In recent times, the Greens’ environmental agenda has been a subject of heated debate, particularly in the context of Victoria’s native timber industry. Critics argue that the party, in alliance with their Labor counterparts, extremist groups and a judiciary receptive to their cause, is not only responsible for the destruction of the local native timber sector but is now incredulously pushing for a broader ban on timber imports from jurisdictions that still DO – permit sustainable harvesting.

This contentious stance has sparked controversy – as workers, families and communities still reeling from the shutdown of their sustainable sector- now face attacks from far-left political parties and activists – who intend not just to irreversibly damage timber towns across Victoria – but kill them.

Victoria’s native timber industry has faced significant challenges in recent years, with the Labor-caused destruction of the native timber sector and subsequent abandonment of workers, contractors and communities. The Greens have taken their place alongside their Labor friends- leading rabid calls to cease harvesting in native forests. Their actions in supporting protest movements and the Labor party in Victoria led to the destruction of a sustainable home-grown industry that supported many of our rural and regional communities.

However, the controversy recently deepened when the Greens extended their agenda beyond local borders, calling for a ban on timber imports from other regions that continue to engage in sustainable logging practices. This move has drawn criticism from those who argue that sustainable forestry can coexist with environmental conservation and provide economic benefits to both local and international communities.

Proponents of sustainable timber harvesting argue that well-managed logging operations can contribute to healthy forest ecosystems, support local economies, and ensure a steady supply of timber without compromising long-term environmental sustainability. Countries like Canada and New Zealand, for instance, alongide Australian states Tasmania, New South Wales and Queensland continue to harvest within robust regulatory frameworks for timber harvesting, allowing for sustainable practices that are held in very high esteem by international standards.

The Greens’ push for a global ban on timber imports from such regions raises concerns about the practicality and fairness of the far-left party in Victoria, the question now is –  do they wish to increase imports from countries like the Solomon Islands, Indonesia, Borneo and Malaysia ? – where carbon emissions from transport are antithetical to the very causes the Greens espouse, and where environmental outcomes of timber harvesting are markedly more destructive.

Quote from Ellen Sandell, The deputy leader of the Victorian Greens ““Many of the logs being shipped into Victoria come from ancient trees near the takayna/Tarkine and southern forests of Tasmania” – while the condescending education the Melbourne based MP seeks to impose on those that actually live within the natural environs of timber communities,  rather than the twisted mess of concrete and steel she calls home – we must take what she says with a grain of salt – as a few years ago she could not tell the difference between China and Japan when viewing the Beijing bullet train – a sure fire symptom of the “Geographically challenged”.

Ellen Sandell must be questioned whenever the subject matter enters the subject of Geography. Pic Credit: X (Twitter)

While environmental conservation is undoubtedly crucial, active management regimes which include cultural burning and timber harvesting among other management prescriptions work both to protect ecosystems and support industries that rely on natural resources. Striking this balance requires nuanced discussions and evidence-based policies that consider the diverse approaches to sustainable forestry around the world.

The Greens’ plans for the sustainable timber sector, extending from their support of community destroying local shutdowns to a proposed ban on imports from other Australian states, has ignited a contentious debate – if this by some small chance became Victorian policy it would be likely that those timber manufacturers that remain in the state would either face closure or be pushed further towards the importation of timber from other countries.

As per their usual playbook – The Greens are nowhere to be seen on common-sense discussions on balancing environmental preservation with the economic needs of communities. Ultimately, finding common ground that promotes sustainable forestry practices while supporting local economies is crucial for thriving ecosystems, communities, families and our sustainable timber sector. Unfortunately, those ecosystems the Greens feign interest in are being damaged severely by current lock-and-leave management regimes, and the support of regional and rural communities, families and employment are completely absent from the Greens Party mindset.