The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations) [9.04]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

By leave, the second reading speech will be incorporated in Hansard.

Today the Government presents a bill which will form the basis of further expansions to the national park estate, including wilderness, as well as forming the basis for a new national park at the junction of the Liverpool and Warrumbungle ranges to be known as the Coolah Tops National Park.

The objects of the bill are:

(a) to abolish the status of certain lands as flora reserve under the Forestry Act 1916, and

(b) to revoke the dedication of certain lands as State forest (including parts of national forests) under the Forestry Act 1916.

Once the provisions of this bill come into force, the lands so affected will be available for addition to the national park system, and in some cases it is also proposed to declare the lands as additions to existing wilderness areas.

The bill provides for the revocation of part of a State forest which is also designated as national forest and for the revocation of certain flora reserves including the State forest lands affected by these reserves. The Forestry Act 1916 provides for the revocation of State forests declared to be national forests and the revocation of flora reserves, only by Act of this Parliament.

The bill provides for the revocation of the Kerripit Beech and Fenwicks Scrub flora reserves. Both of these reserves are relatively small and adjoin existing national parks, being the Barrington Tops National Park in the case of Kerripit Beech Flora Reserve and Werrikimbe National Park in the case of Fenwicks Scrub Flora Reserve. Following the addition of these lands to the respective national parks, it is intended that these lands will be declared as wilderness.

As honourable members are aware, in April of this year, seven new wilderness areas were declared, being Barrington, Budawang, Kanangra Boyd, Macleay Gorges, Werrikimbe, Goobarragandra and Warrazambil. Additions were also made to the existing Bimberi and Ettrema wilderness areas.

Although State forest lands adjoining those wilderness areas have been identified as wilderness by the National Parks and Wildlife Service, in keeping with the Government's policy it is not intended to declare these lands as wilderness pending the conclusion of the interim assessment process currently being undertaken by the Resource and Conservation Assessment Council. However, there are no impediments to the inclusion in the wilderness areas of non-productive or other State forest areas which may be inaccessible for logging, with the concurrence of State Forests of New South Wales.

Both the Kerripit Beech and Fenwick Scrub flora reserves fall into this category, that is, they are non-productive and State Forests of New South Wales has agreed to their addition to the national park estate.

The part of Mebbin State Forest, being part of Mebbin National Forest, also falls in the abovementioned category. The land comprises the non-productive escarpment area above the 800 metre contour.

The remaining three flora reserves to be revoked by this bill are within the part of Warung State Forest proposed to be revoked for the Coolah Tops National Park.

The final boundaries of the proposed Coolah Tops National Park, in which these flora reserves are located, are consistent with the recommendations of the Resource and Conservation Assessment Council (RACAC). RACAC recommended that Bundella and Warung State Forests, excluding areas of leasehold land, should be dedicated as the Coolah Tops National Park.

The sawmill at Coolah will be affected by the decision to create the Coolah Tops National Park. However, the mill owners and workers will be eligible for an unprecedented level of assistance.

Page 3319

This assistance will be provided because this Government firmly believes that the impacts of conservation decisions, which provide benefits across the community in perpetuity, should not be borne by local industry or the local community alone.

The Government will support those at the Coolah sawmill under the forest industry structural adjustment package which includes funding for business exit assistance and relocation and retraining assistance. Alternative employment opportunities are also available with the National Parks and Wildlife Service. A forest liaison officer will be available to advise workers on other assistance that may be available.

The decision to create the Coolah Tops National Park was a difficult one because it required the balancing of the need to conserve ecologically valuable areas for future generations against the social and economic effects on mill owners, workers and the community.

However, Coolah Tops was subjected to a unique and comprehensive assessment process and this decision was made on the best advice available.

I now come to the details of the bill.

Clause 3 abolishes the flora reserves known as Kerripit Beech, Fenwicks Scrub, Norfolk Falls, Warung Tops and Jemmy's Creek.

Clause 4 revokes the dedication as State forest of the parts of the State forests known as Mebbin, Barrington Tops, Doyles River and Warung. I may add that with the exception of Mebbin, these State forest areas comprise the lands generally affected by the flora reserves.

Schedule 1 specifies the notices setting apart areas of State forest as flora reserve that are to be revoked by the proposed Act.

Schedule 2 specifies the State forests that will be revoked by the proposed Act including Mebbin National Forest.

This bill is another step in the Government's delivery of its commitment to expand wilderness areas and protect areas of conservation significance by the creation of new national parks. Where this action has an impact on rural industries the Government has made provision for fair and equitable financial assistance.

Mr President I commend the bill to the House.

