Newcastle City Council Boycotts BORAL

The Wilderness Society has led a significant campaign against BORAL, which has resulted in one of the largest regional Councils in Australia deciding to refuse to deal commercially with Boral because of its involvement in the export woodchipping industry. In this campaign, we made BORAL twice stand in front of a public jury (Council) attempting to justify their involvement in the woodchipping industry. Twice they failed miserably. On the same night, February 9, 1999, two NSW Councils (Newcastle and Byron Shire) acted against BORAL, and action has been taken by Randwick Council in Sydney and Nedlands Council in WA since. The campaign is rapidly gaining momentum. BORAL has a greater responsibility for its logging of Australian forests than it is willing to accept. Well, it is now time that BORAL was made to take responsibility for its actions. The export woodchipping industry has generated enormous opposition in Australia, with thousands of Australians involved in activism mainly aimed at Federal and State governments. However, by the time of the great woodchip debacle of 1994-5, when this issue dominated the front pages around the nation, environmental groups realised the need to directly target the corporations behind the woodchip industry. On February 9, 1999 the Newcastle City Council brought forward a resolution stating clearly its intention to refuse to deal commercially with woodchipping companies, and specifically BORAL. This came in response to a strong community campaign run by the Newcastle Branch of The Wilderness Society (TWS), and the unacceptable decision by the NSW Government in the Regional Forest Agreement (RFA) process.

The final Newcastle Council Resolution states that: With the exception of those matters coming within the Local Government Tendering Regulation, Council confirms its decision to have no new direct commercial dealings with any commercial entity (including BORAL) which, in Council's view, has a significant involvement in the woodchipping of Australian native forests. The Council's vote was carried by nine to two in favour, indicating the overwhelming success of our efforts. This is a pivotal decision, and represents a powerful potential campaign strategy for all those keen to pursue a corporate focus. The decision by the Newcastle City Council may cost BORAL millions of dollars per year in lost contracts, and judging from their exhaustive efforts to break the Council's resolve, has caused significant concerns for the company. It has since come to light that BORAL is reviewing its "non-performing assets" (which include the Timber Division) with a view to selling. While this campaign probably did not provoke the review, it is unfortunate timing for BORAL. Certainly, any company considering taking the risk of acquiring BORAL's timber concerns will have to factor a potent community campaign against woodchipping into its projections. This will affect BORAL's chances of unloading their responsibilities.

The role of local government in environmental issues cannot be overstated. Agenda 21 (from the Rio Earth Summit, 1992) stated that local government has control over 80% of land and resource issues. This places a new perspective on environment activism and political campaigning, and opens avenues ignored for far too long. Hopefully this campaign will help to change the attitudes of the entire community about the role and importance of local government.

Background

The campaign was a product of frustrations with the Regional Forest "Agreement" process, a desire to take the industry on directly, and a belief that Newcastle City Council might be sympathetic. BORAL's export facility is on Newcastle Harbour, and thus the Council has an implicit role in the industry. Newcastle City Council has gained international attention for its positive environmental approach. After preliminary discussions with some Newcastle City councillors, the issue was brought in front of Council in mid-1997. The Council requested that all sides of the campaign publicly present their respective cases. Initially it was planned that The Wilderness Society, BORAL, State Forests of NSW and either the EPA or the NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation would present.

• The sustainability of the export woodchip industry;
• community concerns relating to this industry;
• the importance of ethical investment and
• the role of Council as a leader in this pursuit; and
• the level of accountability Council had to the 1000 people who submitted statements to Council supporting commercial action against BORAL.

This was followed by the BORAL presentation, which was professional but elusive. BORAL failed to address the concerns of the Council about the export woodchipping industry, and were the recipients of a barrage of questions from the councillors. The company's blatant refusal to answer many of the direct questions put to it obviously frustrated the Council.

What Motivated The Council's Decision?

The Council decided to address the issue of action against BORAL after the terrible decision by the NSW State Government in the RFA process. This precipitated action by more than just Newcastle Council, with Manly Council publicly condemning the Carr government. The RFA decision for north-east NSW demonstrated the greatest fears of the community about BORAL's role in our forests. The State Government's own scientific evidence pointed to the need to reserve 1.2 million hectares of native forest on public land. The environment movement involved in the RFA process was willing to modify this to allow for a transition in the industry. Yet the industry (including BORAL) submitted the case that only 330,000 hectares be protected, of largely unloggable land or forests unlikely to yield good quality timber and woodchips. The result was a decision to protect a mere 380,000 hectares, in direct contravention of the scientific guidelines established by the government itself.

