Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

It seems that there is always a convenient ABC story when there is an election in the air, and this edition of Australian Story is one of those. In the run-up to the last federal election, the ABC had a story on the 7.30 Report, if I recall correctly, about forestry and the impact of that and the Gunns mill on Bass Strait. The ABC was later reluctantly forced to put some corrections on the website. Before that, I recall that the ABC had a segment called Lord of the Forest, for which they were dragged kicking and screaming until they finally had to air an apology and a correction. The ABC has a very sad and sorry history in this space, so I would caution the Senate against relying on ABC stories for a Senate inquiry. Having said that, I do not prejudge that edition of Australian Story. There may well be some basis to it and it may be completely correct. All I am saying is that the track record of the ABC in this space ain’t great and I therefore question it.

The Greens are always keen on accountability and administration for others, but they have been strangely silent about the expensive brawl going on within the Wilderness Society as we speak. There have been court challenges, and, of course, we know that the Wilderness Society is the industrial arm of the Australian Greens and that there is a cross-pollination between those two organisations like you would not believe. Indeed, Senator Brown was a former director of it, if I recall correctly. What you have is the old guard fighting the new guard, with people claiming the democratic processes are not being followed—but do you know what? There has been not a peep out of the Australian Greens as to the terrible administration within the Wilderness Society, with court brawls, internal brawls, the leaking of minutes and all sorts of things. They have been strangely silent because they are partners with the Wilderness Society.

In relation to the quite outrageous allegation by Senator Milne about Senator Heffernan, I simply say: Senator Heffernan and I have not even discussed the matter. Yet she comes in here and seeks to impugn the integrity of both me and Senator Heffernan. I should not take exception to it, because that is the modus operandi of the Greens. They will say anything and do anything regardless of the facts and the circumstances. They do not need facts for their public statements and press releases. If it sounds good, just say it and, of course, never apologise afterwards. But I can say on the record here and now: Senator Heffernan and I have not discussed the Australian Story program, and why Senator Heffernan is not in the chamber I do not know.

What I do know is that, if we want to talk about the science, there are very credible scientists such Professor Gordon Duff, Dr Chris Harwood, Dr Julianne O’Reilly-Wapstra, Professor Brad Potts and Professor Jim Reid, all of whom have contributed a scientifically rigorous statement to my local paper today. They say:

No eucalypt plantations in the catchment, or anywhere else in Australia, use trees altered through genetic engineering.

I either believe the Greens’ assertion on this or these highly eminently qualified professors and doctors. At this stage of the proceedings, chances I prefer the professors and the doctors over the Greens, who are ramping up their exposure in the lead-up to the state election in Tasmania. And let’s make no bones about this: that is what this is all part and parcel of—the campaign in Tasmania. These good professors and doctors also tell us that the trees that are grown come from seeds that are grown in seed orchards and:

… have been selected in field trials for their superior growth and wood quality. They have not been selected for increased toxicity.

Whom should I believe? The professors and the doctors or the Australian Greens in here with a political agenda? I would simply commend the article. It is on page 19 of the Hobart Mercury.

I say, with respect to all honourable senators here: why should this Senate be engaged in this inquiry? There are issues of toxicity in my home state of Tasmania at Rosebery in relation to the mining industry. There are these issues all around Australia. So the question has to be asked: why this one in Tasmania now? The answer: state election, 20 March, and the Greens are simply trying to ramp it up to secure their position in Tasmania.

Let the science take its course. Let the investigations continue. For Senator Milne to basically besmirch everybody in the EPA in Tasmania does her no credit and, of course, is a very unfortunate reflection on people who are professionals. You might disagree with their science; you might disagree with the way they go about their business; but the personal reflections on them—that you would not trust them et cetera—as is always the wont with the Greens, go not a step but a leap too far. We in the coalition will be opposing the motion.