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT [9.05]: The Opposition recognises that the Forests and Flora Reserves Revocation Bill, together with another matter given notice of by the Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations a couple of days ago seeking revocation of dedication of forest in various parts of the State, pursue the Government's undertaking to create more national parks throughout New South Wales. The Opposition is entitled to attack the Government on two fronts in this regard. First, the forest industry has been traumatised by almost a pincer movement. When Labor was in opposition it announced its intention to create more national parks from existing forest areas. The Federal Labor Government undertook to set aside 15 per cent of representative forest areas throughout the eastern seaboard for assessment for conservation purposes.

The Resource and Conservation Assessment Council has been making such assessments. It was originally described as the resource assessment committee; only under the direction of this Government was the name changed to the Resource and Conservation Assessment Council. The assessment has left the forest industry with little confidence in its future in New South Wales. The RACAC process is in an advanced stage. The plan of consultation up and down the State is totally inadequate. In my view the program is designed to allow the Government to claim that it has consulted the industry but the scale of the proposed changes is such that it is not possible for people making representations on behalf of the forestry industry to have the proposals changed.

On many occasions I have spoken in this Chamber about my opposition to the way in which the New South Wales forestry industry has been systematically disembowelled. It is a tragedy that the community does not understand how limited are the areas on the eastern seaboard available for forestry. Only a small part of the vast area of timbered country to the north, the north-west, south to Canberra and on down into Victoria is available to the timber industry - less than 5 per cent overall, and at any one time considerably less than 1 per cent is being logged. I have said before that I defy anyone travelling over the areas I mentioned in a commercial aeroplane to identify whether any particular area has been clear-felled in the past.

New South Wales Forests has jealously guarded its silviculture and it is a tragedy that this viable, renewable industry in New South Wales is basically beating a retreat. I have no idea where this process will stop. It will be interesting to hear the Hon. I. Cohen justify this colossal dislocation of a worthwhile industry. The industry has more difficulties because of this pincer movement by the State Government policy to drastically reduce the timber industry and by the former Federal Government to impose conservative policy and restrict woodchip exports. It is tragic that this sustainable industry is reduced to such a low level. There is no justification for proceeding with this legislation at present.

The Coolah Tops National Park proposal is a crying shame. It appears that the 15 per cent of forest area set aside, in practical terms, will result in something like 23 per cent being inaccessible to loggers and the timber industry. Opposition members will be interested to see what option will be adopted by the Resource and Conservation Assessment Council, whether it is the 25 per cent, 50 per cent or 75 per cent option, which would be at the extreme end of the conservation movement's claim on the forestry areas of New South Wales. The conservation movement has placed, in wrestling terms, a double nelson hold on the industry by saying that it is not interested in a catalogue of ecological examples across the State; it wants the State subdivided into smaller compartments, each having a representative of all ecotypes.

Anyone who knows anything about taxonomy and the science of ecology will realise that it is simply a matter of adjusting the focus to redefine the particular ecosystem. It could result in the closure of many compartments because they
Page 3320
contained examples of blackbutt and tallowwood and of tallowwood and blackbutt; the conservation movement might say it wanted examples of 15 per cent of one and 15 per cent of the other, so that at the end of the day there would be no area available to the forestry industry. I want to specifically focus on the Coolah Tops National Park. I thank the Minister for having introduced the revocation legislation first and I am pleased that the motion calling on the Governor to revoke the status of the schedule of forest reserves will be debated later. It is not possible to move an amendment to the schedule contained in the motion but it is possible to move an amendment to the revocation bill.

The Opposition's circulated amendments are clear. The amendments seek to remove any reference to the timber reserves. The legislation deals with flora reserves within the compartments which make up the timber resource for the Morrison mill at Coolah. A number of members have visited Coolah and spoken to the residents. I am sure they recognised that this is a significant industry for Coolah. I do not think that can be contested. The question that should be before the House today is: can the conservation values of that large area of timber be maintained and a viable sawmill exist?

The Hon. I. Cohen: No.

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT: I totally disagree. It is important that I bring to the attention of honourable members that although there has been a determination by the Land and Environment Court an appeal has been lodged. I cannot understand why the Government is proceeding with this bill at this time. The Government should remove from its schedule any reference to the forest reserves and also to the flora reserves within those forest areas so the appeal can be heard without prejudice. There could be ample conservation areas and also a viable sawmill. The Warung State Forest comprises 7,000 hectares and the Bundella State Reserve comprises a little less than 2,500 hectares.

Flora reserves are irrelevant because they are not available for logging at present. My case does not rest on the future of flora reserves but many people believe that flora reserves are better maintained by New South Wales Forests and its predecessor the Forestry Commission, than they are by the National Parks and Wildlife Service. Many areas of national parks are overgrown with weeds. The Government creates national parks but does not allocate sufficient funds to maintain them. These are economic choices: what can the State afford? What is the intrinsic value of that which is being preserved? I do not believe a case has been made out for the revocation of the forests. It is important at this stage to test the opinion of the House with the Opposition's amendments. They go to the heart of the matter. They seek to remove from the schedule flora reserves contained within the proposed Coolah Tops National Park.

