He said woodchip exporters in states with an agreement were already at an advantage because they did not need a licence. Further, by January 2000, operators in areas without agreements would be unable to export woodchips. Agreements have been signed in Tasmania and Victoria, but Western Australia and New South Wales have become entangled in disputes over job security and conservation. The NSW process has been further complicated by the impending state poll.
Mr Corr said the legislation therefore would breach section 99 of the Constitution by discriminating between states on the basis of political agreements and not merely location. He described other aspects of the bill as "bizarre". Under the legislation, regional forest agreements themselves become the law, but changes can be agreed to by Cabinet without the changes being scrutinised in Parliament, as would normally occur with legislative amendments.
Mr Corr said it was also odd that the changes themselves would not have to be gazetted, only the fact that a change had been made. Such an arrangement would make the agreements close to secret documents, he said. Mr Corr raised concerns about compensation provisions regarding future legislation. He said there was doubt over whether the executive arm of government could enter agreements that restricted its own functions and imposed financial obligations as a result of laws that did not yet exist.
Governments that passed legislation could also repeal it, he told the Senate rural and regional affairs and transport legislation committee. In that respect, the legislation did not give the timber industry the certainty it claimed was crucial for investment and jobs security.
The committee is due to report to Parliament by 15 February, but is
under pressure after receiving more than 300 submissions and calling for
additional information as a result of evidence presented to its hearings.