Linda White (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The government does not support this bill, the Ending Native Forest Logging Bill 2023. Unfortunately, it's another political stunt by the Greens political party that shows, again, they are far from understanding the considerations necessary for being a responsible government for Australia. It's another example of their endless addiction to putting social media clicks ahead of consultation, consideration and meaningful environmental reform that responsibly balances community and environmental impact. The bill just ignores a whole lot of real-world factors and considerations that a government would ignore at its own peril, if we supported this bill. This government is anchored in the real world, so that's what we are doing with our environmental reform agenda because that is the strategy we took to the last election and that is the mandate the government has when it comes to environmental protection.

Professor Graeme Samuel's 2019 review into the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act showed us the EPBC Act is outdated and requires fundamental reform:

Australians do not trust that the EPBC Act is delivering for the environment, for business or for the community.

I take that to mean our current framework isn't getting the balance right between nature and the environment, and the industries and communities that rely on the longevity and sustainability of our environmental and natural world for their economic prosperity. That's why the government released the Samuel review into our environmental protection framework and responded to it with the government's Nature Positive Plan.

These actions show you that Minister Plibersek is committed to rewriting environmental laws to better protect the environment and also to giving certainty to communities and the industry. What that does not mean is that the government is going to steamroll into communities, as the Greens and this bill would have us do, and start dictating to them exactly what they should think and do. It might come as a surprise to the Greens, but government doesn't work that well that way. You have to consult with people, you have to bring people with you and you have to explain change in a way that people hear you, and you have to persuade them. That's not what this bill does.

The bill fails to acknowledge the native forest industry requires careful consideration and consultation. It's an industry managed across various Australian jurisdictions. It has impacts on workers and communities, and so requires a more thoughtful approach than this bill proposes—which is not what the Greens are proposing here. But I suppose there are no surprises there; consultation is not the Greens' political style.

This bill doesn't adequately acknowledge that this very issue is already being addressed by the government. Part of the Nature Positive Plan released by Minister Plibersek is a commitment to getting everyone on board the national environmental standards to existing regional forest agreements. As they currently stand, regional forest agreements exist as long-term agreements with four states and set out requirements for sustainability and conservation of native forests. There are 10 agreements in total in commercial and native forest regions—five in Victoria, three in New South Wales and one each in Western Australia and Tasmania. Many of these agreements have been in place since around the year 2000. When they were implemented, they ended a history of dispute over forest use and were underpinned by the principle that Australia's forests should be managed for everyone.

Back then the Commonwealth's role was to coordinate a national approach to integrating environmental, social and commercial interests in native forests. It did not happen overnight; there was widespread consultation to identify government obligations, regional objectives and interests, and broad forest uses as well as the nature and scope of the forest assessment. The process also included areas of forests that needed protection and which parts could be used for commercial purposes. The assessments also determined what the forests meant to the industries and the people in each region, including Indigenous Australians.

This is a process of government and it's what managing complex issues and balancing interests looks like. It isn't particularly sexy; it can be laborious. But it is necessary to getting a sustainable long-lasting result. This approach to government seeks to bring people along with you, which is not something I would expect the Greens to understand, especially given they have never actually been in government. Instead, the Greens are seeking to throw away those useful and productive agreements and flatten the whole process to suit their agenda. As usual, the Greens are ignoring everyone who doesn't 100 per cent agree with them.

That consultative and coordinated roll that the Commonwealth played in establishing those original agreements has not changed, and that is a good thing because that is what the Commonwealth should do. However, the time has come to revisit those agreements and make sure they are updated and fit for purpose in contemporary Australia, which is what Labor is doing.

This is especially important after 10 years of neglect from successive coalition governments that not only ignored Australia's environment but also treated our natural world with outward contempt. Currently, the government is consulting with industry, regional communities and those states that have regional forestry agreements about updating and applying new environmental standards to those agreements. These environmental standards will be stronger and better reflect the changes in the forest industry and environment protection practices. We are doing that consultation work with the flaws of the environmental protection framework at the forefront of minds and with a keen awareness that, in fact, a sustainable renewable forest industry also acts as a net carbon sink for Australia.

Native forests are valuable stores of carbon. In 2020 alone they sequestered 39 million tons of carbon dioxide—that's not a small amount at all. It is also worth pointing out that Australia's forestry product industry underpins the economic prosperity of many regional communities. The sector contributes nearly $24 billion to the national economy per year. Forestry jobs are also good jobs if the industry is managed properly and constructively, and they are sustainable in the long term. Currently, about 51,000 people are directly employed in the industry.

Beyond the economic interests of regional communities, and like many primary and agricultural industries, forestry also underpins the social networks and fabric of many regional towns and communities. I've seen this myself when travelling around Australia as part of the Senate committee on rural and regional affairs and transport. I don't profess to be an expert on agricultural industry policy, but anyone who has spent five minutes in regional areas that rely on agriculture or primary industry realises how important these things are to local identity and as a source of pride as well as a source of jobs and incomes. That is something I often think the Greens party ignore or forget. They come into the Senate and try to pull off these political stunts by putting up something extreme. They are neglecting the fact that there are families that they haven't spared a thought for that would have been directly impacted by this legislation.

I want to confront the allegation that Labor's been missing in action on the environment. That is just not correct. I want to put some facts on the record that point out the government's record on the environment and its reform agenda. As I alluded to earlier, after a decade of nature neglect by the Liberals and Nationals, Labor is now doing something on reforming our environmental protection laws. Even when they received reports showing Australia's natural environment was in trouble and that environment protection laws needed reform, not only did they do nothing about it they didn't even release the report to the public. In contrast, the Australian government under Labor has committed $1.8 billion in the most recent budget to protect the Barrier Reef, to protect native species, to clean up waterways, to fund the Environmental Defenders Office and employ a thousand new Landcare rangers.

Something that has also become very close to my heart in the environment portfolio is the ongoing campaign to protect the unique biodiversity of Macquarie Island, which sits far south of the mainland—halfway between Tasmania and Antarctica. This rocky outcrop is an incredibly diverse and interesting place, home to 13 different species of seabird as well as fur seals and elephant seals. The Albanese government wants to make sure Macquarie Island, along with all of its unique inhabitants, is protected and preserved for the future. That is why Macquarie Island Marine Park will triple in size, adding an extra 385,000 square kilometres to the high-protection area. This is an area the size of Germany.

The Albanese government is acting on the environment, just like Labor governments before it. We are making substantial changes and improvements not for social media likes, retweets or shares but for long-lasting changes for the better of the environment. Again, the government will not be supporting this bill.