The reserves are all in the Warung State Forest area. There has been a cry of anguish from the people of Coolah, an old and well-settled district. Only 10 years ago it was a prosperous district with mixed farms - producing fine wool, excellent cattle and abundant crops. If this timber mill is closed, the reduced circumstances of the pastoral and agricultural industries will place the future of this town at stake. Employment involved in the processing of timber is vitally important to the town. In such a small community the flow-on effects of closing a vital industry are significant. Up to 12 families will go from the mill, another group that runs the trucks bringing the logs in will be lost, those who fell the logs will leave, all of which will place stress on the local community, the local school, and so it continues. Sadly, New South Wales has seen far too much of this devastation.

The Government has made blind decisions and driven towns to the brink when the crucial gravity that keeps them going has been lost. One unintended consequence for this town was when North Power withdrew its maintenance depot from Brewarrina. If Brewarrina were a more substantial town, the withdrawal of such a service would be taken up by something else. However, the removal of this maintenance depot was a telling blow for that town, which is struggling from the present downturn in the wool industry. Coolah is a town in crisis and there is no need to plunge it into crisis at this time. I doubt that any member would have the temerity to argue that somehow the resource contained in the Bundella and Warung State forests is on the brink of overexploitation and destruction. The Coolah Tops area is most attractive. Since 1916 it has been logged. An enlightened government would ensure that the resource was judicially harvested to the year 2016 and beyond until the year 2116.

The future of our civilisation depends on developing sustainable resources. This Government is good on talk but not much good on action. The Opposition had hoped that one of the promises the Australian Labor Party Government might have kept - about 250 promises have gone by the board - was to establish a department to look after the interests of small towns and coordinate the activities of different departments as they impinge on a small town. That election promise was styled on the Queensland model. Indeed, it was a policy the coalition was going to pursue. When considering the impact of this decision on the town of Coolah, someone should have said, "Hang on, that will have a disastrous effect on this town." Other departments have made other decisions. Indeed the courts administration department might decide to decrease the availability of court sittings. These decisions can have almost a rolling effect on a town and cause absolute disaster. But nothing has been said about that.

No-one has made an assessment about the future of Coolah. It is time members in this House stood up to be counted and supported the Opposition's amendments to at least give Coolah some time. There is no need for this legislation to proceed. As I mentioned earlier, an appeal is yet to be determined. The Government can halt all
Page 3321
logging by a simple administrative process while the assessments proceed, particularly a full socioeconomic impact statement of the future of Coolah, which is justified in this case. I trust that honourable members will have read the amendments, will understand clearly their impact and, in view of the case I have put forward, I would not be surprised at a unanimous vote to support the amendments in Committee.

The Hon. I. COHEN [9.24]: Beauty certainly is in the eye of the beholder. I see the value of forests differently from the way the Hon. D. F. Moppett views them. I cannot accept that one cannot differentiate prelogged forests. Silviculture practices in Coolah have had a significant impact. I have visited Coolah with other members of the crossbenches. I find it unacceptable that others consider the area has not suffered significant impact by logging practices. However, people view these issues from different perspectives and cultures. However, to date the conservation argument far outweighs that of the industry in the important protection of Coolah Tops.

I support the bill. The bill brings closer the Government's commitment to establish the Coolah Tops National Park and makes minor additions to national parks and wilderness areas in the State. The bill revokes the dedication of Kerripit Beech flora reserve, Fenwicks Scrub flora reserve and part of Mebbin National Forest. The Government's intention is to add these areas to the national parks estate. These small areas the subject of this revocation were included and accepted by the Government as part of the National Parks and Wildlife Service wilderness exhibition process. Honourable members will recall that this was the second round of wilderness exhibition after the Government came to office.

That part of Kerripit Beech flora reserve to be revoked is part of Barrington Tops State Forest and will be added to Barrington National Park. It is a small addition of approximately 243 hectares and should have been included in the park in 1969; it is merely a housekeeping matter that no reasonable person could oppose. The 110 hectares of Fenwicks Scrub flora reserve is part of the Doyles River State Forest near Walcha. The revocation will add the area to Werrikimbie National Park - again a housekeeping matter. The bill will also revoke approximately 175 hectares of Mebbin State Forest near Murwillumbah, which is also a national forest. This escarpment area can only be described as token revocation.

