Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 11 Hansard (13 December) . . Page.. 2987 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

The second part of the resolution contained a decision by the Assembly to welcome moves where, by the year 2000, no woodchip exports will be permitted from native forests, except from areas covered by regional forest agreements. The crux of this statement dates back to the Special Premiers Conference in July 1991 and was encapsulated in the national forest policy statement which was signed by the previous Chief Minister and which this Government fully endorses. We do believe in national agreements.

The third part of the resolution suggests the adoption of a national goal which would see no unprocessed woodchip being exported. One of the cornerstones of the national forest policy statement was the removal of controls on the export of woodchips originating from plantations because it was seen that the capacity to sell woodchip-type material was an important part of the process of encouraging investment in plantation infrastructure in Australia. Without this, it will be impossible to achieve the goal of an expanding plantation resource.

The Canberra-based forestry and forest products industries generate $60m of economic activity in the ACT each year, employ around 350 people, and are based on sawmills processing suitable logs from our plantations which are managed on a sustainable basis. The production of these sawlogs also necessarily involves the production of some logs which are unsuitable for sawing as well as the production of wood residues at the sawmills themselves. One of the uses for this sort of material is for it to be turned into woodchips either for use by a local industry or for export, where they are used to manufacture particle board or paper products which are such an important part of modern society.

Although Judith Clarke's report to the State conservation councils on Australia's plantations has been criticised for being too optimistic in its assessment of the potential for plantation timber to replace native forest timbers, it does confirm the fact that there is not enough residue available in this region to allow a locally based processing industry, and it recognises that the export of this material, at least in the immediate future, is a valid option.

In terms of what an export market would mean to the Canberra region, access to a market for the currently unused pulplog material generated from the region's plantations would substantially enhance their financial viability and encourage further plantation establishment. It would enhance the viability of the local sawmilling industry, thereby generating more interest in plantation establishment. Eventually, we will have a sufficiently large plantation resource to support a local processing industry for the region's plantation-grown woodchip. So, Mr Speaker, although we agree that, in the interests of Australian jobs, the aim of having no unprocessed woodchips exported is an admirable but long-term goal, the establishment of an export market in the short to medium term should be recognised as an option to increase the utilisation and profitability of plantations.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .