Kelvin Thomson (Wills, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Members opposite wondering how it is that the latest opinion polls show the government and the opposition now neck and neck, when the opposition has been a mile in front for the past two years, could do worse than reflect on the astonishing decision the opposition took last week to allow the supertrawler to trawl in southern Australian waters, from Tasmania to Western Australia. In doing so, they turned on the recreational fishermen they claim to support. I am sure recreational fishermen were astonished by their actions, but it reflects just how far the Liberal Party has swung to the right during this parliament. They are so besotted with the free-market agenda—globalisation, privatisation, deregulation and no fetters on business doing whatever they want to do—that they no longer believe that governments should do anything, anywhere, at any time.

So when the government came into the House with legislation to take the action the community wanted us to take, the opposition cried sovereign risk and voted against it. They displayed contempt for recreational fishermen. They claim to support them, but last week they sold them out. The fact is they never saw a big corporate dollar they didn't like. They treated recreational fishers the same way they treat small business. They claim to be on their side, and they talk the talk all right, but when big business comes along they cast small business aside and sell them out.

Those opposite are so hell-bent on dismissing any role for government in doing anything—in this case protecting our fisheries—that they even put themselves at odds with the Liberal and National parties in Victoria and Tasmania. Yesterday the Victorian government announced that it will be banning supertrawlers from operating within three nautical miles of the Victorian coastline. The Victorian government's Minister for Agriculture and Food Security, Peter Walsh, a National Party member, said it was important to ensure Victorian waters were protected from overfishing. This clear and decisive action stands in stark contrast to the actions of their counterparts here, who think the supertrawler should go right ahead. I am on the edge of my seat waiting for Liberal and National Party members here to denounce the Baillieu government for giving rise to sovereign risk.

Members opposite are also out of touch with the views of their Tasmanian colleagues and of Tasmanians, 300 of whom protested in Hobart on Saturday against the supertrawler. Liberal Party MPs in the Tasmanian parliament voted in favour of a motion opposing the supertrawler, which achieved the support of all parties in the Tasmanian parliament. But their colleagues here, such as Senator Abetz, thumbed their noses at the Tasmanian Liberals.

The opposition has tried to disguise its genetic opposition to government and to people power by saying this is all about the science and all about the judgment of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority. But on the weekend the Commonwealth Ombudsman exposed that argument by upholding a complaint by the member for Denison about the presence of a Seafish Tasmania director at a meeting of AFMA's South East Management Advisory Committee which recommended the allowable catch of jack mackerel be doubled, from 5,000 to 10,000 tonnes. The Commonwealth Ombudsman found that this advisory committee breached the Fisheries Management Act by allowing the Seafish Tasmania director to participate in the meeting by remaining on the phone while the meeting considered the quota issue.

I note the Seafish Tasmania director has denied any impropriety, saying it was 'absolutely standard' for industry representatives to be present in such committee meetings. I do not know whether it is standard or not, but I share the Ombudsman's concern about this. We are told that AFMA has been making independent, science based decisions which we should all respect, but then we hear that industry representatives are present when the discussions take place and the decisions are made. Procedural fairness would suggest that either industry representatives absent themselves from discussions on decisions about these matters or representatives of recreational fishers and environment groups also be present at these discussions; otherwise we will be left with the impression of undue and inappropriate influence.

It is time for the opposition to edge back towards the political centre from the far right position they have put themselves in under this Leader of the Opposition. It is time to join with their Liberal colleagues in Victoria, time to join with their Liberal colleagues in Tasmania, time to join with recreational fishers, time to join with ordinary Australians, time to come back from the political fringe and into the political mainstream, time to come back from the edge, and time to help Labor block the supertrawler.

See this speech in context