Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Fisheries Legislation Amendment (New Governance Arrangements for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority and Other Matters) Bill 2008 will amend the Fisheries Management Act 1991 and make consequential amendments to the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984 and the Migration Act 1958 to improve the governance of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, AFMA, by moving AFMA from being a statutory authority to a commission. The bill is also designed to strengthen and tighten measures to combat illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing within the Australian exclusive economic zone.

The Australian Fisheries Management Authority is the statutory authority responsible for the efficient management of Commonwealth fishery resources on behalf of the Australian community. The functions of AFMA include policy and planning. In managing Commonwealth fisheries, the Australian Fisheries Management Authority has an obligation to develop plans and implement policy in the performance of its functions and the pursuit of its objectives. It is also responsible for licensing and quota management. AFMA grants permits and statutory fishing rights for Commonwealth fisheries, processes transactions in relation to these concessions and maintains registers of individual transferable quota to give effect to fisheries management arrangements. It has a compliance role. AFMA has a responsibility to enforce the provisions of the Fisheries Management Act 1991 and the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984 through the detection and investigation of illegal activities by both domestic and foreign fishing boats in the Australian fishing zone and the Commonwealth managed territories.

It has responsibilities for the environment and sustainability. AFMA is strongly committed to the protection of the ocean’s ecosystems and biodiversity by promoting the sustainable use of our fisheries resources. It is tasked also with data collection. Good decision making depends on having the best quality information available. This means providing information which is relevant, accurate and timely to our fisheries managers and researchers. Research undertaken for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority seeks to address a number of fisheries management related issues. It also undertakes an observer program. The observer program currently places observers on domestic and, if required, foreign fishing vessels within the Australian fishing zone and some adjacent areas under international agreements. It works in partnerships with a range of other agencies. AFMA maintains a firm commitment to managing Commonwealth fisheries resources for the benefit of the community as a whole. Accordingly, cooperation with the community, industry, government agencies and others with an interest in the sustainable management of the Commonwealth’s fishery resources is a vital part of our approach.

AFMA manages fisheries within the 200 nautical mile Australian fishing zone, on the high seas and, in some cases, by arrangement with the states and territories, to the low water mark. AFMA looks after around 20 Commonwealth commercial fisheries and three nautical miles out to the extent of the fishing zone. These include the Antarctic’s Heard, McDonald and Macquarie islands, the Bass Strait Central Zone Scallop Fishery, the Coral Sea Fishery, the Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery, the Southern and Eastern Scale Fish and Shark Fishery, Norfolk Island Fishery, North West Slope Trawl Fishery, the Northern Prawn Fishery, South Tasman Rise, the Southern Bluefin Tuna Fishery, the Southern Squid Jig Fishery, the Western Tuna and Billfish Fishery, the Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery, the Skipjack Tuna Fisheries, the Small Pelagic Fishery, the Commonwealth trawl, the Great Australian Bight Trawl Sector, the Gillnet, Hook and Trap Sectors and the East Coast Deepwater Trawl Sector. The state and territory governments generally look after recreational fishing, commercial coast and inland fishing and aquaculture. AFMA is charged with ensuring fishing is conducted in a sustainable way so as to provide the benefits we get today, such as healthy seafood and employment, and to ensure that these will be continued into the future.

The Australian fishing industry is one of our great industries. It carries with it great traditions, and there are many Australians who dream of participating in an industry of this nature. But the reality is that recent times have been very tough for the fishing industry. The contraction of their resource, the closure of very large areas to fishing, the creation of a whole range of national parks from which fishing is excluded and significant developments, especially the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park plan and in the Torres Strait, have made a huge difference to the profitability of our fishing industry. A great many of these changes have been made without adequate consultation with the men and women involved in the industry. There has certainly been pain and hardship.

The previous government devoted substantial financial resources towards compensation for fisheries that had been adversely affected by conservation and other priorities. I appeal to the new government to follow a similar path. If resources are to be taken away from the fishing industry, and if their capacity to have an economic industry is to be restricted because of some kind of perceived greater national good, then the livelihoods of the men and women involved in the industry need to be considered. There are many family fishing operators, and they can ill afford shocks in relation to their access to the available resources. The industry needs to be able to plan effectively. The massively increased cost of diesel fuel, in particular, is having a huge impact on the Australian fishing industry.

