Kamala Emanuel, Hobart
The battle to save Tasmania's forests can and must be won. All the arguments of those who justify the forests' destruction are thin, held together by tacit support for the right of a rich minority to profit at the expense of everyone else.
These are the facts:
- Tasmania's old-growth forests are a priceless ecological treasure that for biodiversity, greenhouse and water conservation reasons simply have to be saved;
- The current woodchip regime is wreaking environmental havoc and in many cases, trampling on Indigenous people's rights;
- Workers in the industry would have safer, better-paid and more secure jobs if the industry was brought under public ownership and run with the aim of preserving ecological sustainability; and
- the majority of Tasmanians want an end to clear-felling in old-growth forests. Simple respect for democracy should mean an immediate end to clear-felling.
Despite intransigence on the part of the state Labor government and industry mouthpieces, pressure has been building since the 1997 Regional Forest Agreement opened the door to today's record woodchipping levels. The fantastic mobilisation in Hobart of more than 10,000 people in March — the largest pro-environment mobilisation in Tasmania for more than 15 years — is the latest reflection of the popular will.
This campaign is truly a mass movement. It strength lies not in a few willing to lobby politicians, but in the tens of thousands that are willing to take action themselves to save our forests. If the campaign continues in this way, it is quite possible, even likely, that it will result in a major victory — such as a government-regulated end to clear-felling and an expansion of forest reserves.
This would be a big step forward. But the Socialist Alliance believes that more is needed. We have been calling for the big players in the timber industry (such as Gunns Limited) to be brought under public ownership. There are several reasons for this.
It is the profit motive that is decimating Tasmania's forests and nationalising Gunns would cut directly against this.
Further, despite the fact that the "jobs versus environment" myth peddled by the establishment has much less resonance today than a decade ago, job security is (justifiably) a real concern for working people. Calling for guaranteed jobs for timber workers helps to broaden the base of support for forest campaigns.
Of course, after years of record profits and government subsidies it is quite reasonable to expect Gunns should pay for these jobs (and paid retraining if required). However, job security could be much better ensured by a publicly owned industry.
Finally, it is the best way to ensure that our victory will be lasting. We can already see the government talking about "ending clearfelling by 2010" (without ending forest destruction).
As long as the industry remains private the imperatives of the profit system will lead to recurring pressures to profit at the expense of the environment. Yet a publicly owned timber industry, democratically run by community, environmental and worker representatives could ensure ongoing compliance with ecological and social goals.
[Kamala Emanuel is the Socialist Alliance candidate for Denison in the upcoming federal election. She polled 5.2% in the state seat of Elwick in May.]
From Â鶹´«Ã½ Weekly, June 2, 2004.
Visit the