The Government should consider taking action with other significant State areas. The north coast community is still awaiting the establishment of national parks centred upon the Mount Clunie and Mount Nothofagus flora reserves, extensions to Toonumbar National Park, Yabbra, and other parts of the Richmond Ranges as well as coastal areas such as Warrell Creek, Queens Lake State Forest, Bellinger River State Forest and the longstanding commitment for additions to Khappinghat Nature Reserve. Notwithstanding such criticism, I warmly welcome the Government's action in relation to Coolah Tops. The Hon. R. S. L. Jones, the Hon. J. S. Tingle, the Hon. A. G. Corbett and I visited the Coolah Tops community on 2 October 1995. It was an enlightening visit and we were well treated.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: They thought you were going to offer them some comfort.

The Hon. I. COHEN: Not false comfort but an assessment based on facts from viewing all sites at first hand. I can do no more than come to conclusions after looking at the issue first hand and not from a long-distance appraisal. Those conclusions are arrived at from my best ability as a member of this House and as a conservationist who cares for social justice issues in the community. I assure the honourable member that I have spent a good deal of time considering the issue. In the end I believe the Government's decision is correct. I am advised that the sons of the mill owner, Mr James Morrison, have found alternative employment and the Government is attempting to finalise payment to Mr Morrison.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett has also written to crossbench members setting out reasons for not proceeding with this matter, and I thank him for his courtesy. The Opposition's argument, as I understand it, is that the Coolah Tops matter is currently before the Court of Appeal. The action is against a decision of the Land and Environment Court in which the Government's decision on Coolah Tops was upheld. The action before the Court of Appeal will seek declarations against the Government's action to establish Coolah Tops National Park. If the company's action is successful in the court, the actions leading to the establishment of the park will have been nullified. I have doubts as to the company's success, which appears to be an action to gain the best possible financial outcome for Mr Morrison rather than to re-establish the timber mill.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: That is unworthy.

The Hon. I. COHEN: No, having visited the mill I was disenchanted with the conditions that it was operating under. The day I was there it was wet, there was sump oil on the floor and the conditions were extremely difficult. From a workplace safety point of view I consider working conditions at that mill to be quite inappropriate under any circumstances. I looked at the mill from the viewpoint of proper organisation and protection of workers in the industry. They should have a fair go; they should not be treated in an inappropriate industrial relations manner. They want jobs, and that is understood. In many country areas people are working in substandard conditions. If the industry is to continue it must be appropriate. At present many areas of the industry are not appropriate and people are working in substandard, dangerous conditions.

Page 3322

I am sure the Hon. D. F. Moppett is aware of accidents that have occurred over the past few generations in this industry, and it is still a dangerous industry. The industry's many outdated practices need to be upgraded. It is extremely important that we move on and do not stay in the backwaters of industrial relations as has been happening in this industry. I am also concerned about future training and employment prospects for the workers of the mill. I made that clear at earlier meetings, and I have spoken previously in the House about it. After going to Coolah I was greatly concerned about the prospects for the workers. I note the announcement on 3 June 1996 by the Minister for the Environment that the Government is looking for full re-employment for the six sawmill workers affected. I wish the same treatment was given to workers in other areas of the State who were made redundant. Thousands of people have been put off work across the State yet they will not receive the same assistance. The crossbenchers, working with the Government, have addressed the conditions of people working in the industry.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: How far will that money go with a 50 per cent option?

The Hon. I. COHEN: I think the honourable member will find that the money will go further than it is going in the short term, with people working in an unsustainable industry that is only a tiny remnant of the representative area that is left. Not to adopt these changes is to take a one-way trip to oblivion. Future generations will thank the Government for this change. Restructuring will enable people to get on with sustainable-based industries so that the workers can be supported. Government support for the millworkers and owner falls within the forest industry structural adjustment package. Assistance includes business exit assistance for the mill owner; financial assistance with relocation to a new job, training and special redundancy payments; and jobs are still available within the National Parks and Wildlife Service in the new park when established.

The mill's foreman has already received a new foreman's position and is eligible for relocation expenses under the financial package, funded from the environmental trusts. I now highlight a few of the important aspects of the Coolah Tops area which warrants its protection as a national park. Coolah Tops National Park will comprise some 11,000 hectares and contains forest types including snow gum, mountain gum, manna gum, silvertop stringybark and silvertop yellow box. If all the current proposed and surrounding vegetated lands were protected, the Commonwealth's criteria of 15 per cent of pre-European vegetation could not be met for most forest types. With Coolah Tops added to the reserve system the representative area contributes only 2.4 per cent to the criteria set out within the national forest policy statement agreed to by the Commonwealth and States. That is a tiny area.

