Hon Peter Foss questions the government's plans to reduce pre-2004 timber cuts to increase post-2004 cuts, specifically regarding contract surrenders and acquisitions. Hon Kim Chance confirms the government is considering this, particularly through business exit offers, but not through compulsory acquisition.

AnsweredQoN 232Legislative Council
Asked
20 June 2001
Portfolio
Forestry and Fisheries

QuestionView source ↗

(1) Is the Government contemplating in any manner, following the principles outlined by Mr Richardson, reducing the pre-2004 timber cut in order to increase the post-2004 cut? (2) Is the Government contemplating doing so by - (a) causing the surrender of contracts by people exiting business; (b) placing a condition on post-2004 contracts that pre-2004 quantities be reduced; or (c) purchasing or compulsorily acquiring pre-2004 contracts - I realise new legislation will be required to do that - or obtaining them in any other manner; and, if so, how? Hon KIM CHANCE

AnswerView source ↗

(1) Yes. (2) (a) No, I do not believe that is the case if I have understood the question correctly.  The 2004 volumes that millers now hold are held by right.  The Government does not want people to surrender that right under duress, although that does need to be filled out a little. (b) Yes, the business exit offers the Government is making now amount to that.  In effect, we are saying to people who hold contracts at this stage that the business exit allowance will be paid to them on the condition that they agree to no longer take resources from the native forest.  It is an interesting point because, in my view, a business can take an exit allowance and continue operating as a mill if it is able to obtain resources from other sources, such as private land. (c) By compulsorily acquiring contracts, no.
(2) Is the Government contemplating doing so by - (a) causing the surrender of contracts by people exiting business; (b) placing a condition on post-2004 contracts that pre-2004 quantities be reduced; or (c) purchasing or compulsorily acquiring pre-2004 contracts - I realise new legislation will be required to do that - or obtaining them in any other manner; and, if so, how? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) Yes. (2) (a) No, I do not believe that is the case if I have understood the question correctly.  The 2004 volumes that millers now hold are held by right.  The Government does not want people to surrender that right under duress, although that does need to be filled out a little. (b) Yes, the business exit offers the Government is making now amount to that.  In effect, we are saying to people who hold contracts at this stage that the business exit allowance will be paid to them on the condition that they agree to no longer take resources from the native forest.  It is an interesting point because, in my view, a business can take an exit allowance and continue operating as a mill if it is able to obtain resources from other sources, such as private land. (c) By compulsorily acquiring contracts, no.
(b) placing a condition on post-2004 contracts that pre-2004 quantities be reduced; or (c) purchasing or compulsorily acquiring pre-2004 contracts - I realise new legislation will be required to do that - or obtaining them in any other manner; and, if so, how?
(c) purchasing or compulsorily acquiring pre-2004 contracts - I realise new legislation will be required to do that - or obtaining them in any other manner; and, if so, how?
(1) Yes. (2) (a) No, I do not believe that is the case if I have understood the question correctly.  The 2004 volumes that millers now hold are held by right.  The Government does not want people to surrender that right under duress, although that does need to be filled out a little. (b) Yes, the business exit offers the Government is making now amount to that.  In effect, we are saying to people who hold contracts at this stage that the business exit allowance will be paid to them on the condition that they agree to no longer take resources from the native forest.  It is an interesting point because, in my view, a business can take an exit allowance and continue operating as a mill if it is able to obtain resources from other sources, such as private land. (c) By compulsorily acquiring contracts, no.
(2) (a) No, I do not believe that is the case if I have understood the question correctly.  The 2004 volumes that millers now hold are held by right.  The Government does not want people to surrender that right under duress, although that does need to be filled out a little. (b) Yes, the business exit offers the Government is making now amount to that.  In effect, we are saying to people who hold contracts at this stage that the business exit allowance will be paid to them on the condition that they agree to no longer take resources from the native forest.  It is an interesting point because, in my view, a business can take an exit allowance and continue operating as a mill if it is able to obtain resources from other sources, such as private land. (c) By compulsorily acquiring contracts, no.
(c) By compulsorily acquiring contracts, no.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more