Motions

Timber Industry

Mr BELL (Mount Gambier) (11:02): I move:

That this house establish a select committee to inquire into and report on the exporting of wood fibre and other matters regarding the timber industry in the Limestone Coast of South Australia, and in particular—

(a) whether the exporting of wood fibre is in compliance with the conditions of sale of the radiata pine forests in the Limestone Coast, sold by the previous state Labor government;

(b) the volume of radiata pine log being exported from the Limestone Coast area;

(c) the economic benefit and employment opportunities through additional wood fibre based industries should the current exported logs be made available for processing in South Australia;

(d) the supply agreements between forest growers and processors; and

(e) any other matter the committee deems relevant to the wood fibre industry in the Limestone Coast.

A broader inquiry is needed into the Limestone Coast region's forestry sector taking into account what has happened in the past, the present and the future. It has been nearly nine years since the harvesting rights to the South-East forests were sold off by the previous Labor government, but this is still an incredibly contentious issue for my electorate.

Many questions remain about the finer details of this sale, including the value of the asset. Many questions remain about compliance with the conditions of this sale. Many questions remain about the harvest rates of the forests and many questions remain about the supply agreements with processors and the amount of wood fibre exported from the Port of Portland. This week, the state government announced an independent audit on the lease agreement with OneFortyOne Plantations, something I have been asking for for quite some time, and it is perhaps in response to part A of the inquiry, but it is interesting to note that the independent audit is only for the 2018 calendar year.

Many questions remain about the number of trees harvested from 2012, when the forward rotations were sold, up to the current year of 2019. In my opinion, a limited audit of just 12 months does not capture past practices that may have been in breach of the forward sales agreement. I would ask the government to expand that audit from a 12-month audit to one that includes the period of time from 2012 so that any breaches and fears of overharvesting can be allayed once and for all in my community.

It is interesting that the Marshall Liberal government came to the 2018 election with a stated policy of an independent audit. We are now 12 months past that time, and there is a concern in my community that, if there have been breaches in the past, the company has known about this for 12 months and has had at least 12 months to rectify any previous breaches. I am not saying that there have been breaches. All I am saying is that that is a concern in the community if the independent auditor is limited to just the previous 12 months. It is well past 12 months since the state election.

A genuine concern for many in my community, including processors, is that the company may have improved its practices and that it will not address the overharvesting. My community has called for this inquiry. They would like to get to the bottom of what is going on in terms of the amount of wood fibre being exported. I want to assure companies that this is not a witch-hunt and I am not targeting one particular grower. This inquiry would look at all companies exporting wood fibre, not limit it to just one company.

My community is requesting that the inquiry look into issues directly affecting the future of the Limestone Coast timber industry—that local processors are missing out when it comes to competing for log supply with the export market. In short, a large volume of our wood fibre is going offshore when processors are telling me that it can be utilised locally. There are hundreds of jobs that can be created in the Limestone Coast if exports of raw log was reduced or quotas introduced.

Over the last 24 months, I have been approached by three separate companies—established companies—wanting to invest or expand in Mount Gambier. These three companies have a potential investment of more than $300 million in the South-East, and around 600 jobs on offer. If you sit back and look at that from a government's point of view, we are exporting raw product out of the Port of Portland that could be invested or lead to investments in the South-East of $300 million and 600 new jobs. That is the basis for me and my community calling for this inquiry.

These companies that would love to invest and employ are hamstrung by the fact that they cannot access the additional wood fibre. It is a tragedy when you see truck after truck transporting that raw product over the Victorian border to be exported out through the Port of Portland. It does not even come up to a South Australian port where the benefit would be realised by the South Australian government and the people of South Australia. In my opinion, wood grown on the Limestone Coast should be available to the Limestone Coast businesses first. We need to have policy measures that incentivise these companies to look locally first.

Growing our economy should be our priority, not shipping off raw product and jobs overseas. In short, South Australia and our communities are missing out. Believe it or not, Australia has a $2 billion trade deficit when it comes to importing sawn wood products. That means that we are sending our raw product overseas and importing $2 billion more in value of processed wood product. Much of that product can be processed locally. It makes sense to me to look more closely at this for the benefit of not only those living in the South-East but those living in South Australia.