The industry has little opportunity to pass on the increased costs to its customers. We have seen how changes to the subsidy arrangements for fishermen in Europe have led to protests on the streets. The Australian fishing industry, whilst not subsidised, is enduring similar experiences with cost increases. It is facing difficulties in obtaining crew and in meeting the huge costs associated with maintaining operations. Australians love their seafood and are proud of what our fishermen are able to deliver to the market, but fishermen are also facing increasing competition from cheap imports, much of it coming out of Asia and much of which requires detailed supervision and testing at the border to make sure that there is no risk of pests, diseases and chemical residues coming into the country. Australian consumers have enjoyed unprecedented access to comparatively low-cost seafood as a result of these imports, but they have had an impact on the Australian industry—both the wild catch and the aquaculture sectors—and we need to make sure that there is an appropriate balance to guarantee that there are no disease risks imposed upon the Australian industry so that it can prosper.

This is a particularly difficult sector. The Australian fishing product is also in high demand around the world. Our premium prawns can attract a very high price in Europe, the United States, Hong Kong or other key markets. On the other hand, we have lower quality products being imported into Australia in significant quantities. This applies to other fish as well which frequently bring much higher prices in other markets around the world than can be achieved domestically. That is the way in which trade occurs, and it is appropriate that products find their way to the highest priced market, but so often there is intervention for one reason or another which prevents the fishing industry from achieving its best marketing advantage. Sometimes it is protection in other parts of the world; sometimes it is the demands of conservationists and those who demand that additional areas be protected. All of these initiatives are placing enormous threats and challenges on the industry. I have a significant fishing fleet based in my electorate, so I appreciate and face these difficulties on a personal, one-to-one basis. It has happened quite a lot over recent times.

The changes that are proposed in this bill will of course improve governance arrangements, but they will not of themselves do anything to improve the profitability of the industry. So it will be important for the government to monitor very closely the viability of this sector. It needs to be responsive to the particular challenges of the fishing industry, which, in many instances, are beyond those of other primary industries. Particular challenges are the demand that certain areas be locked away from commercial fishing and the competition between recreational fishers and commercial fishers and, for that matter, those who need to use nets or trawls or other fishing gear. Some of those issues are not easy to deal with, but we need to remember that our country does need reliable supplies of quality fish. It is important to cater for the needs of the recreational sector, but we must also ensure that the capacity to provide needed fish for our diet is taken as a very important national priority.

I welcome the arrival of the minister to the room. I hope that he might take a little time to read some of the things that I have said about the particularly difficult plight confronting many in the fishing industry at the present time. There are the challenges of the availability of the resource, the locking up of areas for conservation or other purposes, the difficulties of competing with imports and, perhaps more pressing than anything at the present time, the skyrocketing cost of fuel, which is devastating the viability of many in the industry. I appeal to the government to look very seriously at the economic viability of the sector and to do what it can to make sure that fishing families, people who have given their lifetime to this industry, have a strong and optimistic future.

I will return to the specific detail of the bill. The previous government announced in October 2006 that AFMA would become an independent commission from 1 July 2008. The principal changes in the legislation relate to AFMA’s governance structures and resource management. Considerable rationalisation of Australia’s Commonwealth managed fisheries has been carried out, and the opposition expects the government to use the changes to AFMA’s structure to also rationalise their operations, with the objective of reducing costs that are passed on to industry.

A significant aspect of the bill is the increased fisheries enforcement role that AFMA will perform. AFMA works in close cooperation with Coastwatch, the Australian Customs Service and the Australian Defence Force. As international waters to our north in particular come under increasing pressure from overfishing, Australia faces rising levels of illegal fishing within our zone. Increasingly sophisticated criminal syndicates target valuable stocks and have attempted to avoid prosecution by locating mother ships in international waters and effectively raiding our fisheries in small boats. The ability to intercept in international waters and take into custody people suspected of fishing in Australia’s exclusive economic zone will provide a greater deterrent to illegal fishing activities. AFMA is seeking this power. Australian fisheries need this added power to protect their future sustainability. The opposition totally supports this initiative.

