Chapter 6
SUPPORT FOR THE BILL
Support for the Bill
6.1 Submissions received by the Committee, particularly from State and Federal organisations involved in
the timber industry, supported passage of the Bill in its present form. [1]
6.2 The Forestry Committee of the Tasmanian Farmers and Graziers Association submitted to the inquiry
that:
Farm foresters are encouraged by the Governments commitment to the RFA process
and urges the Senate not to weaken the current Bill.
TFGA Forestry supports the RFA Bill 1998 as it stands and recognises the integration
with the Action Agendas and the greater role to be played by the rural sector. [2]
6.3 The Queensland Timber Board advised the inquiry that; “The Queensland timber industry notes and
supports the key features of the RFA Bill …” [3]
6.4 Emeritus Professor E P Bachelard of the Australian National University expressed his strong support
for the Bill. Professor Bachelard's submission commented:
… the RFA process, which has the support of both major political parties, was initiated
in order to overcome the acrimony associated with ongoing parliamentary and public
debates regarding Australia's policies and the management of these forests. The process
aims to address the concerns of all sectors of the community with regard to the
sustainable management of forests for industrial and conservation purposes. It involves
the most comprehensive examination ever undertaken in Australia, and possibly world
wide, of the scientific, social and economic values of our forests. All interest groups have
the opportunity to have their concerns identified and heeded in the preparation of a final
Agreement which is then signed off by the Prime Minister and the relevant State Premier.
It is essential that these Agreements be supported … [4]
6.5 The Forest Protection Society stated it “…supports the current RFA legislation as a means to create
legally binding RFAs and thereby provide reasonable security and certainty for regional timber
communities.” [5]
6.6 The Forest Industries Association of Tasmania stressed that:
Commonwealth Regional Forest Agreements (RFA) legislation is an absolutely essential
element of the RFA process. Without it the process will not achieve its stated objectives
under the National Forest Policy Statement. [6]
6.7 Ms Patricia Townsend of the WA State Office of the Forest Protection Society stated in evidence to
the inquiry that by passing the Bill the Senate and the Commonwealth Parliament has the opportunity to
do “something very special for regional Australia”. [7]
6.8 The Tasmanian State Office of the Forest Protection Society argued that:
… it is essential that this legislation be supported by the Senate to meet the sustainable
management of our forests. Without the legislation the durability of each Regional Forest
Agreement is in doubt. With long term security there can be sustainable development of
our forests for the social, economic and ecological benefit of Australia. [8]
6.9 Dr Ross Florence of the Australian National University expressed support for the RFAs, although
with some reservations:
While there have been inadequacies in the process, a lot has been achieved: it may have
been unrealistic to expect more. I believe we should accept the RFA outcomes and an
environment in which industry can confidently restructure and develop. However, we
might also accept that the RFA process has been but one staging point towards the
ultimate goal of balanced and sustainable development. [9]
6.10 The Forest Industries Association of Tasmania submitted that the legislation is necessary if the RFA
process in that State is to achieve its objective fully. According to the Association the Bill is:
… essential, from industry's point of view down there, if we are to grow our business and
the industry to its full potential. It is essential because it adds the cap of full security or as
full as can be obtained in a democratic society to the RFA document itself. If we do not
have that security, we are looking at less than full potential. [10]
Social and economic importance of RFAs
6.11 The inquiry was told that an assessment of the Victorian Central Highlands RFA identified a “…
direct and indirect forest industry expenditure flow of $77m affecting 7 700 families in the region covered
by that particular RFA.” [11]
6.12 Dr Ross Florence advised the inquiry it is important that:
… provisions of the National Forest Policy Statement relating to the forest industries be
underpinned by Commonwealth legislative support for outcomes of the RFA process,
and by state commitments to ongoing wood supply agreements and contractual
arrangements. A stable wood supply environment is needed to encourage industry
development, downstream processing and value adding, and to pursue new processing
technologies, products and markets. [12]
6.13 In evidence to the inquiry Senator Shayne Murphy stated:
… what is vitally important is that we ensure that the objectives of the RFA are realised,
particularly in the case of employment and downstream processing of the resource that
we harvest from the forests that have now been determined to be commercially available,
because that is simply not happening. [13]
6.14 Mr Ian Whyte, Chief Executive of the Forest Industries Association of Tasmania, told the inquiry in
evidence; “The RFA is an essential but not a sufficient prerequisite for industry growth and the flow-on of
social benefits.” [14]
Benefits of the Bill
6.15 The Tasmanian State Office of the Forest Protection Society noted that; “Passage of the Bill will
send a positive message to timber communities that their endeavours are valued by the Parliament of
Australia.” [15]
6.16 The Society further claimed:
… this Bill will promote growth and investment in forest industries, including greater
downstream processing and value-enhancement, plantation development and farm
forestry. [16]
And:
The Bill will encourage sustainable, regionally based and internationally competitive
Australian forest products industries. It will also encourage industry to address the
current trade imbalance in forest products through ongoing import replacement and
export development. [17]
6.17 The company Harris-Daishowa stated that RFAs have become important to overseas companies
purchasing forest products from Australia or interesting in investing in forest related industries.
