A defeated motion in Victoria’s parliament for more transparency around state forest operations illustrates the misconception that Labor is the major party most likely to protect the environment.
There was a time when environment issues could tip election results – a promise to protect Tasmania’s Franklin River played a significant role in Bob Hawke’s election landslide for Labor in 1983. Since then, conservation bodies have tended to limit criticism of the party in election years, believing that Liberal governance is worse for nature.
That view has changed. Many are reflecting on what they see as the Liberals’ better record on a range of environmental protections and, with Victorian Labor polling poorly in the lead-up to the state contest on November 28, green groups are waging overt campaigns against its forest policy.
A vote in state parliament this week highlighted the Hobson’s choice they now face. Victorian upper house MP Georgie Purcell’s motion for “transparency and oversight” in state forest operations revealed the extent of bipartisan opposition to what the Animal Justice Party representative described as “a small ask”.
In her final parliamentary debate spot before the election, Purcell listed multiple failures under Labor’s watch. She and her Greens colleagues cited a body of studies showing Labor’s “loophole logging” – thinning and clearfelling for forest “fuel breaks” – has increased flammable scrub and created wind tunnels that will potentially fan flames, broaden fire fronts and increase risks for firefighters.