Page 3580 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 18 September 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Paragraph (2) of Ms Cody’s motion congratulates the government for the proposed planting of Ingledene Forest. This is nothing more than hubris. This is the same government that has dragged its feet on tree planting, announcing initiatives like this only following an outcry from the community and industry, particularly in the face of the significant loss of trees that our city has faced. The problem was so bad that some commentators have estimated that Canberra was losing about 3,000 trees annually, trees that were not being replaced.
There have long been calls from the forestry industry for more trees to be planted, not just in the ACT but Australia wide, to mitigate future shortages in Australian-grown timber that are heading our way, not to mention the deficit that exists at the moment. We have about a $2 billion annual trade deficit in timber products right now. This is what has prompted the need to import products from overseas, the same products that are being condemned in speeches by members opposite. The solution to this is to plant more trees and further grow a domestic industry.
Furthermore, some of the products that are currently being imported, as has rightly been mentioned, have question marks over their sustainability. They come from rainforests in other countries, they are not being replanted and they are destroying the habitat of many endangered species. A domestic sustainable timber industry is the best solution. We simply need to be growing more trees to meet future demand and have the ability to build more houses.
I have a couple of questions for Ms Cody and those on the government benches, on the back of this motion. There is food for thought as to whether this is a serious motion and not just political posturing. How much carbon is currently being stored in the ACT’s plantation estates, and how much money has been made from timber sales over the past years? I understand that much of the ACT’s timber goes to Tumut for processing. How much is actually processed here? How is any of this maximising job creation in the ACT, when there is a significant opportunity for value-add work being undertaken here within the ACT?
The national forest industry plan released last year talks about policy needs for forestry in the future. This plan talks about the need for one billion new trees to be planted over this decade to meet future demand. It estimates that some 18,000 jobs could be created if this were to happen. What is the ACT government doing to get its share of that potential employment, economic benefit and economic growth? The ACT needs to look to the future of the forestry industry in the ACT and focus on supporting and encouraging the building and construction industries to promote the use of sustainable forest products, as well as looking to develop the value-add industries in the ACT that could be supported by an enlarged forestry industry.
It is worth noting at this point that any changes in the use of sustainable or environmentally friendly products in construction that the government might seek to mandate must be weighed up and measured against the impact that they are likely to have on the cost of construction. The construction industry has largely steered away from the use of timber products in previous years because they are labour intensive to use and install, they are costly not just grow to but to process and there is unreliability
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video