Countries across the world are beginning to put in place export tariffs to protect local jobs. I am not suggesting that we go that far, but it is interesting that other countries are looking at this to protect local jobs. In fact, Australia and New Zealand are the only countries that provide no protection for local manufacturers. Meanwhile, the shortage of timber is now affecting other industries. Vignerons, like Coonawarra's Doug Balnaves, are waiting up to 12 months for timber posts to grow and maintain their vineyards.

In a news story last year, Doug spoke about how ridiculous it is that the Coonawarra wine region is smack bang in the middle of a large and successful timber region but they cannot get access to these vital products. Primary producers, like Mingbool potato grower Terry Buckley, have also spoken out about having to use imported timber products for storage and transportation pallets because their local suppliers cannot access the raw product.

David Quill is the CEO of the SA Timber Processors Association (SATPA), and he has been outspoken on this issue for many years. SATPA member companies are all family-owned businesses and directly employ South Australians. I agree with David when he says it:

…makes no sense to sell our natural resources from under local jobs.

Australian domestic manufacturers need reasonable terms of contract in any supply agreement and a level playing field.

OneFortyOne Plantations recently announced that they will not export sawlog from their estates, with their executive general manager saying that it is the 'strongest domestic market they have seen for more than 15 years'. I applaud OneFortyOne for their decision. It is important to note that OneFortyOne is only one supplier, and this commitment is only until June 2020. So you have the problem that local processors, who are investing millions of dollars into their plant and equipment, only have that guarantee for another 12 months.

The forestry industry is one of the Limestone Coast's key economic drivers and supports thousands of jobs, both directly and indirectly, through services and employment. When I say I have the full support of my community, that includes the council, and I will read out one letter of support from the City of Mount Gambier:

At a meeting of the City of Mount Gambier convened on 19 March 2019 Council resolved to express its full support for your proposed Notice of Motion to Parliament recommending 'That a Select Committee of the house be appointed to inquire into the Economic Impact Exports of wood fibre is having on processors of the South East of South Australia'.

The letter goes on to talk about the importance of that industry for our community. The future of our forests and our timber industry depends on better management, support and regulation, where it is needed, from this state government. There needs to be some greater scrutiny on what is going on from an independent regulator.

In closing, this inquiry is not trying to target one company. This inquiry will look at the lost economic opportunities for the South-East and for South Australia. If you saw the photos and the evidence of how much wood product is being exported out of the Port of Portland, they are missed opportunities for our state and lost jobs for our region.

What I am seeking, with this inquiry, is the facts. How much product is being exported? What is the economic loss to our state and to the community? It does not go as far as to seek tariffs or other mechanisms; all I am trying to establish is the facts, so that when policy is developed it can be done with the facts in mind to grow jobs in South Australia, jobs in the South-East and revenue for this state. With that, I commend this motion to the house.

The Hon. T.J. WHETSTONE (Chaffey—Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development) (11:17): I rise to speak in response to the motion for a select committee put forward by the member for Mount Gambier and note that the government will be opposing the establishment of this committee. That is because we are already undertaking a number of positive measures for the forestry industry so that it can work more closely with the sector.

Traditionally, across Australia plantation forest assets have been held in government hands. Over the last two decades, many state governments have devolved forest ownership to the private sector, and the previous state Labor government sold up to three forward rotations of the South-East ForestrySA and the asset to OneFortyOne Plantations.

There are three large pine forest owners in the South-East of South Australia: OneFortyOne Plantations, New Forests, and Green Triangle Forest Products. In addition, there are a number of small foresters. The South Australian Timber Processors Association has four members that are all small sawmills that process plantation pine, and these members have concerns about the quantity of pine being exported and generally about the ongoing timber supply. They claim that locally grown pine should be retained for local processing and not exported.

