Mr QUICK(4.02 p.m.) —What a glib ministerial response from the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy (Mr Anderson). This is ridiculous. Tasmanians have had enough of this vacillating by the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) and his relevant ministers—Senator Hill and Minister Anderson—over the whole RFA process. Tasmanians want this issue resolved right now.

Tasmania has always been everyone's whipping boy across a whole range of industry issues. With 460,000 people and only five federal seats, we are perceived as being irrelevant and electorally dispensable. Despite what the minster has alleged, my colleague the member for Denison (Mr Kerr) has eloquently put forward reasons why this is a real matter of public importance, especially for Tasmanians.

The whole complex issue of forests—their usage by the timber industry, the preservation of rare and endangered species, the conservation and management of wilderness areas, and the issue of old-growth forest—has to be finally resolved. For too long, governments of all persuasions have pussyfooted around this sensitive and complex issue trying so unsuccessfully to placate both green and industry concerns.

The RFA process was the only way to resolve once and for all this sensitive issue, to put some certainty back into the equation and to allow progress to take place—progress in establishing viable forest industries, progress in promoting more jobs in the forest industry, progress in establishing species reserves in perpetuity for future Australians and progress to stop the exporting offshore of jobs in the timber industry.

The RFA process is the best and the only sensible way to resolve this complex issue, providing better outcomes for the environment and better outcomes for the forest industry. The process is based on science—assessment of the various forest types against the JANIS criteria. It is a transparent process which allows those participating in the process to be confident that the outcomes are properly achieved. Tasmania, however, is a classic example of how such a seemingly simple process can go so horribly wrong and leap right off the rails.

All players in the process saw 30 June 1997 as the final sign-off date for the RFA process in Tasmania. The great expectation was that finally we were going to resolve this complex, sensible issue which has been a navel-gazing exercise for Tasmania for too long and has almost cleft asunder communities throughout Tasmania. We are now in the first week of September and no-one—I stress `no-one'—can say with any certainty when the signing-off will take place.

The whole issue is like the gestation of a baby elephant: it just keeps going on and on. The failure to finalise this RFA process is causing unbelievable angst and anger right throughout Tasmania and is holding up in excess of $100 million worth of forest industry projects right now.

With the Tasmanian Premier in the gallery, it is sad for me to say—and I do this in a bipartisan way—that Tasmania is close to becoming an economic basket case. It has the nation's highest unemployment rate, negative population growth, huge youth unemployment figures and little prospect of attracting new industries to the state with this whole uncertainty hanging over the place.

One needs only to listen to Tasmanians talk about their home state. Never before—and I have been there since 1961—has there been so much negativity and hopelessness expressed by people from all walks of life. Tasmania is in a real meltdown mode.

The Tasmanian Premier, who is sitting in the gallery, has unsuccessfully fought for a long period of time to convince the Prime Minister that there is a simple and achievable solution to the whole stupid impasse. I am sure he has been listening intently to this debate. I think he has not really been convinced and reassured by what the minister has said in his 15 minutes at the dispatch box.

There is a real requirement by the federal government to open its purse strings and provide Tasmania with the necessary dollars to allow the process to be finalised once and for all. In meeting the RFA requirements, it becomes obvious that it is not just about drawing lines on maps to include and exclude forest types and species. There is a real human dimension to this process, which the people in power in Canberra seem to forget.

The inclusion of species in a reserve requires a management regime to be put in place, as the honourable member for Denison said, and this costs real dollars. People forced out of work as a result of this RFA process who are no longer employed in certain regions need money for transition and relocation to other jobs and other living centres.

There is a realisation that Tasmania, probably because of its island status, has so many and so varied a range of forest species that it means not all of them are located on public land. You cannot have a successful RFA outcome in Tasmania without acquiring large tracts of privately owned land. What landowners in their right minds would willingly forgo private property without realistic and adequate compensation?

As the honourable member for Denison said, if a successful RFA outcome means withdrawing four to five per cent of the forest resource from the timber industry then money for successful and constructive industry restructuring is urgently required. The federal government has a real obligation if the RFA is to be achieved and signed off, hopefully by the end of September 1997, to provide Tasmania with the necessary dollars. The RFA process will provide a win-win solution for jobs and the environment. The Prime Minister, Senator Hill, and Minister Anderson, get your acts into gear and assist Tasmania—neglect our plight and you stand condemned.