The area also contains some old-growth forest, most pronounced in the eastern areas, and some spectacular falls. The history of the fight to save Coolah Tops is worth mentioning because the National Parks Association of New South Wales - NPA - campaigned for the national park which is being considered by the Government. Until 1979 many bushwalkers, including members of the NPA, had visited the area, observing its significance and expressing concern about its management. In 1979 the NPA undertook an initial investigation of Coolah Tops. On 9 January 1981 the NPA wrote to the then Minister, the Hon. Eric Bedford, with a preliminary proposal. In June 1982 the "National Parks Journal" set out the first documentation of the conservation values for Coolah Tops.

On 9 January 1987 the NPA expressed its concern about the issuance of a grazing permit and inappropriate forestry practices, including burning. In 1992 Dr Macdonald in the other place introduced his National Parks and Wildlife (New Areas and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which identified Coolah Tops. In 1995 the Australian Labor Party accepted Coolah Tops National Park in its 24 new parks policy and on 13 June last year the Government announced the establishment of Coolah Tops National Park. A year and a week after the Government's announcement, the Coolah Tops revocation is before this House. The National Parks and Wildlife Service has discussed with adjoining and willing landowners the possibility of voluntary purchase of other significant lands for addition to the 11,000 hectare park.

The proposed Coolah Tops National Park comprises the Warung State Forest and Bundella State Forest. The area comprises an undulating basalt plateau at the western edge of the Liverpool Range. The escarpment also contains eucalyptus eleaophora and kurrajong. Other species include three metre high xanthorrhoea and the native cherry. Thickets of leptospermum grow along streams and wildflowers include orchids and the Darling pea. Approximately 30 bird species have so far been identified and fauna includes the greater glider. There are spectacular views to the Nandewar Range, Lake Goran, the Warrumbungles and the Blue Mountains. The area contains seven forest types plus grassland and swamp areas.

I understand that the Opposition will not support the revocation schedule. I have already addressed the purported reason for court action. Any action that is successful will reverse the procedure to establish the national park. The bill and schedule do not establish the national park: they only facilitate its establishment by revoking State forests and flora reserves. As such, this Parliament will not have acted in the shameful way it has over the State Environmental Planning (Permissible Mining) Bill and the Environmental Planning and Water Amendment Bill. I would be interested to have further discussions with the Hon. D. F. Moppett about the Opposition attitude to the bill. The Opposition should take guidance from its
Page 3323
shadow minister for public works and shadow minister for roads. In October 1994 the Hon. George Souris, the member for Upper Hunter, when Minister for Land and Water Conservation, spoke in the other place in support of the coalition's failed Forestry (Environmental and Fauna Impact Assessment) Bill and stated:

If we do not want logging in certain forests, the honest approach is to change the land use to declare them as national parks. The dishonest approach is to legislatively ensnare forestry operations so that they are so slow, so uncertain and so expensive that industry will whither and die. Let us be honest about our forests, and not waste public money hamstringing State Forests and the industry. If we do not want logging in certain areas then let us change the land-use.

That is the honest approach. The reason that some political interests would prefer the death of a thousand cuts is that it allows them to blame State Forests for the loss of jobs and the social dislocation that results.

Here the Opposition is opposing the protection of our heritage and allowing a mill owner to suffer rather than get reasonable compensation and to get on with his life. I support the bill.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES [9.40]: I support the Forests and Flora Reserves Revocation Bill. As the Hon. I. Cohen said, it is too late for Coolah because Mr Morrison will auction his logs on 12 July. He will auction the mill and machinery on 24 July and then he will go to Queensland. He has taken advantage of the business exit program.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: He is a broken man.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: No, he is actually very happy. He will have one month's holiday in Queensland. He will sell out under the business exit program.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: That is a cynical disregard of the wishes of the council.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: I am not being cynical. He was available to me on the phone just now, but I did not have time to talk to him. He said he was quitting the whole thing and selling up.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: He is not the only one. What about the one at Eden? It closed up. The owners did not want to close up. They closed up because they have no resources.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: Tonight we are talking about Coolah, not Eden. It has nothing to do with Eden. There is nothing in the bill about Eden.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: No, but there are a lot of other places apart from Coolah. And you are going to shut down the whole show.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: The show is already shut down. It is up for auction in about two weeks. There will be jobs, perhaps not jobs cutting down the forest, but long-term jobs maintaining the forest. There will be jobs there long-term in the park; I hope there are jobs for the sake of the workers. I met the workers, not one of whom belonged to a union, but the union representative was there to help them. Working conditions at the mill were far from ideal. I would say they were actually quite dangerous conditions. Change such as this is always painful, but we have to make sure that those who suffer, suffer the least.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: Where are you going to get the wood from? That's what I want to know. Where are you people going to get the wood from, New Guinea?