The South Australian Timber Processors Association has agitated for several years for government intervention in the commercial agreements with their suppliers, the forest owners. The forest owners claim that they offer timber for sale to these local sawmills but the sawmills do not have the capacity to take the timber or do not pay the same amount as export markets. OneFortyOne Plantations made a commitment in March 2018 not to export sawlogs. The definition of a sawlog is a log over 20 centimetres in diameter.

OneFortyOne Plantations has recommitted to this pledge this year; in March 2019 they gave a commitment again not to export sawlogs. However, some processors want access to timber that is smaller than the sawlog classification and, by and large, that is normally classified as pulp log. The state government has no controls within its lease agreements about the process through which OneFortyOne sells its non-sawlog or its pulp log. Similarly, the state government does not have control over other forest owners' operations to force them to sell small sawmills as opposed to exporting the resource.

The Green Triangle, consisting of the South-East of South Australia and south-western Victoria, produces about 28 per cent of the nation's plantation hardwood logs, 26 per cent of the plantations softwood sawlog and 25 per cent of the nation's plantations softwood pulp log. Attempts to constrict exports of timber resources growing in South Australia may have a negative, unintended consequence and disadvantage the SA forest businesses relative to those in neighbouring Victoria.

At a national ministers meeting on 1 June 2018, examples of other countries intervening in log exports were examined. In every example, this intervention created distortion in the market, resulting in negative, unforeseen local outcomes. At this meeting, it was agreed by all ministers that Australian and state governments should generally not intervene in the log export trade to avoid distorting the market. This issue is complicated, and further complicated by the fact that some of the small sawmills themselves undertake minor processing, which they themselves export instead of providing to local processers. That is, they are building pallets, using that pulp log to make logistical products and themselves exporting those products, so there is a significant pallet shortage here in South Australia.

The government action is that the Marshall Liberal government is in the process of procuring an independent consultant to conduct a one-off audit for OneFortyOne's compliance with the contract it has with the state government, as requested by the sector. I know that the member for Mount Gambier said that the audit is only going to come for the next 12 months, but OneFortyOne have self-audited and, as an incoming minister, I did not feel that was good enough. It was not quelling the anguish, nor was there the transparency and the commitment I thought OneFortyOne should have for South Australian taxpayers, so that is why we have an independent audit coming up for the 2018 season.

Again, the government has also formed the Forest Industry Advisory Council (FIAC) of South Australia, with its first meeting to be held in Mount Gambier on 10 April, next week. The FIAC brings together 11 key industry figures from across the value chain to provide advice to the state government on further developing the forestry sector. Each member has a high level of industry knowledge and responsibility.

Members include forest owners, forest managers, contractors, haulage, small mills, large mills, farm foresters and the biomass sector, and I will read their names into Hansard: Wendy Fennell is the chair, and she is Managing Director of Fennell Forestry; Mark Rogers, Managing Director of New Forests; Laurie Hein, Managing Director of Green Triangle Forest Products; Jill Stone, Three Streams Farm and farm forestry expert; Ian McDonnell, Managing Director of NF McDonnell and Sons; Linda Sewell, Chief Executive Officer of OneFortyOne Plantations; Ian Tyson, CEO of Timberlink Australia Ltd; Tammy Auld, Woodflow Manager, Timberlands Pacific; Martin Crevatin, National Operations Manager, PF Olsen Australia; Peter Badenoch, Managing Director of Plantation Treated Timber; and Emma Daly, Executive Manager of Van Schaiks Bio Gro.

The majority of them are local people from here in South Australia. We are going to put much-needed transparency into the forestry industry. If I am going to support a select committee, it is about doubling-up, and it is about putting a large amount of effort and commitment into these people, not only having to respond to a select committee but also now having a large amount of the industry leadership meeting in the FIAC group.

At the 2018 state election, the Australian Forest Products Association sought support for an industry target to double the economic value of domestic manufacturing in South Australia by 2050, and that is what the FIAC will address. It will address what has been historically the uncertainty with export log, and it will address the certainty of how we will attract investment into the forestry sector. It is about dealing with what is potentially a $1 billion injection into forestry, forest products and value-add into forestry. A member of the South Australian Timber Manufacturing Association sits on FIAC.