The budget for AFMA that was announced just last month was increased from $52.763 million to $55.574 million—an increase of just $2.8 million. The role of AFMA is being considerably increased, especially in the area of high-seas fisheries and compliance, as I mentioned a few moments ago. The recent incident off Darwin, with AFMA being found to have incorrectly detained fishermen in a joint Australian-Indonesian managed fishery, has highlighted the necessity for AFMA officials to be well trained and equipped to carry out their duties, especially with the proposed new functions contained in this legislation. The credibility of the Australian government and the integrity of our fisheries compliance depend upon ensuring we have highly trained officials and clearly defined procedures that are adhered to.

The minimal $2.8 million additional funding in the budget for AFMA seems inadequate to allow them to implement the new management arrangements as well as implement the new roles and functions assigned to AFMA. I am concerned that the amount the government has announced for AFMA will not be enough to enable the authority to implement its new roles. I would be interested in a comment from the minister as to how he believes that the organisation will be able to undertake its increased functions within the budget that is being provided without passing on significant additional costs to the industry. Indeed, the objective of all this is to reduce the cost to industry. I have always believed that the policing role of AFMA is not just one for the industry. It is a national function that is an important part of our national security, so the nation as a whole should share in the cost and not expect that it be borne entirely by the industry. We want to make sure that AFMA does not end up with another funding black hole. It has experienced a few of those in its lifetime under successive governments. If we expect it to do its job, it is important that we adequately resource it.

In relation to the bill, the opposition shares the concerns of industry that the commissioner and the organisational component of AFMA must separate policy setting and service delivery. This is why the opposition will be moving the amendments that we have circulated to legislate that the CEO be not eligible to also be appointed as the commissioner. AFMA manages Commonwealth fisheries and is largely funded by the fisheries industry. It is therefore fair that the industry have the opportunity to make recommendations for the position of commissioner. The opposition is also moving an amendment that would mandate a consultative process with industry in the appointment of AFMA commissioners. Industry support and involvement in AFMA policy development is vital in ensuring that AFMA continues to deliver the services that the industry needs while protecting Australia’s Commonwealth fisheries.

As I mentioned earlier, this legislation fulfils a commitment that the previous government had made. I commend this government for having carried forward this proposal. It is, I think, a helpful advance for AFMA and for the fishing industry. The industry faces many challenges, and I hope that these new governance arrangements will give it increased confidence and that it does enjoy the support of the government and the community for its future.

Damian Hale (Solomon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to make my contribution to this debate on the Fisheries Legislation Amendment (New Governance Arrangements for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority and Other Matters) Bill 2008. There are two very equally important aspects of this bill. Firstly, this bill will amend legislation to improve the governance of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, commonly known as AFMA; and, secondly, and particularly importantly for us in the north, this bill will provide strong tools to help fight illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing.

The proposal restructures and strengthens the obligations and powers relating to boarding and inspection of foreign fishing vessels to give effect to Australia’s obligations under international fisheries agreements and arrangements in which Australia is involved. These amendments will clarify the ability of fisheries officers to exercise the powers of the Fisheries Management Act 1991 outside the Australian fishing zone, commonly known as the AFZ. This aspect of the current act requires clarification, particularly in cases when AFMA officers undertake their duties following the hot pursuit of a boat that was in Australia’s fishing zone or that has been providing support to foreign boats fishing illegally in the Australian fishing zone.

While speaking about the amendment bill, it would be remiss of me not to mention my thanks to all our hardworking AFMA officers. There are roughly 50 AFMA office personnel in Darwin, primarily engaged on illegal foreign fishing surveillance and enforcement activities. These officers are often away from home for weeks at a time carrying out their work. I think as parliamentarians we can relate to that side of the job because, like us, our AFMA officers are often missing out on milestone events with family and friends. I must also mention Australian Customs, NT Fisheries and the Australian Defence Force, who work closely with AFMA officers to undertake Australian government fisheries enforcement activities in Australia’s northern and southern waters.

Under current arrangements, fisheries enforcement officers are often unable to apprehend the mother ship or support vehicles such as fuel and other supply vehicles, which generally sit just outside the Australian fishing zone. Currently, the hot pursuit of a mother ship on the high seas is only permitted when there is also a hot pursuit of vessels being supported from within the Australian fishing zone. This bill will provide for enforcement officers to pursue a fishing vessel or support vessel individually where the support vessel outside the Australian fishing zone is identified as supporting an illegal fishing vessel inside the Australian fishing zone. Importantly, the legislation provides for officers to shift the focus of their pursuit from fishing vessels to the mother ship should vessels separate during this operation.

