{"id":30237,"date":"2025-11-17T16:16:34","date_gmt":"2025-11-17T06:16:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/woodcentral.com.au\/?p=30237"},"modified":"2025-11-17T16:18:29","modified_gmt":"2025-11-17T06:18:29","slug":"david-v-goliath-forestry-must-fight-for-fairness-in-australias-courts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/woodcentral.com.au\/david-v-goliath-forestry-must-fight-for-fairness-in-australias-courts\/","title":{"rendered":"David v Goliath \u2014 Forestry Must Fight for Fairness in Australia\u2019s Courts"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

An application by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights to a Clean, Healthy and Sustainable Environment <\/a>to join three Federal Court cases this week has been met with shock and surprise in certain legal and political circles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Federal Court judges will now decide whether to accept the application to appear as amicus curiae\u2014a friend of the court. This move highlights what I discussed last Friday: the “Trojan horse” of the federal government’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act reforms, which in itself raises questions about the balance of power in environmental litigation.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Environmental groups enjoy significant financial strength, thanks in part to federal legislation. Under the Charities Act 2013, they can seek charitable status, which provides income tax exemption. Registered charities endorsed by the Australian Tax Office may also qualify as Deductible Gift Recipients, allowing donors to claim tax deductions. In both cases, the Australian taxpayer effectively subsidises these organisations, reducing revenue available for government expenditure.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"The
Last week, Rodden-Green described the new law as something of a Trojan horse for native forestry – a regulation that appears (somewhat) harmless but could be harmful if it provides the Environmental Defenders Office (EDO) or advocacy groups with an opportunity to attack native forestry on sustainability grounds. <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Some environmental NGOs report substantial incomes. <\/strong>WWF Australia disclosed revenue of $52 million in its most recent return to the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission. The Nature Conservation Council of NSW reported nearly $4 million, while the Environmental Defenders Office in Sydney recorded just under $18 million. These are only three examples among many.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By contrast, the forestry sector does not enjoy comparable tax advantages and often lacks the resources to defend litigation. While large corporations dominate the softwood industry, the hardwood sector is characterised by small, usually family-run businesses. If the federal government is serious about maintaining a forestry industry\u2014particularly a native forestry industry\u2014it may need to consider reforms to level the playing field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n