The terms of reference in the motion are so broad as to include the operations of all forest growers, to investigate their commercial-in-confidence contracts with sawmills and other customers. This is broad, invasive and it is not required at this time. I have a press release I would like to insert into Hansard, and it is the agreement that OneFortyOne has come to the table. My conversation with the CEO of OneFortyOne states:

[OneFortyOne] has agreed to fully cooperate with this audit which will be conducted under the ASAE 3100 standard, set by the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. I believe it will provide a high level of assurance to the assessment findings.

I think that is critically important. It is about putting in transparency. It is about alleviating the fears and the uncertainty of what the forestry sector has been about. It is also understanding that we cannot tell private business how to do business.

We cannot go in there and audit their books for the sake of auditing their books without having an intrinsic understanding that we are allowing private business to operate as a private business. It is also really important that FIAC will be there for the best interests of forestry in South Australia, particularly in the Green Triangle. This independent audit of OneFortyOne Plantations is about appeasing the compliance concerns of the forestry industry, particularly in the Green Triangle. Let me be clear about this, the audit will look at:

age class distribution across the plantation estate;

area weighted average clearfall age;

tender process for uncontracted sawlog in excess of planned viable domestic supply;

sale contract lengths for sawlog export; and

the amount of sawlog and pulp log exported and if those logs were appropriately classified.

It beggars belief that we can go to any sector, any private enterprise, and tell them what they can and cannot do with their product, whether it be timber products, whether it be red meat, whether it be horticulture or whether it be a bottle of wine. We have to understand that OneFortyOne are coming to the table, that they are going to be transparent and that they will be audited in the manner according to the independent audit.

The timber industry is a great industry. It is a vital industry to the South-East, and that is why the government is moving to act responsibly on behalf of the Green Triangle and forestry in South Australia.

Mr HUGHES (Giles) (11:27): I congratulate the member for Mount Gambier on bringing this motion before the house. The opposition will be supporting the member for Mount Gambier's motion to:

…establish a select committee to inquire into and report on the exporting of wood fibre and other matters regarding the timber industry in the Limestone Coast…

As someone from a regional community that is dependent upon adding value to mineral products, I fully understand the desire on the part of the local member and the Mount Gambier and Limestone Coast community to maximise their advantages.

I have listened to the minister. I think a number of the initiatives are fine initiatives and worthy initiatives, so I am not critical, and this particular motion does not run counter to some of those worthwhile initiatives. It does in some respects enhance them: it enhances transparency and openness. The select committee will provide a platform to engage with a spectrum of views. In my view, anything that encourages openness and open dialogue should be supported.

Forest industries make a huge contribution to the economy of South Australia, generating around $2 billion per year. It is a major employer in the Limestone Coast region, and there are also significant plantation forestry assets on Kangaroo Island and in the Mid North of the state. More than 7,000 people work directly in the forest, wood and paper products industries in South Australia and a further 15,000 people are employed indirectly, so it is a very significant contributor to our state.

The industry went through a significant downturn during the global financial crisis and for several years afterwards, but international and domestic demand in recent years has seen the industry booming. Advanced technology, manufacturing and processing of timber, much of which was enabled through the funding from the South East Forestry Partnerships Program, is part of a thriving and competitive industry.

While this is great news for the industry and those who work in it, it also presents challenges. The smaller manufacturers, in particular, have not been able to negotiate supply agreements to meet their demand for fibre, some for current needs and some for expansion. There are new businesses that would like to establish themselves on the Limestone Coast but cannot do so unless they can access timber resources. There are a number of growers in the region, most of whom export timber. There has been some concern in the local community that the volume of export is too high. The committee would be empowered to examine that.

There is some residual concern that the purchaser of the forward rotations of those forest areas, previously owned by government, may not be complying with the conditions of sale. Clearly, there are some mechanisms that were put in place by the government to look at this, but this will enhance those mechanisms further. This committee would be able to test that suggestion. It would also be able to examine the economic opportunities that may be available if supply could be found for additional local processing.