Harris-Daishowa advised the inquiry:
The RFA has already become the yardstick by which the overseas customers are judging
Australia. The first thing they ask you now if you go to them to talk about woodchips is:
`Does your region have an RFA signed in respect of its wood supply?' So already the
RFAs have become a sort of sustainability indicator in terms of the overseas markets and
their buyers. They see Australia as somewhere down the track, well ahead of many of
our competitors overseas, in getting an accreditation system for their forest products on
the international markets. [18]
Public benefit
6.18 When the issue of public benefit under the legislation was raised during the Melbourne pubic hearing
the National Association of Forest Industries advised:
We are quite convinced, and we believe we can demonstrate already, that there has been
public benefit in both Tasmania and in the Central Highlands of Victoria as a
consequence of the RFA being signed. We are absolutely sure that the sort of 20 years
of security that we are looking at coming from this bill will enhance that benefit. [19]
6.19 Mr Whyte of the Forest Industries Association of Tasmania described what he saw as the social
benefits flowing from RFAs:
We would see social benefits in terms of the numbers of jobs, the quality of those jobs in
terms of the satisfaction that people derive from them, the distribution of those jobs in
what is still a highly decentralised state and the quality of community life that flows from
those. … the fundamental social benefits have to also include the quality of community
life, the quality of the jobs themselves and a whole range of factors—the stability of rural
townships and all of those sorts of things. [20]
6.20 The Wide Bay Branch of the Forest Protection Society stated:
We support the current Bill as a land mark opportunity to promote vastly improved
security for regional communities.
The RFA legislation is an opportunity to reverse the spiralling downward trend occurring
in our communities that have left many families close to emotional, social and economic
bankruptcy. It is an opportunity to restore faith in government forest policy and invest in
long-term growth and prosperity for rural and regional communities. [21]
Support for the RFA process in Victoria
6.21 The Victorian Association of Forest Industries told the inquiry, “… the RFA process in Victoria has
provided a sound basis for the continuation of value-adding investment and industry development
programs.” [22] In support of what it sees as the positive outcomes of the Victorian RFA process the
Association provided a detailed list and descriptions of commercial forestry activities, including
investments in the industry that have recently taken place in Victoria. [23]
Support for the Tasmanian RFA
6.22 Mr Paul Lennon told the inquiry during its public hearing Melbourne on 1 February 1999:
The Tasmanian Regional Forest Agreement signed just over a year ago has brought
Tasmanians and Tasmania's forest the security for conservation and the security of
resource to industry that we have been lacking over the years…. Together with the
industry growth plan that I announced late last year, the act represents putting in place
another piece in the picture to provide a platform for growth and regional employment.
[24]
6.23 Minister Lennon went on to state:
The raw outcome of the Regional Forest Agreement for Tasmania is the following. Forty
per cent of Tasmania's land area is now protected in some form of reserve: 39 per cent
of our forests, 68 per cent of all old-growth forest and 95 per cent of all wilderness. … I
know some people still are not satisfied … I certainly hope that other people understand
and appreciate the commitment that we have made. [25]
Support Bill with amendments
6.24 While it supported the concept of the legislation the Tasmanian branch of the Construction,
Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) argued that the Bill required amendments. The Union
stressed that if the Bill was not amended, “ … we will not support it being passed because we believe it
will cause too much damage.” [26] The CFMEU told the inquiry:
When looking at the bill in relation to the national forest policy statement, we believe the
bill is deficient in a number of areas and we believe that that deficiency was caused by the
lack of consultation in its development. Therefore, we have been campaigning for its
amendment. ….
We believe that regional forest agreements as defined should be changed - regional forest
agreements must have a proper industry development plan which should be included in all
RFAs.
