By Pip Hinman
In the current debate over woodchipping old growth forests, you'd be forgiven for thinking that the union movement had taken a unanimous position in support of the government's pro-woodchipping policy. This is not the case. The ACTU and the forestry division of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU), are facing growing criticism from unions concerned that making chips out of Australia's native forests flies in the face of environmental and economic logic.
Last week, the construction division of the CFMEU took a public stand against woodchipping old growth forests. The Victorian state secretary, Martin Kingham, said his branch's division did not agree with the exploitation of native forests.
In the interest of a broader debate over jobs and the environment, 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly contacted the CFMEU's forestry division, offering to publish a position paper. They agreed to provide one, but nothing had been received by 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly's copy deadline.
As the federal government manoeuvres to be all things to both the timber lobby and the environment movement, other unions have joined the call for the remaining fragments of Australia's old growth forests to be protected.
According to Martin Foley, acting branch secretary of the Victorian Clerical and Administrative branch of the Australian Services Union (ASU), "The trade union movement cannot afford to alienate potential supporters and members to its ranks". He believes that unless the union movement comes out strongly against the government's anachronistic pro-woodchipping position, it's long-term survival will be threatened.
Foley argues that the number of unionists supporting woodchipping in old growth forests is declining. Apart from that, "Survey after survey shows that the issue of support for the environment and opposition to export woodchipping has massive backing amongst young workers. This is the very group that my union, and indeed the trade union movement, needs to be attracting, not alienating."
The ASU is arguing for an end to export woodchipping and the protection of areas of high conservation value currently threatened by the government's decision to issue 11 woodchip licences. "To do otherwise is to alienate potential unionists we are seeking to enrol as well as to destroy irreplaceable national assets", said Foley.
The spurious argument, used by many in the timber industry as well as some 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ of the union movement, that environmental conservation poses a direct threat to job security, was also addressed by the ASU, which insists that job losses are more directly associated with the long-term restructuring of industry than with any other factor.
Foley said that 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ of the labour movement have yet to come to terms with the inevitable restructuring of the woodchipping industry in light of greater community and economic pressures for the protection of this disappearing source. He added that job protection remains an important concern for the union movement, but "one that needs to be set against longer term and community demands to protect the few remnants of old growth and wilderness areas that remain".
At its annual conference on January 20, the Australian Education Union (AEU) condemned federal resources minister David Beddall for renewing all the woodchipping licences despite advice to the contrary from environment minister John Faulkner. The AEU called for the decision to be reversed, an immediate investigation into the issuing of licences and the phasing out of woodchipping from all native forests.
"The AEU regards the export woodchip industry as it currently operates in Australia on both public and private lands as being environmentally and economically unsound (chipping of sawmill wastes is no exception)."
It recommended tax incentives to promote the use and further establishment of plantations; the further development of downstream processing of woodchips (making pulp and paper here instead of sending woodchips overseas and importing it back as paper); and the investigation of alternative employment for people working in the timber industry.
The union "strongly condemned" the ACTU for its support of the Beddall decision and its recent attack on the environment movement. "These statements cause damage to the union movement among those it is trying to recruit — young people."
The AEU says that such statements do nothing to safeguard long-term employment in the forestry industry, but defend the worst practices of employers in the industry, "who have failed to productively invest in favour of short-term profit".
The AEU demanded that the ACTU executive support the phasing out of logging in old growth forests and seek to get Beddall's decision reversed. It cited the 1992 ACTU-Australian Conservation Foundation Charter, which says that concern for the environment and job growth are not incompatible.