report to the Senate and, in so doing, I wish to raise my concern about a particular area in Tasmania, the Florentine Valley, and a document that has been signed by Forestry Tasmania with forestry activists. It is a memorandum of understanding that was signed in June this year. In my view, it is an indicator that we are headed for another Labor-Green accord, this time at a federal level—a Rudd Labor-Green accord. It is an indicator that, in Tasmania, the Green-Labor accord is alive yet again. That accord did occur at a parliamentary level from 1989 to 1992, and it was disastrous for Tasmania.

The memorandum of understanding which has been signed relates to the Florentine Valley, which had previously been available for forestry operations. That document, in substance, says that criminal activity to be undertaken in that area will not be undertaken. You do not require a lawyer to tell you that you cannot contract not to undertake criminal activity. It is deeply concerning that an MOU like that would be signed by Forestry Tasmania on behalf of the Tasmanian government. In my view, it is a potentially illegal document and it is nothing more than state sanctioned blackmail. This is an agreement between Forestry Tasmania, on behalf of the Tasmanian government, with these forestry activists—who, prior to the signing of this MOU, had sought to lock up that area of forestry operations entirely to make it a conservation area so that there would be no further forestry operations in that area. That MOU sends a message to me and to the community that Forestry Tasmania is willing to do a deal with the Greens to lock up more of Tasmania for forestry purposes. That is of great concern. It says to me that that is exactly what could happen at the federal level as well.

Why does it say in the body of that MOU that the agreement will be reviewed after the federal election? That says to me that federal Labor knows exactly what is going on. It says to me that there has been a wink and a nod. Why do I say that? Because Kevin Rudd, the federal Labor leader, has never said that there would be no further lockups in Tasmania. It says to me that he knows full well that that he will do a preference deal with the Greens in the lead-up to the election and then, after the election, say that the Florentine Valley is ruled out for any further forestry operations, that it is a no-go zone, and that more of Tasmania will be locked up.

Why do I say that? Because I know what Labor’s federal environment spokesman, Peter Garrett, has said on the public record. I want to advise the Senate what he has said with respect to some of these areas. Let us go back to an AAP story on 1 August 1998, in which he is talking about RFAs. He said they are ‘a completely flawed and discredited process, initiated by government’. Of course, both sides of this parliament have previously supported the regional forest agreement which was initially signed in 1997 and the Tasmanian Community Forest Agreement, which was signed in 2005. That second five-year review of the Tasmanian Community Forest Agreement began on Monday, 28 May. We know Peter Garrett’s view on RFAs, but what else does he say about locking up further parts of Tasmania? On the Sunday program on 1 April 2007, he said:

I won’t be opposing the policy, Laurie.

that is, Laurie Oakes—

What we have now is policy that’s been agreed by the Caucus, that’s in that draft platform—

the federal Labor platform—

it’s policy that reflects not only the RFAs, it also reflects the Tasmanian community agreements on forests, and it also reflects a number of important principles about forestry, which include no overall job losses in the sector, a sustainable forestry industry, consultation with unions, with the government—

and this is the important part—

and also further protection of identified, properly identified, high conservation value forests and other natural ecosystems, and that’s as it should be.

That is a reason for the concern. This was essentially reiterated on 13 January 2007, just some months ago, in the Australian newspaper, where Mr Garrett said:

The principles that will guide Labor’s forest policies are further protection of identified high conservation value old-growth forests ...

We know what that means: more lockups in Tasmania are on the way. We have a Labor-Greens accord heading our way at a federal level and, in my view, that will be bad for Tasmania. It will be bad for the timber industry, it will be bad for jobs, and it is not what we want. I would like federal Labor to come clean and say exactly what they have planned for Tasmania. Why won’t Mr Rudd rule out further lockups in Tasmania?

I note the Prime Minister’s recent comments in the Australian on 9 August 2007. He warned that Australia faced a ‘Garrett recession’ caused by delivering a 60 per cent cut in greenhouse emissions, which has been promised by Labor. That is the Prime Minister’s view, and I think he is entirely right. He has substance in putting that view forward. So we are heading towards a federal Labor-Greens accord, like we had in Tasmania at the state parliamentary level. To think that the state Labor government would sign an MOU, an agreement with forestry activists, which actually said: ‘Yes, you agree not to conduct and undertake criminal activity.’ So they will go to that level and say, ‘The Florentine Valley is likely to be locked up. We want you out of there. You won’t be conducting criminal activity there against forestry operations. We’re pleased about that.’ They are willing to stoop that low. That concerns me greatly. I think it will concern the timber communities of Tasmania.

I commend Barry Chipman and his team right across the state for the work that they are undertaking in supporting Timber Communities Australia. They have branches all around the state standing up for timber communities and saying that they are important for Tasmania. Yes, it must be balanced. I make no apologies for saying that we need strict environmental guidelines applied. In making these comments, I refer to the Federal Court decision today, which has knocked out entirely the Tasmanian Wilderness Society’s appeal against Malcolm Turnbull, as the federal minister.