Forest policy can deliver on jobs, growth and the environment

By Anthony Albanese and Craig Smith, NSW Secretary of the CFMEU’s forestry division.

Conservative political forces would have us believe that the interests of regional communities and workers are not compatible with broader environmental goals.
This long-running campaign has had a divisive impact, with negative consequences for both regional communities and for the environment over the medium and longer term.
At the heart of the conservative campaign is the big lie that seeks to divide for short-term political gain.
The big lie is, of course, that the needs and interests of communities in forestry areas, the environment, industry and government are not compatible and cannot be reconciled by government policy.
Tony Blair talks a lot about the quadruple bottom line: economic growth, jobs, social outcomes and environmental sustainability. That is not a bad platform when you come to address forestry policy.
With the natural environment, we are dealing with a finite resource. If it is respected and used properly, these resources will deliver economic bene- fits and employment opportunities for the long term.
With forestry, value adding is the key to getting the most out of our timber resources. Take the example of wood chips. Timber felled and chipped sells for just 14 to 16 dollars per tonne. But we pay $1,000 per tonne to buy it back in the form of paper, after its been further manufactured and processed in countries like China.
If the Australian industry had a broader view and was prepared to invest, we could have a world-class pulp paper mill on the south coast of NSW, near Eden. And there are other areas, particularly on the eastern seaboard, where pulp and paper mills can be a viable job generator, provided we can move away from the shortterm focus on wood chipping. The requirement that mills operate to environmental best practice standards would further add to employment.
Woodchips were meant to be a byproduct of the industry not a driver of it. Rather than a high-volume, lowvalue industry, the best economic outcome, the best employment outcome and the best environmental outcome is a low-volume, high-value industry.
That's the key in terms of jobs - high paid and high skilled jobs.
We have to recognise that financial considerations alone are not the only barrier to implementing these jobgenerating strategies. The very narrow outlook of the timber industry and their lack of commitment to investing dollars back into the industry must be addressed.
Some people outside the timber industry have this romantic notion of big blokes with axes chopping down trees. The reality is that technology has dramatically reduced the number of workers required to plant and harvest trees.
It is not primarily environmental regulations that cost jobs - it's technology.
That applies to virtually all sectors of the industry.
What is desperately needed is a longer-term vision, where governments sit down with unions and business to develop industry plans.
There are many examples that show this process of policy development can deliver desirable outcomes for workers, the industry and the environment.
In Western Australia for example, a Labor government has achieved the phasing out of old growth logging in the south-west forests over four years with just 20 of more than 700 workers displaced remaining unemployed.
The Gallop government had investment plans that maximised use of the timber which was harvested. The timber town of Pemberton has actually grown and unemployment in the region has consistently been below the state average.
The process hasn't been perfect, but we can learn much from it. The re-election of the Gallop Government confirmed the public's support for the Government's actions.
Similarly, in NSW the Carr Labor government worked with industry, the union and environmentalists on a strategy to minimise old growth logging in the north-east forests.
Through the consultative process we've seen a leading timber company shut down one plant employing around 40 people only to build a new plant in the same region that now employs 70 people making valueadded timber products.
The primary impediment to these effective strategies is political will, or more precisely a lack of it. We need political leadership, not just in terms of providing subsidies, but also in providing mechanisms and incentives for industry to look at investing in valueadding.
It has always been the ALP in partnership with the broader labour movement that has had the vision to develop and implement progressive economic and social reforms.
In each of these areas, Labor's approach has consistently emphasised the need for long term solutions rather than instant political fixes.
Only through the adoption of this approach can governments hope to provide the security and certainty so desired by workers, their families and their communities.
In the longer term, if federal governments continue to ignore the environment, then climate change is going to impact heavily on us all. The Kyoto Protocol, which has been signed by every industrialised nation bar Australia and the United States, connects with forest policy through the availability of carbon credits for plantations.
Now there are large tracts of farming and agricultural land around the country that are degraded or no longer used for farming. If we can use some of this land to regenerate and regrow as plantation, then that is an ideal source of wood fibre for the industry. Many local environmentalists in NSW are keen to pursue this direction.
In the future, carbon sinks - the planting of forests to off-set greenhouse gas emissions - have the potential to develop into a significant generator of national income. For example, Australia could generate export income from Japanese power companies wanting to plant carbon sinks to offset their greenhouse gas emissions.
However, as long as Australia refuses to ratify the Protocol, this type of investment will simply go elsewhere.
We're also seeing Australian timber exported to Korea and made into furniture that proudly features the label 'Australian Timber'. Our timber is recognised as the best in the world, yet we are not extracting anything like full value from it.
There is no long term future in Australia exporting wood chips.
Let's not forget that the environment, and issues like access to water and climate change, matter to the forest industry too.
Regional development and employment growth is another important dimension of this debate. You need diversity to underpin growth and, in many areas, value-added forest product industries can be part of achieving just that.
If business, unions and government can work together to achieve lasting outcomes that ensure the survival of Australia's remaining old growth forests and strengthen the forest product industry, then that can set an example of how to negotiate progressive social change.