Nation building: how not to nation build

There has been ongoing government neglect when making decisions, undertaking actions and progressing policies in relation to regions, regional communities, regional industries and regional employment in Australia over a very long period.

This opinion piece explores this matter further.

Some examples of ongoing government neglect in decisions, actions and policies in relation to regions

There are too many examples to outline here, but some examples are provided below.

A clear example is the progressive and ongoing closure of the native forestry sector over 30 plus years in NSW and more recently in Victoria and WA to a large degree, noting WA still has a small thinning program. More recently, a carbon method to close native forestry, the so called Improved Native Forest Management in Multiple-use Public Native Forests (INFM) method, was used to close forestry in N NSW, with questionable science and no release of submissions nor detail on consideration of submissions.

Another example is the ongoing loss of employment in regional towns over the last 30 years plus, involving many small towns. This relates to forestry closures, conservation purchases, carbon lock ups and water buy backs. There has been inadequate to nil consideration of the socio economic impacts on these communities, with large impacts. Wages go down and many people move.

There have been ongoing threatened species scientific committee decisions to stop/ restrict active management, including mild fire and forestry. The outcomes are becoming very obvious, with more and more intense, severe and long duration bushfires.

There are other examples, inadequate fire mitigation is putting communities and firefighters at risk, a major issue of neglect with prescribed burning in SE Australia around the order of 0.5 to 1.5 % of forests prescribed burnt each year, inadequate to protect communities, firefighters and ecosystems.

In relation to water buy backs, this is having big impacts on regional communities, employment and indeed the productivity of the nation.

Another example is ongoing unnecessary legislation that restricts effective land management and, in some cases, involves duplication of regulation. One example of that is the recent EPBC bill.

A specific example involves the federal government live sheep export ban which has delivered a sharp economic shock to WA's livestock sector, collapsing a key market that stabilised prices, flock numbers and regional employment; producers face stranded capital, falling farmâ€'gate returns and accelerated flock decline, with impacts cascading through transport, feedlot and portâ€'service industries.

Policy approaches are often being developed and determined by employees with little land management expertise and this often results in very bad policy. And it gets worse when poor science policies get through with nil science checking.

What governments routinely miss or ignore in making decisions in relation to the regional examples outlined above

One example that is missed is the impacts on primary industry sectors, and these are ongoing and cumulative impacts. Loss of multiple use is another factor usually missed. There have been loss of primary industry sectors in many areas, including forestry and fisheries.

Other issues that governments miss are regional business impacts, loss of regional manufacturing, loss of regional employment and loss of tourism and loss of local sporting club membership. Socio economic impacts of the areas that have been impacted are rarely considered.

Ongoing increases in agricultural land management impacts is routinely missed, the recent EPBC bill is a case in point.

Loss of exports and increasing imports is another factor mostly ignored. Sovereign risk is also rarely considered.

Inadequate fire mitigation protection of regional communities, firefighters, infrastructure and ecosystems is an area of major refinement, yet routinely gets ignored.

Weed risks, pests and bushfire risks rarely get soundly considered with more and more conservation lock ups, 30 by 30, water buy backs and carbon lock ups. The Nationals noted recently that Labor is planning to lock up another 39 million hectares of land to meet its 2030 target 30 by 30 target, almost the size of two Victoria's.

Adequate checking of the science behind decisions is another area being missed regularly.

The cumulative impacts of decisions are rarely considered, in relation to long term decisions, more recent decisions and current decisions being considered.

The costs that come out of poor government approaches

These costs that come out of poor government approaches are many and including the costs of each decision are huge; the cumulative costs of ongoing decisions are huge; loss of active management is a huge cost; loss of regional manufacturing; loss of regional employment; loss of tourism; increased wildfires; weeds and pests; loss of productivity; increased use of steel and concrete; increased imports and loss of exports and increased sovereign risks.

Cumulative impacts

The cumulative impacts and ongoing neglect of government consideration of state forest closures, agricultural impacts, conservation purchases, carbon lock ups, water buy backs and unnecessary regulation needs to be be stopped and the impacts on businesses, employment, towns, communities, landholders, imports and exports addressed.

Potential ways forward for government

An urgent priority area is urgent government review of the impacts and cumulative impacts and ongoing neglect of government consideration of forestry closures, agricultural impacts, conservation purchases, carbon lock ups, water buy backs, renewable clearing and agricultural impacts and unnecessary regulation and the impacts on regional businesses, employment, towns, communities, landholders, imports and exports addressed. And assess ways to make improved decisions.

Another way forward is improving regional communities and increasing investment in regions and regional roads.

Questioning the federal and state government focus on passive management for many sectors and determinations at the expense of active and adaptive management is a critical area that needs to be reviewed by governments at all levels.