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: That area has a deal of timber, but it was being used for low-grade purposes. As I have said before, I have friends in the industry. It is a matter of what you use the timber for and how much value you get out of it. One could take out an entire forest and get a very low yield, or take out one or two trees at a time and produce high-quality furniture. People I know who have built mills in the past five years are making a lot of money providing goods for niche markets. We have to be more clever than we have been in the past. Ironbark - a very fine timber used for houses, furniture and kitchens - has been wasted to make posts because it was too difficult to mill. However, ways of milling it have now been found and it will be used for a good purpose. It is a matter of not just turning the wood into fence posts or cross-members for electricity poles.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: What are you going to do with beechwood?

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: Beechwood has a very low-value use. People are pulling down old warehouses and using the wood to make magnificent furniture. My house up north has magnificent old beams from old warehouses that originally were of very low value, but now they are in a very nice house. The timber was preseasoned for about 50 or 60 years. We have to be clever with the timber. We cannot just give it away. Until recently we have not appreciated the worth of our timber resources.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: That is rubbish.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: I wish it were rubbish. We have wasted our timber. In the early days cedar was wasted for fence posts and heaven knows what else. Recently one of our neighbours up north knocked down a cedar tree and made $3,000 out it. She should not have done it; it was illegal, but she did. After all, $3,000 is more than she makes from her dairy cattle. I have said this before, and I do not want to waste the time of the House by saying it again, we are revoking little parcels of State Forest, not big areas.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: No, but they go in with the next motion.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: We are looking at 175 hectares of Mebbin National Forest, which is a very tiny portion of the forest. It would not keep a timber mill going for more than a few months. We are talking about precious little reserves.

Page 3324

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: But it is reserved already. It is a flora reserve. No timber is drawn out of it.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: No, it is not. I wish the honourable member had read the bill. It is not a flora reserve. Schedule 1 refers to flora reserves and schedule 2 refers to State forests. The reserves include 243 hectares of Barrington Tops, which is a beautiful area and 110 hectares of Doyles River, which is also a lovely area.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: Will you be satisfied with that?

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: These are fragments, not vast areas. These are tiny, weeny little fragments of fine-quality timber areas.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: You can have the next lot.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: We have already compromised. We have already lost a significant proportion of the forest. You want to have 50 per cent, then 50 per cent, then 50 per cent and you end up with about 3 per cent left. That is all we have left now. The reserve also includes 556 hectares of Warung State Forest, which we have visited. We have a duty to future generations, to our grandchildren, to our great-grandchildren and to our great-great-grandchildren to preserve these area so that they will be able to see forest as it was when the while man first arrived. In 100 years the forests will have recovered; even Coolah Tops will have recovered. Does the Hon. D. F. Moppett not think about who will follow him in 100 or 150 years?

Future generations will thank us for having the foresight to save these areas so that they can enjoy them. Jobs and people in them will be long gone and their children will probably be involved in something quite different by then. They are short-term jobs, but these are long-term forests and they are worth saving. We have to think of future generations and intergenerational equity. The Hon. D. F. Moppett should be thinking six or seven generations ahead, not just for the next four or five years, but 100 or 150 years. We owe it to our children and our great-grandchildren. We are not trying to save these forests for ourselves, but for our great-grandchildren. I thank the Minister for reserving these little areas. I hope we get a few more so that at least some representative fragments of the old forest are left.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [9.47]: Call to Australia supports the Forests and Flora Reserves Revocation Bill. The objects of the bill are:

(a) to revoke the status of certain lands as flora reserve under the Forestry Act 1916, and

(b) to revoke the dedication of certain lands as State forest (including part of a national forest) under the Forestry Act 1916.

The remaining three flora reserves to be revoked by this bill are within the Warung State Forest, which is proposed to be revoked for the Coolah Tops National Park. The final boundaries of the proposed Coolah Tops National Park, in which these flora reserves are located, are consistent with the recommendations of the Resource and Conservation Assessment Council, RACAC, which recommended that the Bundella and Warung State forests, excluding areas of leasehold land, should be dedicated as Coolah Tops National Park. There is no doubt, and the Government admits, that the legislation will affect the sawmill at Coolah. However, the mill owners and workers will be eligible for an unprecedented level of assistance, so that even though there is a need for sound conservation decisions to benefit the whole community, the burden should not be borne by the local industry or the local community alone.

The Government has promised to support those at the Coolah sawmill under the forest industry structural adjustment package, which Call to Australia supported last year, to get $60 million from the State Government and $60 from the Federal Government, totalling $120 million, which includes funding for business exit assistance and relocation and retraining assistance. Alternative employment opportunities are also available with the National Parks and Wildlife Service, a forest liaison officer will be available to advise workers and other assistance may be available. It has been a very difficult decision that has led to this impact on mill owners at Coolah, the mill workers and also, as the Hon. D. F. Moppett said, the community at Coolah Tops, a small community that has been dependent on the timber mill. The Hon. D. F. Moppett asked Call to Australia to support him in his efforts. In a letter dated 18 June he stated:

I hope you can support us in our efforts to save this vital industry for Coolah and New South Wales.

