Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

What do we know? We know that our oceans have never been subject to anything like the Margiris, now called the Abel Tasman. This massive 9½-thousand-tonne, 142-metre trawler is twice the size of the largest trawler to have ever fished in Australian waters and can catch more than 90,000 tonnes of fish every year. We also know that supertrawlers have developed reputations all around the world for devastating local marine environments, vacuuming tonnes of fish out of the food chain and killing dolphins, seals and turtles. We also know specifically with regard to the area around Tasmania where it was proposed the Margiris would operate that there is a very real, appreciable risk of localised depletion. The way that this supertrawler would have operated, because it would have caught large numbers of small species close to the surface, would have only enhanced those risks.

We know that these risks are real. Large surface schools of jack mackerel were once common off Tasmania until they were targeted by trawlers more than 20 years ago. These surface schools have since disappeared and have not been seen since. The Margiris supertrawler would have been able to come in and continue vacuuming fish from closer to the surface in particular localised areas, in the context where there is currently no federal government strategy to deal with the problem of localised depletions. There is no federal industry strategy to deal with the problem of localised depletions.

We also know that supertrawlers threaten not only the fish but also other marine life such as dolphins, seals and seabirds, which they are not targeting, simply because they have such huge nets and that is the way that they operate. This has been the experience around the world. And there was never going to be 100 per cent observer coverage of what the Margiris would have done.

We also know that, as far as stock management and those broader fisheries management issues are concerned, we do not have timely and accurate estimates of the fish numbers or how those fish numbers change over time. Blue mackerel were last surveyed in 2004; red bait in 2005 and 2006; and the data for jack mackerel comes from 2003.

As far as this particular supertrawler is concerned, as recently as March this year this trawler was fishing near West Africa off Mauritania and Morocco, where most of the targeted fish stocks are considered fully exploited or overexploited, and local fishermen reported it increasingly hard to find fish and having to go further for longer to get their catch. In December last year, 2011, the Margiris, along with other EU trawlers, was ordered out of occupied Western Sahara waters after the fishing agreement they were fishing under was voted down by the European Parliament following advice that they were breaching international law.

We in the Greens have known these things for some time, but so have the local communities in Tasmania and so have the recreational and professional fishers in Tasmania. They knew that this supertrawler would have threatened their livelihood. They knew that the quota had been doubled previously, precisely to allow this supertrawler in. The recreational and professional fishers, concerned about their livelihoods, wanting to make sure that they could take their kids and their grandkids fishing, came to us in the Greens because neither the Liberal Party nor the Labor Party would listen.

The Greens worked with them and with a range of environmental groups to organise public meetings to try to get their concerns addressed. We did not get satisfactory responses from Seafish, from AFMA or from the fisheries minister. So, in the Tasmanian parliament, the Greens moved a motion opposing the operation of the Margiris in those waters, and others eventually came on board and supported that. Senator for Tasmania Peter Whish-Wilson asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry more than 30 questions on notice about this and was fobbed off every time. He was told that the science was all solid and there was no need to inquire further.

Federally, the Greens were the voice of the majority in this debate, when neither of the other parties were willing to listen or wanted to know.

Almost a month ago, back on 15 August, the Leader of the Australian Greens, Senator Christine Milne, wrote to the Prime Minister and said:

The Greens do not believe this supertrawler should be permitted to operate in Australian waters as the evidence indicates it's a subsidised vessel and there are real issues with quotas being exceeded, death of bycatch species, localised depletion and impact on other fisheries.

We urged the Commonwealth to put in place management plans to prevent localised depletion of stock and we proposed that not only should the government refuse to permit the trawler to operate in Australian waters:

… but that regional development funds be made available to support the construction of a Tasmanian-made purpose-built vessel to monitor and research existing fisheries and for scientific research including marine protected areas.

Central to the Greens is the interconnection between these environmental concerns and the social and economic questions affecting communities in Tasmania. The people who came to us were not only concerned about their own livelihoods but they understood that we needed sustainable fisheries to operate in Tasmania for the sake of the Tasmanian economy, for the sake of Tasmanian society and for the sake of the environment. We are pleased the government has responded.

There has been much talk of this response being somehow unjustified because people's voices were heard through campaigns on social media. What this shows is that sometimes the community can win against big business. Especially when the Greens are in parliament and acting as the voice of the community, the community's need to preserve recreational fishing, professional fishing and the environment can win out against big business.

We are pleased the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Declared Fishing Activities) Bill 2012 has been introduced and we will support it. It is disappointing that all it does is stall the arrival of supertrawlers for, potentially, a year past the next federal election. Given what we know and given what uncertainties there are about the effect these supertrawlers will have on the environment, on society and on the economy, they should not just be stalled; they should be banned. When we reach consideration in detail, I will move an amendment to that effect.

We support the legislation and we especially support its emphasis on the social and economic uncertainty that a supertrawler would have created. Above all, the Greens care about the environment and people. This is an instance where doing the right thing by local communities and doing the right thing by the environment work together hand in glove. We are pleased that finally, after months and months of campaigning, we are now seeing action. It would not have happened without the Greens.

See this speech in context