The amendments in the bill strengthen Australia’s existing enforcement framework to ensure compliance, conservation and management measures adopted under international fishing management organisations and arrangements. It also clarifies the powers of the fisheries officers to commence hot pursuits of foreign vessels outside of the AFZ which are providing support to other illegal foreign fishing vessels within the AFZ. The amendment also clarifies requirements in the Fisheries Management Act for foreign fishing vessels transiting the Australian fishing zone to stow their equipment properly so that they are not tempted to engage in illegal fishing in our zone. The proposal amends the act to make it an offence for Australian nationals to breach the conservation and management measures of the international fisheries and management organisations to which we are a party. This amendment brings our domestic legislation in line with emerging international calls for states to control the activities of their nationals in the fight against illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing.

The bill will improve Australia’s enforcement capacity relating to Australian nationals and foreign fishers engaged in illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. The amendments will engage Australia’s obligations under international fishing agreements and arrangements to which we are a party. As I said, the bill will strengthen requirements for foreign vessels transiting Australian waters to have their fishing equipment stored in a practical way. These amendments are absolutely essential to ensure that Australia’s approximately $2 billion a year commercial fishing industry and aquaculture sectors are protected.

In summary, these amendments to the act will improve the governance and resource management of Commonwealth fisheries. They will support our efforts to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. They will bolster Australia’s case for continued leadership internationally and they advocate sustainable access to the fisheries resource. I commend this bill to the House.

Mal Washer (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The main purposes of the Fisheries Legislation Amendment (New Governance Arrangements for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority and Other Matters) Bill 2008 are, firstly, to amend the governance arrangements of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority; secondly, to strength the enforcement provisions of the Fisheries Management Act 1991; and, finally, to enhance the enforcement provisions to take action against foreign vessels contravening international management measures.

The governance arrangements proposed by the bill are in accordance with the recommendations of the Uhrig review. This review was commissioned by the previous government for the purpose of improving the performance of statutory authorities without compromising their duties. The Australian Fisheries Management Authority is a statutory authority responsible for the efficient management and sustainable use of Commonwealth fish resources. It manages fisheries from three nautical miles out to the extent of the Australian fishing zone, on the high seas and in some cases, by agreement with the states, to the low water mark. The Australian fishing zone is the third largest in the world, covering nearly nine million square kilometres. It extends out to 200 nautical miles from the Australian coastline and includes the waters surrounding our external territories, such as Christmas Island in the Indian Ocean and Heard and McDonald Islands in the Antarctic.

The authority manages more than 20 Commonwealth fisheries, which are worth nearly $500 million in production value and generate more than 72,000 tonnes of catch annually. The largest of these by value are the Northern Prawn Fishery, the Southern Bluefin Tuna Fishery, the Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery, the Commonwealth Trawl Sector and the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery, which provides much of the table fish for the east coast. Currently its operation is overseen by an eight-member board of directors. This bill would replace this board with a commission involving a chairman and a limit of eight commissioners, including a CEO. The commission would be responsible for domestic fisheries management and the CEO would be responsible for foreign compliance matters. These foreign compliance matters will be reported directly to the minister. Provisions also include requiring commissioners to disclose any conflict of interest.

The bill widens a number of definitions to broaden the application of the Fisheries Management Act 1991. The act will then encompass references to fish stocks by any prescribed fisheries management organisation and not just the UN Fish Stocks Agreement. Australia is a key member of a number of international and regional fisheries and fisheries related forums, such as the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, the Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean and the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. This more comprehensive framework will enable authorised officers to exercise their powers more broadly to enforce these other international fisheries agreements or arrangements—that is, under certain circumstances it will allow the boarding and inspection of foreign vessels not only in Australian waters but also on the high seas or in the waters of a foreign country.