We believe that regional forest agreements should include clauses that ensure the local
processors would have priority of resource over people interested in exporting
woodchips or sawlogs overseas. …. [27]
Wood and Paper Industry Council
6.25 In discussions with the Committee the Tasmanian CFMEU suggested a possible amendment to the
Bill to enable the establishment of a national Wood and Paper Industry Council to take place. The union
told the inquiry:
… we would like to see the bill amended to ensure the establishment of a Wood and
Paper Industry Council under the original terms of reference that were outlined in the
wood and paper industry strategy and for that council to include a representative of the
Standing Committee on Forestry. We would like the bill to ensure that that council is
properly funded with a dedicated secretariat and adequate resources. …
We also believe that, if established, the Wood and Paper Industry Council should be
given, as part of its role, the job of monitoring these industry strategy clauses, if they are
included, and the utilisation of wood under RFA areas. [28]
6.26 The creation of the Council was supported by a number of organisations and individuals including
the Tasmanian Government and the Forest Industries Federation of WA. [29]
Recommendation
The Committee recommends the Government establish the Wood and Paper Industry Council.
Footnotes
[1] Submission, NAFI, p. 7. Among the submissions supporting the Bill were those from:, p. 3; North
Forests Products, Forest Protection Society, (Coroy Branch), Timber and Building Materials
Association NSW Ltd, Boral Timber, Marbut Pty Ltd.,
[2] Submission,Tasmanian Farmers and Graziers Association, Forestry Committee, p. 3.
[3] Submission, Queensland Timber Board, p. 2.
[4] Submission, Professor Emeritus E P Bachelard, p. 1.
[5] Submission, Forest Protection Society, p. 1. In its evidence to the inquiry the Forest Protection
Society discussed the social and economic importance of the timber industry to rural communities, see
Evidence, Forest Protection Society, pp. 193-194, 195.
[6] Submission, Forest Industries Association of Tasmania, p. 1.
[7] Evidence, Forest Protection Society, p. 195.
[8] Submission, Tasmanian State Office of the Forest Protection Society, p. 1; see also Evidence,
Forest Protection Society, pp. 196-197 for a discussion of the importance of the Bill to particular rural
communities in Tasmania. .
[9] Submission, Dr Ross Florence, p. 6.
[10] Evidence, Forest Industries Association of Tasmania, p. 90.
[11] Submission, Forest Protection Society, p. 3. The inquiry was told that forest industries in Victorian
have a total combined turnover in excess of $3 000 million and employs about 30 000 people. See
Submission, Victorian Association of Forest Industries, p. 2. For information on expenditure by the
company Harris-Daishowa in Eden, NSW see Evidence, p. 71.
[12] Submission, Dr Ross Florence, p. 1.
[13] Evidence, Senator Shayne Murphy, p. 76.
[14] Evidence, Forest Industries Association of Tasmania, p. 92.
[15] Submission, Tasmanian State Office of the Forest Protection Society, p. 4.
[16] Submission, Tasmanian State Office of the Forest Protection Society, p. 4.
[17] Submission, Tasmanian State Office of the Forest Protection Society, p. 4.
[18] Evidence, Harris-Daishowa, p. 70.
[19] Evidence, NAFI, p. 66.
[20] Evidence, Forest Industries Association of Tasmania, p. 93.
[21] Submission, Forest Protection Society,Wide Bay Branch, p. 1.
[22] Submission, Victorian Association of Forest Industries, p. 3.
[23] Submission, Victorian Association of Forest Industries, pp. 3- 6; see also Evidence, Victorian
Association of Forest Industries, pp. 157-158. See also Submission, Marbut Pty Ltd.
[24] Evidence, Forestry Tasmania, p. 133.
[25] Evidence, Forestry Tasmania, p. 139; see also Submission, Forest Industries Association of
Tasmania, pp. 2-3.
[26] Evidence, CFMEU, p. 84.
[27] Evidence, CFMEU, p. 82.
[28] Evidence, CFMEU, p. 82.
[29] Mr Paul Lennon, Minister for Infrastructure, Energy and Resources in Tasmania told the inquiry his
Government is a “… very solid supporter of the establishment of a Wood and Paper Industry Council
…”. Evidence, Forestry Tasmania, p. 140. See also Evidence, Forest Industries Federation of WA, p.
174. House of Representatives Hansard, 9 February 1999, p. 2162.