I have made inquiries and my information is that it is too late to achieve what the National Party would like to see happen. Perhaps the Coolah timber mill needed this assistance from the coalition during its term in office between 1990 and 1995. Call to Australia spoke to the owner of the Coolah timber mill, Mr Morrison, just a few moments ago. He indicated that he would like the process with the mill to be finalised; that he has applied for business exit funding and is happy to go that route; and that he does not support the Opposition's amendments or approach. Mr Morrison's mill will be auctioned in July; his logs and timber will be auctioned on 12 July and the milling machines will be auctioned on 26 July. By the end of July he will be out of the mill. He plans to go to Queensland for a month during August.

Mr Morrison's two sons are happy to continue with the process of the business exit fund and the valuation. Price Waterhouse, the accountants, have been asked by the Government to give an independent valuation. Mr Morrison agrees that Coolah will now become a national park and, he says, the sooner, the better. Call to Australia recognises that many communities are dependent on
Page 3325
one or two industries. In this instance Coolah was very dependent on the timber mill. Sadly that has gone and we will have to hope and pray that there will be other ways of providing employment and hope for the town. If not, as people have said in the past, "NSW" will be Newcastle, Sydney and Wollongong and there will be national parks right across the State, with no small regional communities operating in country areas.

That would be unfortunate because Australia is not merely a city-based nation. I believe that the farming communities have been in the past, and still are, the backbone of our State and nation. In the same way as the environmentalists are concerned and do not want to see a forest decimated by the timber cutters, Call to Australia does not want to see the nation decimated with communities becoming heartbroken, giving up and moving out, resulting in a large number of ghost towns across the country and forest areas. That would also be a tragedy. Call to Australia recognises the reality of the situation tonight and supports the bill.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations) [9.53], in reply: I thank honourable members for their eloquent contributions to the debate and I commend the bill.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Schedules 1 and 2

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT [9.55]: By leave, I move Opposition amendments 1 and 2 in globo:

Pages 3 and 4, Schedule 1, lines 14-36 on page 3 and lines 1-7 on page 4. Omit all words on those lines.

Pages 6 and 7, Schedule 2, lines 6-37 on page 6 and lines 1-5 on page 7. Omit all words on those lines.

It is with apprehension and some dread that I await the fate of these amendments.

The Hon. J. W. Shaw: Fear and trepidation?

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT: Severe trepidation, indeed, given the information that has been conveyed by honourable members this evening.

The Hon. R. T. M. Bull: The people of New South Wales should know how people feel about this issue.

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT: They should. It is most important, though, that we proceed. I point out to those honourable members who have taken the trouble to visit Coolah in an attempt to understand the process that has gone on there, that this is not just about the Morrisons; we are making a decision to alienate what was once a resource.

The Hon. R. S. L. Jones: To reserve it for our children.

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT: I will choose the words that I use. We are making a decision to alienate that land for public usage and to make it unavailable for any future development by a sawmiller.

The Hon. R. S. L. Jones: Destruction!

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT: I think that is the misunderstanding about this issue. It is quite obvious to anyone who has visited the area that there has been no destruction. Silviculture has been practised judiciously and the most basic needs of human society have been met in a sustainable manner.

The Hon. R. S. L. Jones: Those needs do not include fence posts.

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT: People need fence posts. The honourable member might make little of the use of timber for fence posts. In his Utopian world people do not have to do anything except sit on their backsides and dream. In the real world other people have to develop the wealth of this country, and to do that they have to get into forest areas somewhere. If they do not do it in Australia they are going to do it somewhere else in the world under less well-controlled conditions. I warn honourable members that these amendments are the last ray of hope to the community - not to the Morrisons. I can accept the message that has come from the contributions of a number of honourable members that the Morrisons have decided to quit. They have had enough. I can understand that.

If honourable members were in the Morrisons' position they would quit, too. I do not think that that is enough for the people of Coolah, though. I wager the shire council has not quit; I wager the people in the district wish the industry was still in their midst and that the work was still there. They would like to have the benefits of that industry not only flowing directly to them in wages, but also flowing out into the rest of the community as a result of the production at that mill. I say again that very substantial areas of Crown land are reserved for conservation purposes but they are not national parks.