Australia’s fishing industry is rated as our fifth largest food-producing industry. Fish are a major industry for Australia, worth more than $2.2 billion to our economy each year. Fish are also a healthy source of food, with Australians consuming around 16 kilograms of fish and seafood per person per year, purchased from fish markets, supermarkets and food outlets. The impact of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing on this industry is significant and extensive. Within each of our states a number of our marine species are on the verge of extinction, with illegal fishing aggravating the situation. The Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts periodically releases a priority assessment list of threatened species and ecological communities. This list includes the green sawfish and the southern bluefin tuna, both common targets of illegal fishing. The list also includes the dugong, marine turtles and the manta ray in Queensland waters, the western blue groper and the harlequin fish in southern Australia, the spotted handfish and the freshwater lobster in Tasmania, and the grey nurse shark in Victoria. The populations of these endangered species can be controlled with sustainable fishing practices. However, illegal fishing could cause a collapse of these fisheries. Other endangered members of the marine ecosystem, such as the albatross, are also placed at risk by illegal fishing.

Illegal fishing in the Australian fishing zone around Heard and McDonald Islands is threatening the sustainability of fisheries in this area. A prime target is the endangered but highly valuable patagonian toothfish. In 2000, around half the total trade of patagonian toothfish was illegal catch. In our northern waters, sharks, trochus and trepang stocks are being seriously damaged in the ‘memorandum of understanding box’ around the Ashmore and Cartier reefs and their surroundings due to illegal motorised Indonesian vessels. The problem of illegal fishing in Australia grew steadily over the last few years, with the number of illegal fishing vessels apprehended increasing by 250 per cent between 1999 and 2005. During the 2005-06 year there was a further 80 per cent increase. However, in 2006-07 there was a 58 per cent drop in sightings of foreign fishing vessels by the Australian Customs Service. In the first six months of 2007 alone there was a 90 per cent drop in sightings in our northern waters. This success has been attributed to the whole-of-government approach taken by the previous government to combat illegal fishing. As stated by Peter Venslovas, a regional director at the Australian Fisheries Management Authority:

What we are seeing is a real turnaround in the number of fish is trying to enter our water to fish illegally. Continued visible the trials, education programs in Indonesia and some high profile cases have helped get the message across. They are finally starting to understand the risks they face by coming into Australian waters to fish illegally.

As mentioned earlier, Australia—along with Japan, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea and Taiwan—is a member of the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna. The southern bluefin tuna is considered the most endangered of all large fish species. These creatures can reach weights of around 680 kilograms and lengths of up to four metres. Whereas most of the approximately 20,000 fish species are cold-blooded, with body temperatures similar to the waters in which they swim, the southern bluefin tuna is one of the few warm-blooded fish species. Even when diving to depths of one kilometre, where the temperature is around five degrees centigrade, the bluefin can maintain a body temperature of 27 degrees centigrade—close to that of a mammal. Bluefin hunt in packs and will eat anything they can catch; and they can catch almost anything that swims, floats or crawls. Unfortunately, these are the ones that are now being hunted to endangerment. A single bluefin can sell for more than $170,000. The industry is rife with illegal and unregulated fleets, and with Japan alone devouring over 60,000 tonnes of bluefin every year there are many eager to buy, regardless of how it is caught.

It is not only illegal practices that are damaging fish stocks. Every country along the Mediterranean, except Israel, is taking advantage of a legal loophole that allows countries to take undersize tuna and fatten them up in floating pens. Hundreds of thousands of half-grown tuna are being captured in this way. Catching the fish before they are old enough to breed and keeping them penned until they are killed is decimating the breeding population. As the Mediterranean is one of the breeding grounds for this highly migratory species, this practice, in combination with overfishing in the foraging grounds of the Atlantic, is seeing bluefin stocks collapse throughout the oceans.

We are reaching, or have already reached, the stage where the hunting of certain wild fish stocks is no longer sustainable. We must look at ways in which to breed, raise and harvest commercially valuable species in an environmentally sustainable way. Unless bluefin can be raised like domesticated animals, such as cattle, they will be taken to the brink of extinction. An Australian company is, in fact, leading the way. The previous government provided Clean Seas Tuna with $4.1 million through a Commercial Ready grant to assist in the commercialisation of southern bluefin breeding. I was surprised and saddened to hear that the current government has scrapped this highly successful program. In March of this year, Clean Seas Tuna became the first organisation in the world to create an artificial breeding regime for southern bluefin tuna. This breeding breakthrough will give them the ability to at least duplicate Australia’s annual bluefin quota within the next few years and to dramatically grow the aquaculture industry without impacting on wild tuna stocks.

