Ted O'Brien (Fairfax, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Hansard source

I'm happy to participate in this very important consideration in detail debate for agriculture, fisheries and forestry. I'll be focusing specifically on fisheries and forestry in the questions that I pose here for the government.

Firstly, in relation to the biosecurity tax: As far as the new biosecurity tax announced in the budget applies to the forestry industry, will it remain at a fixed rate from year to year, or will it change based on the level of production? If it does remain fixed, is there any room for variations to that in exceptional circumstances—say, in the case of someone who is affected by an unforeseen development, like a natural disaster, for example, that lowers the level of their production in a year through no fault at all of their own?

With respect to the use of gillnets: How has the government calculated that there will be a $160 million cost to the budget as a result of the minister's recent decision to outlaw the use of gillnets in parts of Queensland? What specific consultations did the Minister for the Environment and Water and/or her staff undertake with fishers prior to this decision, and with what individuals and organisations, and on what dates in each case? What has the government calculated will be the extent of the financial impacts as a result of the environment minister's gillnets decision, not only to the fishing industry itself but also more widely, and, in particular, across the state of Queensland? And, as a part of that, what is the government's response, specifically, to the comments made by Andrew Tobin last week? As I hope the minister might know, Andrew Tobin is a senior research fellow at the Centre for Sustainable Tropical Fisheries and Aquaculture, as well as a director at Tobin Fish. He told the ABC on 9 June that the price of fish will, in his words, go 'through the roof' as a consequence of the minister's gillnets decision. Specifically, Mr Tobin said that the decision is:

… going to have a huge impact and not just on fish and chip shops; it's all the businesses including restaurants up and down the east coast.

And he said that:

It will end up being a handful of fishermen selling product to a very high-end market and the price—

of fish, that is—

will go through the roof.

On page 100 of Portfolio Budget Statements paper No.1.1, it says that in 2023-24 the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, or AFMA for short, using its acronym, will be 'gaining efficiencies' in 'business processes'. At whose instigation are those efficiencies being pursued? And what will these efficiencies be, specifically?

Also, on page 100 of the PBS, it says that in 2023-24 AFMA will be 'investing in different science to meet the demands of climate change'. On or around what date was this priority identified as something that needed to be pursued? Who made the decision to invest in this different science? What is this different science exactly, and what will be the full cost that will be accrued because of the pursuit of such different work? I very much look forward to hearing the minister's response to these very important questions—and it's not only the opposition that is interested in hearing these answered but also, indeed, the industry and the economy at large—especially with respect to some of those questions relating to Queensland and the Queensland economy.

See this speech in context