We hope that this select committee will seek to find solutions by looking at the current situation and options for the future. The opposition considers that it is vital to invest time and resources into the industry that is so valuable for our state, particularly to the Limestone Coast. Therefore, we support the establishment of the committee and commend the motion to the house.

Mr McBRIDE (MacKillop) (11:32): I rise today to speak to the motion brought by the member for Mount Gambier and thank the member for Mount Gambier for bringing it to the house. I also thank the Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development for presenting our government's position on this motion. I would like to express my appreciation to the Liberal government for allowing me to express my position on this matter in support of the member for Mount Gambier's motion to support key forestry processing stakeholders and the Wattle Range Council.

The MacKillop electorate forms part of the Green Triangle, which includes the South-East of South Australia and south-western Victoria. It is a significant beneficiary of the forestry and forest processing industry. The Green Triangle produces 28 per cent of the nation's plantation hardwood logs, 26 per cent of the plantation softwood sawlog and 25 per cent of the nation's plantation softwood pulp log.

The MacKillop electorate includes a significant share of the total standing forest and supplies wood processing industries located both within my electorate and into the adjacent electorate of Mount Gambier. There are three large forest companies in the region, including OneFortyOne Plantations, New Forests and Green Triangle Forest Products. Farm forestry also has a role in the region, with several businesses operating in that space.

The industry is a valuable one. Analysis in 2017 by consultants EconSearch highlights that the economic contribution of the timber processing industry in Mount Gambier and Grant district council area in 2016-17 was around $198 million in gross regional product. Of this GRP, flow-on effects account for another $85 million. The same report identifies that the total employment contribution by the timber processing industry was around 1,521 jobs, which includes flow-on employment effects of around 684 jobs.

The report identified that the timber processing industry directly contributes around 7 per cent of the total GRP or around 12 per cent including flow-on effects. This is in the context of the 2016-17 data where the total GRP generated across all industries in the two council areas was around $1.643 billion and total employment was around 14,529 jobs.

The South Australian Timber Processors Association, which comprises four small sawmill enterprises that process plantation pine, and Wattle Range Council have communicated their concerns to me in relation to log supply. What I have heard from stakeholders is, firstly, that the volume of log available is only available in large consignments. Small mills have indicated to me that they cannot handle the large volume consignments. Secondly, long-term contracts are challenging to smaller mill facilities. The industry and marketplace are still developing post the forward sale of rotations of the state government forest estate. Smaller mills are seeking to manage their risk.

Thirdly, the previous market arrangements lent to smaller consignments of timber that were received regularly now do not serve the harvesting speed or volume taking place today. Impacts include difficulties in accessing timber or appropriate volumes of timber; flow-on impacts to agriculture, viticulture and horticulture enterprises, which seek posts for a range of purposes and are unable to access the product they require in a suitable time frame; and a stifling of growth. I understand that there is potential for a range of new players to enter the market and for expansion of some existing processes; however, this potential may not be realised until there is a better understanding of the sales and contract arrangements and a pathway established for a clearer operating approach to the market for timber.

I appreciate that there are value-adding opportunities that need to be realised in the Limestone Coast and Green Triangle area. I appreciate the impact the log shortage is having on processing businesses and end users alike and the view that the current purchasing arrangements and market behaviours are stifling regional economic growth. It is the strong desire of my constituents and myself to realise an effective select committee process that brings together the information and hears from witnesses to identify driving forces in the sector.

I believe that a select committee would provide a transparent and bipartisan approach to support a regional industry that is struggling to achieve adequate log supply to value-add and grow the sector. I believe that the outcome will assist to identify how market transparency could be improved and how our region can better capitalise through value-adding to the timber and log products within our region. I am supportive of the select committee and, at the same time, would like to acknowledge that the Liberal government that I am part of, and the minister specifically, is taking steps to support the need for more information in relation to the extent of compliance to forward sale conditions by OneFortyOne Plantations.