Perhaps one of the most insidious legal practices that occur is deep-sea trawling. Bottom-trawlers operate at depths of two kilometres with nets of around 55 metres across and 12 metres high. These traverse the seabed on giant rollers while trawl doors, weighing up to six tonnes, scrape along the bottom. They are a weapon of mass destruction, demolishing ancient coral reefs, giant sponge communities and seagrass beds. The benthic environment accounts for 98 per cent of marine species. Deep sea fish are characterised by slow growth and low fecundity, and they are rapidly depleted to commercial extinction, even within a single season. While these fish species will take decades to recover, coral recovers over centuries. Deep-sea trawling is practised by relatively few vessels, perhaps no more than 200 worldwide, and accounts for about 0.2 per cent of the total world catch. The scale of the destruction is out of proportion to the gain in terms of the value of the fishery. This problem has been recognised by the UN, which has made moves to implement a moratorium in the past but without success. Although we have had success in the past 18 months in tackling illegal fishing in our waters, the threat will not only remain but increase as worldwide demand for seafood increases.

The UN Environment Program released a report in February noting that rising greenhouse gas emissions threaten at least three-quarters of the key fishing grounds, affecting about 2.6 billion people who derive their protein from seafood worldwide. The combination of climate change, overharvesting, bottom-trawling, invasive species infestations, coastal development and pollution will see the demand for seafood protein increase as supply dwindles. Legislation which assists Australia in tackling illegal fishing is to be commended. However, we must also look to the future and provide support for those who are seeking to address the demand sustainably through aquaculture. I commend the bill to the House.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The purpose of the Fisheries Legislation Amendment (New Governance Arrangements for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority and Other Matters) Bill 2008 is to turn the Australian Fisheries Management Authority into a commission and to improve AFMA’s financial management and accountability to government. The changes are in accordance with the findings of John Uhrig’s Review of the corporate governance of statutory authorities and officeholders of June 2003—I guess it has taken a Labor government to put those changes in place. The bill will not make any significant changes to the day-to-day functions of the authority or operations of Commonwealth fisheries, fishers or stakeholders. I understand the new body will retain the existing functions and powers conferred on the existing body by legislation, and the bill will not reduce the body’s net funding or cash reserves in any way.

This bill establishes the requirement for AFMA to consult and specifies that AFMA is obliged to have consultation periods on management plans or amendments to management plans. The existing consultative process will be retained. Management plans are legitimate legislative instruments and are subject of course to parliamentary scrutiny, which allows feedback from those consultations. The bill will provide strong tools to help fight illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, and I think the community will support the changes in this bill in a very strong way.

The board of directors of AFMA will be replaced by commissioners, and the managing director will be replaced by a chief executive officer. I understand the CEO may also be the chairperson but need not be, depending on how the commission wants to operate. There will be modified eligibility criteria which require fields of expertise to be considered in the selection process for the appointment of commissioners. There are also new obligations to disclose and report conflicts of interest, which will probably be a godsend to this body. The current board will be replaced by nine commissioners, whose expertise will include fisheries management, fishing industry operations, science, natural resource management, economics, business or financial management, law and public sector administration. Although there will be no government representative on the commission, the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has ensured, as far as practicable, that the commissioners collectively possess expertise in all fields just mentioned. After an open and transparent process, the minister will make appointments for up to five years. The CEO will be responsible for AFMA’s foreign compliance functions. I understand that the CEO will report to the minister in that regard and not to the commission. The bill therefore acknowledges the responsibilities that the government has to protect our borders, operations and important bilateral and international obligations regarding sea fisheries.

As noted in the Uhrig review, independence and objectivity are important contributors to good governance. This bill will establish eligibility criteria to exclude anyone who is an executive officer or a majority shareholder in a company which holds a Commonwealth concession, permit or licence and anyone who holds an executive position in a fishing industry association from being appointed a commissioner. These requirements are strengthened by more detailed requirements to disclose and report conflicts of interest prior to and following appointment as a commissioner.

In my state of Tasmania, concerns have been raised with me about who exactly would be eligible to be a commissioner, as this legislation is fairly restrictive. However, I have been informed that fishers who hold licences under any state government legislation, including the fisheries management by the states under offshore constitutional settlements, would be eligible to be a commissioner. Fisheries such as crab, rock lobster and stripy trumpeter fisheries are managed under the Tasmanian laws and therefore under the OCS arrangements. Fishers holding concessions in these fisheries would be able to apply to be an AFMA commissioner. I think the minister advertises these positions, people apply and, after a merit based process, the appointments take place. There appear to be about a thousand concession holders under the Fisheries Management Act and the Torres Strait Fisheries Act and well over 10,000 concession holders under the state regime. So there is a lot of opportunity to find people with specific skills and experience in the fishing industry organisations to fill these roles.