Our total conservation program is not measured simply by the total of our national parks. Coolah was a perfect area of multipurpose land use that could have been sustained if we had had the courage to stand up. I am sorry the position has been reached where the Morrisons feel that the sale of their machinery is necessary. I have seen this happen before in other areas, particularly in the cypress pine industry. One miller goes out and all those problems that the Hon. I. Cohen is so distressed about would cease. But another miller could come in very quickly with new equipment if the resource is in place, but if there is no resource available then it is quits for sure. It is bad news, not for the Morrisons but for the Coolah district. I will proceed with these amendments and test the vote of the House in a division.

Page 3326

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations) [9.59]: The Government opposes the amendments. These amendments effectively remove the areas of forest at Coolah Tops which have been identified by the Resource and Conservation Assessment Council as being required for a comprehensive, adequate and representative reserve system in the region.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [10.00]: I have a letter from Mr Col Dorber, Executive Director, New South Wales Forest Products Association Limited. He put the following arguments to encourage our support for these amendments:

It is this Association's position that revocation of these forests should not occur until the Appeal in the Supreme Court against the decision in the Land and Environment Court has been heard and determined. If one assumes any success for any part of the Appeal, then a prudent government should withhold revocation on that basis.

I am not sure what that refers to. I assume the Forest Products Association Limited has lodged an appeal in the Supreme Court against the decision of the Land and Environment Court. If that is the case, Call to Australia will support the amendments on the basis we should at least symbolically show support for the townspeople of Coolah.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations) [10.01]: I am always very conscious about the relationship between the Parliament and the courts. The fact that something is pending in the courts does not prevent the Parliament from acting if the Parliament is persuaded that is the appropriate way to go. My understanding is there has been no injunction or no interim relief granted by the courts and, therefore, there is always an intermingling of legislative action and judicial action. There is nothing strange or unique about that. It is not regarded as a barrier to this House determining legislation.

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT [10.02]: I listened with interest to the Attorney General. Although I know he is reluctant to give legal opinion, I would be interested to explore it further. If the appeal goes ahead and is upheld, what would be the status of that decision?

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations) [10.02]: As the Hon. D. F. Moppett knows, I am reluctant to give legal opinion. Essentially one comes down to the proposition that the Parliament is sovereign. If the Parliament decrees something to be the legal position, then that prevails. The court determines the law as it is enacted by the Parliament.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: So you are quashing the appeal?

The Hon. J. W. SHAW: No, this is the traditional relationship between the Legislature and the courts. The courts interpret the laws as enacted by the Parliament but the Parliament is a sovereign Parliament elected by the people and has a democratic mandate. The Parliament can ultimately determine what is to be the law for the State of New South Wales. The courts interpret that law and, if necessary, determine its validity. This is a perfectly orthodox interaction between the legislature and the courts.

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT [10.04]: I thank the Attorney General for that advice. I once again commend the amendments to the House. It is obvious nothing is at stake. Morrison's mill is closed. Even if it were operating State Forests could prevent any logging taking place while that appeal is being determined. This House would be better informed if we had the judgment of the court. I understand what the Attorney General has said. Parliament could say despite the appeal decision it is still determined to go ahead. If that was the wish of the House we would have to abide by it, as would the people of Coolah and of New South Wales. In the meantime, it is not an unreasonable request of the members of this House to support the proposition that these areas be excised from this schedule and to show opposition to the schedule attached to the motion for revocation so that the reserved area of forest lands can be held in trust, in effect, until this matter is determined.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [10.05]: Following on my question, it would be important to know whether the Government is actually bringing this legislation on tonight to circumvent the appeal to the Supreme Court. In other words, the legislation will then become a factor in the decision of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court may determine that the appeal would have been upheld but because of this bill the basis of the appeal is neutralised. Can the Government provide information that that is its intention, or is it just a coincidence?

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations) [10.06]: I do not believe it is the intention of the Government to seek to circumvent any court decision. The effect of the legislation would be a matter the court itself would have to determine.

Question - That the amendments be agreed to - put.

The Committee divided.

Mr Bull Rev. Nile
Mrs Chadwick Dr Pezzutti
Mrs Forsythe Mr Ryan
Mr Gallacher Mr Samios
Dr Goldsmith Mrs Sham-Ho
Mr Kersten Tellers,
Mr Lynn Mr Jobling
Mrs Nile Mr Moppett

Page 3327

Mrs Arena Mr Macdonald
Dr Burgmann Mr Obeid
Ms Burnswoods Mr Primrose
Mr Cohen Mr Shaw
Mr Corbett Ms Staunton
Mr Dyer Mr Tingle
Mr Johnson Mr Vaughan
Mr Jones Tellers,
Mr Kaldis Mrs Isaksen
Miss Kirkby Mr Manson

Miss Gardiner Mr Egan
Mr Hannaford Ms Saffin
Mr Rowland Smith Mrs Symonds

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendments negatived.

Schedules agreed to.

Bill reported from Committee without amendment and passed through remaining stages.