This result caused significant concern among the Councillors, and they passed a strong Resolution threatening economic sanctions against Boral on December 8, 1998. This reinvigorated the community campaign, and led to the final resolution stated above.

The Lead Up To The Final Decision

The December resolution was contingent upon legal advice. While the Council gained its advice, we sought our own. The Environmental Defender's Office (EDO), with a sympathetic corporate lawyer, gave us the legal perspective on both the Council's position and that of TWS. This advice played a pivotal role in the direction TWS took. The Newcastle Branch went back on the streets, running a "Herofax" campaign. We gained public submissions congratulating the councillors for their strong stand, and demonstrating the commitment of the community. This was the easiest public submission campaign in the memory of the Branch, with seemingly unanimous support for action against Boral. We also gained support from local groups, including the Trades Hall Council, the churches and some prominent local figures. This was bolstered by some networking with prominent environmentalists around Australia, plus submissions from various environment groups. The Newcastle Branch also provided the councillors with all the information they required, and endeavoured to demonstrate clearly to the Council that they would be supported by the community. The final component was to spread the campaign to other Councils. This was again well supported, the Newcastle councillors recognising the importance of this action in view of legal constraints.

Glen Klatovsky - TWS Newcastle

An Urgent Appeal
from the
Forests of Western Australia

Western Australia's old growth forests are currently being clearfelled at the rate of about 20,000 hectares per year to produce jarrah and karri sawntimber, and large volumes of low-grade karri and marri woodchips for export to Japan.

The jarrah and karri sawntimber is increasingly intended for export markets, especially in the USA and Europe. Some may be exported as lengths of timber and some as products such as garden furniture. Some karri sawntimber is believed to be exported for uses such as mine stays in South Africa,and some was under consideration for use as canal lining in the Netherlands. This latter use was ruled out by the Dutch Ministry of Public Works, which, after a long and detailed examination of karri forest management, remained unconvinced that it was sustainable.

On top of all this, it appears that trial shipments of jarrah woodchips for use as industrial charcoal are underway or planned. It is believed Saudi Arabia may be one market for these woodchips.

Unsustainable Forest Products From Western Australia

Timber Exports

In recent years the WA company Wesfarmers Limited, through its wholly-owned subsidiary Bunnings Forest Products, has been engaged in intensive efforts to develop international markets for the sale of old growth jarrah and karri sawntimber products. Wesfarmers Bunnings and other companies are attempting to market the old growth timber as "sustainable", "from sustainably managed forests" and "from a renewable resource". An Evironment Protection Authority (EPA) report contradicts these claims. Some companies may advertise the products as "from plantations", which is also false.

Photo: In 1994 Wesfarmers Bunnings, WA's biggest woodchipper, breached its export license when it clearfelled 80 hectares of Giblett Forest .

Woodchip Exports
Wesfarmers Bunnings sells up to 900,000 tonnes of old growth karri and marri woodchips annually to Marubeni Corporation, which in turn sells them to three Japanese pulp companies: Hoketsu Paper Mills, Nippon Paper Industries, and Nagoya Pulp Company (a subsidiary of Daio Paper Corporation). According to Wesfarmers Bunnings' internal reports, the Japanese pulp companies consider Western Australia' s old growth woodchips to be very low grade, and the companies would probably cancel or renegotiate their supply contracts if they were given the opportunity.

Since it has now been officially confirmed that the logging of Western Australia' s old growth forests is not sustainable, the Japanese pulp companies should now stop buying old growth woodchips from WA because it conflicts with their own stated environmental policies. We ask them to do so. Such a step would be strongly supported by the WA public, which overwhelmingly opposes the woodchipping of WA's old growth forests.

Consumer Campaign
Until a sustainable timber industry comes into existence in Western Australia, we wish to advise consumer groups, corporate buyers, environment organisations and governments that jarrah and karri timber production and karri, marri and jarrah woodchip production are based on the destruction of unique old growth forests, and are not sustainable. Consequently jarrah, karri and marri products should not be traded, bought or endorsed in any way.

As well as not buying or endorsing these products, we ask you to pass on this message to other organisations, and to advise us if you are aware, or become aware, of any particular examples of the marketing of jarrah and karri timber.

There is widespread support in WA for a sustainable timber industry. Such an industry would be based on a combination of plantation resources, of which WA has a large amount, and the sustainable logging of regrowth native forests for the production of high value timber products like furniture.

Thank you for your assistance in stamping out this trade in unsustainable forest products

Forest Alliance website: http://wafa.org.au/
The Wilderness Society forests pages:
http://www.green.net.au/twswa/forests.html
Please send feedback to the
Western Australian Forest Alliance,
conswa@iinet.net.au