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

I, and also on behalf of Senator Bob Brown, move:

That the Senate—

  (a)   notes:

  (i)   clauses 25 and 27 of the Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement between the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Tasmania (IGA), signed by Prime Minister Gillard, and

  (ii)   that current logging and proposed logging in the 430 000 hectares of high conservation forests proposed for protection breaches these clauses of the IGA; and

  (b)   calls on the Government to immediately honour the IGA.

Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

Paragraph (b), omit “honour”, substitute “abandon”.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendment moved by Senator Colbeck be agreed to.

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

I seek leave to make a short statement.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Leave is granted for two minutes.

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

We object to the amendment. Clearly the opposition want to abandon the agreement. This would be a complete disaster for jobs in Tasmania and a disaster for a strong regional future in Australia. The opposition stand not to support the intergovernmental agreement. They move away from forestry in Tasmania. It has been a decision by individual businesses, not a decision by government. It has happened regardless of government. The opposition seek to abandon the agreement. That would take away a significant amount of support that Tasmania deserves. It would take away $40 million in assistance to workers and timber communities, $45 million in support for contractors and $120 million for regional areas in Tasmania and transition to a long-term sustainable future.

I will just make a brief comment in respect of Senator Milne's substantive motion. The intergovernmental agreement on Tasmanian forestry is well underway. Governments are working with industry, environmental groups and the CFMEU in Tasmania to progress the agreement. It has been a community led agreement from the start, and we commend those parties for coming to the table to end the decades of conflict. The government cannot support the motion. It selectively reads parts of the agreement and focuses on those. It does not read the agreement in total. The agreement needs to be considered as a whole rather than certain elements of it being picked for their own purposes. The agreement will provide certainty for the Tasmanian forestry industry, local jobs and communities and protection for the state's ancient forests.

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

I seek leave to make a short statement pertaining to this motion.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Leave is granted for two minutes.

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

I note the minister, Senator Ludwig, saying that the clauses from the agreement are cherry picked. They are central clauses to the agreement. Clauses 25, 26 and 27 set out the conservation part of the agreement. The rest of the agreement pertains to compensation and allocation of funding to logging, where logging will occur et cetera, but those three clauses set out very clearly and state emphatically that there will be no logging in the 430,000 hectares that go into informal reserves. If the verification process says that timber from those areas is essential to maintain contracts, then clause 27 is invoked, which provides compensation to those companies concerned. There is nowhere in the entire agreement anything that provides for ongoing logging in the 430,000 hectares. I have to say that if the government votes against this then it is voting against a fundamental part of the agreement and will be signalling to Tasmanians that the federal government is either rolling over to Forestry Tasmania or prepared to renegotiate the fundamentals of the agreement, which will be a very strong signal to the ENGOs in Tasmania that the federal government has sold out on the conservation principles of the intergovernmental agreement. So this is a critical motion for the Senate.

Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I seek leave to make a short statement.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As much as it grieves me, I have to agree with Senator Milne about the importance of clauses 25, 26 and 27, which demonstrate what a ridiculous agreement the Commonwealth government has signed with the states and how it is based on flawed information that was provided to it by Professor Jonathan West, who advised the Commonwealth government and the state governments during the negotiation of the IGA that there would not be any need to log in the 430,000 hectares.

Senator Ludwig interjecting—

If you would like to read the report, you might understand that. Again Senator Ludwig shows his complete lack of understanding of the agreement that the Commonwealth has negotiated with the Tasmanian government and how flawed the whole process has been.

Senator Ludwig interjecting—

The clauses are important and that is why I asked him about this on Monday. He had no idea then and he has got no idea about it now—and yelling out across the chamber does not actually indicate any understanding of this process at all. This whole process is a corporate strategy that has been put in place by one company with the Greens. It is flawed and it will not provide for reasonable forestry or environmental outcomes, because what it is effectively going to do is cram what is left of the forest industry into a smaller area and set it up for failure four or five years down the track. The minister has so little understanding of his portfolio that he does not understand the basic principles of what he is doing to the forest industry in Tasmania. His whole panel is stacked with close associates of the Wilderness Society, so he is getting flawed advice from that. He will not talk to the forest professionals from around the country, so he has no understanding of what this program is going to do—no understanding at all—and all he is doing is setting up the Tasmanian forest industry for failure in a few years, and we will not stand for it. (Time expired)

Question put:

That the amendment (Senator Colbeck's) be agreed to.

The Senate divided. [15:59]

(The President—Senator Hogg)

Question negatived.

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

The question now is that Senator Milne and Senator Bob Brown's motion be agreed to.

Question agreed to.

Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I seek a point of clarification on that last question put by the President. I am just clarifying that the government is supporting the Greens motion because my impression from Senator Ludwig's statement was that he was not supporting the Greens motion.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question was called in the affirmative on the voices, but I am happy to put the question again, as there were people crossing the chamber at the time. Would you like me to put the question again, Senator Colbeck? The question is that motion moved by Senator Milne be agreed to. The Senate divided. [16:07]

(The Deputy President—Senator Parry)

Question negatived.