The previous state government infamously sold up to three forward rotations of the South-East ForestrySA asset to OneFortyOne, which is now one of the largest forest owners in the South-East of South Australia. As part of this arrangement, a number of conditions were set to ensure that the interests of the community and the forestry industry were conserved. I am sure that many of my constituents will be pleased when they hear that the Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development has announced the initiation of an independent review to conduct a one-off audit of OneFortyOne's compliance with the contract it has with the state government. I commend our government and our minister for undertaking this audit. This is an important step to ensure that a great many people in my electorate and across the state can feel confident that the conditions of the forward sale are being met.

I acknowledge and support the establishment in December 2018 of the minister's Forest Industry Advisory Council of South Australia, which will meet for the first time next week. I had the pleasure of meeting several members of the Forest Industry Advisory Council during our last sitting week, when we held the inaugural meeting of the Parliamentary Friends of Forestry. The membership of this advisory council includes 11 key industry figures from across the value chain to provide advice to the state government on further developing the forestry sector. Each member has a high level of industry knowledge and responsibility.

I see the opportunity for this group to bring great value to the discussion of log market supply issues. In particular, key objectives of this group include playing an important role in identifying how industry and government can create the right environment for business to thrive, maintaining a strong working relationship with the Australian Forest Products Association and other industry stakeholders and advising on other industry initiatives, including the opportunities and impediments for expansion of the state's plantation estate and a sustainable and safe forestry and forest products industry sector.

I am fully supportive of the steps our government is taking; however, I believe, as do my constituents, that we need to take one further step and support the motion to establish a select committee for the purposes described by the member for Mount Gambier. I again thank the member for Mount Gambier for bringing this motion to the house and the Liberal government for the freedom to express my views in this house.

The Hon. L.W.K. BIGNELL (Mawson) (11:39): I rise for the second day in a row to support a motion brought to this place by the member for Mount Gambier. I congratulate him on this motion because I think a select committee would be a good idea, if for nothing else but to give confidence to people in the South-East. As many people have mentioned, and as I know as someone who grew up in the South-East, the forestry industry is vitally important down there.

It is going gangbusters. It has been going well for a decade and that is terrific to see. In fact, there are probably still people out there who are trying to get people with the right skills to come and work in the forestry industry. It is one of those growth areas that quite often has a supply problem when it comes to getting the appropriately skilled employees into it.

I do not reckon that governments should ever be scared of having select committees. The current minister for agriculture was on the select committee that I was on a few years ago. After the 2011 grain harvest, there was a lot of disquiet around regional South Australia, and the member for Hammond brought a motion to have a select committee on the grain handling capabilities of Viterra to get to the bottom of it.

The agriculture minister at the time was a guy called Michael O'Brien and he did not want that to happen. I had some links to regional South Australia, and the member for Hammond and I had a few chats about it. I was able to go to our party room and convince them that there was actually nothing for the government to be scared of here. This was a private company that some people thought had done the wrong thing, so let's have a select committee into it.

The member for Frome ended up being the Chair. The member for Light and I were on it, as well as the member for Chaffey, who is now the agriculture minister, and the member for Hammond. I think we got on very well and we learned a lot. We sat down in the bowls clubs in Loxton, Wallaroo and Ceduna and also at the footy club at Pinnaroo during a mouse plague—I remember that night—and we heard from local people. I would urge the government to get onside with the member for MacKillop, the member for Mount Gambier and the opposition and support this in a bipartisan way.

As a former forest minister, I know there were always conspiracy theories that OneFortyOne was getting away with things that they should not have been able to get away with. As a government, we looked at the tight and stringent rules around that contract to ensure that OneFortyOne was behaving as it should, as set out in the contract. If we did have this select committee, and OneFortyOne and everyone else could come along and have their say, it would give a better understanding and maybe allay some fears that people have. One thing I know—and this was the same when I was the minister for forests as well—is that the best use of those forests in the South-East is to have them go to the wharves as a finished product, or at least something that has been partly processed, rather than go out as logs.

In the last few months as a forest minister, I had plenty of chats with Anne Ruston, who I think did a great job as the assistant minister for agriculture at the federal level. She had responsibility for forests and also fisheries. We had a sit-down roundtable meeting in my office with Anne Ruston and people from the federal government, we had people there from PIRSA and the forestry department and we had processors and forest owners there.

We were trying to get some solutions around that table. I am not sure whether that group is still having meetings, but there was a lot of goodwill from everyone around the table. Out of that first meeting, I think perhaps we got a better understanding about what difficulties and challenges the growers faced, as well as the challenges faced by processors.

I think there is actually a lot of goodwill out there in the industry. It is, as I said at the outset, such a vital industry for the South-East of South Australia. It is something that has bipartisan support—at least there is support on this side. There is support from one of the government members and from the Independent member for Mount Gambier. When you have the two members who have all these forests and all these processors coming into this place and saying it is a good idea, and you have the former forest minister saying it is a good idea, maybe it would be good if you reconsidered and just had another look at it.

There could be things that come out in that select committee that point to my time as the minister that say that perhaps I could have done things better and that the government of the day could have done things better in that four-year period. I am happy for that to come under the spotlight and for people to have a look at it because I think that is the mature approach we should take.

If there are ways of improving the forest industry in the South-East of South Australia, if there is a way to prevent logs going out of the Port of Portland and have those logs processed here in the South-East, which would in turn create more jobs and more economic benefit to the people of Glencoe (my home town), Nangwarry, Mount Burr and Tarpeena—all those towns that rely so heavily on the forest industry—then that is a good thing.

I urge the government to maybe have one more think about this, to get on board with the two local members from the South-East, get on board with the opposition, who want to provide a bipartisan approach to it, and let's give everyone who is involved in the forest industry, everyone who cares about the South-East and everyone who wants to see that part of South Australia prosper the opportunity to have their say and have a little bit of a discussion.

Again, for the second day in a row, I commend the member for Mount Gambier for bringing a really decent and well thought-out proposal to the Parliament of South Australia. I commend his motion and wish him all the best in getting this select committee up.

Mr BELL (Mount Gambier) (11:46): I would like to thank all those who have made a contribution to this motion, and I would just like to reaffirm a couple of points. This inquiry is not a witch-hunt: it is about transparency and it is about allaying fears within the community. It does not go as far as putting any suggestions in there on what could be done, but it talks about the volume of wood fibre going over to the Port of Portland, which is a loss to South Australia and a loss to my community.

If that wood product was processed locally, what are the lost opportunities in terms of jobs? If it is 400, 500, 600 jobs, as I am led to believe, then that needs to be put forward. What is the lost economic impact of that wood fibre going over to the Port of Portland? That is all this inquiry is seeking to achieve, because once you have transparency you can then look at what steps a state government could take to encourage local processing and local jobs.

This is really just the first step. I agree with the member for Mawson that this type of transparency and this use of a parliamentary committee can actually provide great benefits to the forest growers of the South-East because it allays people's fears. Once things are put on the table—and, of course, there will be commercial-in-confidence matters that will not be able to be discussed—as a government we can look at how we attract 10 to 15 per cent of that export staying locally.

Are there issues around water that need to be addressed? Are there issues around plantation sizes and hectares needed to grow more product? Is it investment in smart technologies, like, Göran Roos, I think it was, identified with the inquiry that he did around 2013 looking at more advanced manufacturing for that supply?

The facts still remain that, over the last 24 months, three businesses have come to see me saying that they want to invest in our region to the tune of $300 million, providing up to 600 jobs, and that they cannot get the raw product because it is on trucks heading over to the Port of Portland. I have put in people's pigeonholes a few photos of the ships and the stacks of woodchip over at the Port of Portland, and I look at that as a lost opportunity.

I fully respect and agree that these are privately owned estates. They have the right to export. Nothing in this inquiry directs against their right to do that. All it is saying is let's get the figures on the table so that we can start having some discussions around that. With those words, I thank all those members who have contributed to the debate and I wish it a successful passing.

The house divided on the motion:

Ayes 21

Noes 24

Majority 3

Motion thus negatived.