The bill also amends the Australian fisheries legislation to strengthen the government’s ability to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, which I think people would be very pleased about, and to fulfil Australia’s obligations under international law and agreements. We are party to a number of international fisheries management organisations and arrangements established to manage and conserve fish stocks and marine living resources of the high seas.

This bill allows Australian nationals to be prosecuted in Australian courts for activities on board foreign vessels in waters outside the Australian fishing zone where such activities are offences under the Fisheries Management Act. Some years ago such incidents occurred on the South Tasman Rise, which is below Tasmania, when Australian and New Zealand nationals were involved in helping rogue fishers to poach our waters and escape. This bill will allow for pursuit, capture and charges in relation to such offences, which was not possible before. I look forward to the minister pursuing those in the future.

This is in line with emerging international calls, which Australia supports, for states to control the activities of their nationals in the fight against illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. This will also enable Australia to give effect to the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission’s boarding and inspection procedures. The framework outlined in this structure will enable Australia to more easily give effect to all future boarding and inspection procedures adopted by other international fishing agreements.

Foreign vessels going through our fishing zones will be required to disengage, secure and store inboard their fishing equipment in a manner that will not allow for fishing gear to be readily employed. Fishers often tell me that as they are coming down the coast to Tasmania they will shoot the nets and act in that way. To my knowledge, no-one has been prosecuted for that activity. This requirement will make it tougher for anyone to be able to do that. I have heard of many examples in Tasmanian local waters, as well as those just beyond our state limits, in the Commonwealth jurisdiction.

I remember sitting on the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Primary Industries, Resources and Rural and Regional Affairs in 1997 when it compiled its report on managing fisheries, called Managing Commonwealth fisheries: the last frontier. The committee put together a number of very important recommendations on fisheries management. Although some have been put in place, there is still a large gap in trying to monitor and change the activities of illegal fishers within and outside our waters.

The illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing operations put at risk millions of dollars of investment and thousands of jobs as valuable fish resources are wantonly depleted below sustainable levels. This disregard for the environment, the high seabird mortality and the abandonment of fishing gear gives rise to even more concern, as does the general disregard for crew safety in these illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing boats. These boats fishing on the high seas are highly organised, mobile and elusive. They are undermining the efforts of responsible countries to sustainably manage their fishing resources. We need international cooperation, which is vital to effectively combat this serious problem. By using regional fisheries management organisations as a vehicle for cooperation, fishing states, both flag and port states, and all major market states should be able to coordinate actions to effectively deal with these illegal fishing activities. These boats that are fishing illegally are jeopardising the Australian harvest of fish stocks, both within and beyond the Australian fishing zone. The long-term survival of the fishing industry and the fishing communities is threatened. The recent incident of illegal fishing of Patagonian toothfish in Australia’s remote Southern Ocean territories is a prime example of the damaging effect of unregulated fishing on the sustainability of stocks and the viability of the Australian industry. In the southern Indian Ocean, 4,000 kilometres south-west of Perth, six vessels have been apprehended since 1997 by Australian authorities for illegal fishing in the Australian fishing zone around Heard and McDonald Islands. Illegal fishing also occurs in Australia’s northern waters, but it is largely undertaken by traditional small-scale Indonesian vessels.

We need to strengthen our powers and our borders against these incursions by illegal fishers. I believe this bill will enhance our opportunities to do that and make our task a little easier. Our legal fishers are our eyes and ears on the high seas and they will be in a position to report other illegal activities, if given the right to do so. I have always believed that any development of a coastguard should include those who spend the most time at sea. I support the bill wholeheartedly. I am sure it will lead to keeping our fisheries safe and sustainable.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

in reply—I thank all members of the House for their contributions to the debate on the Fisheries Legislation Amendment (New Governance Arrangements for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority and Other Matters) Bill 2008 and in particular thank the members for Wide Bay, Solomon, Moore and Lyons. Both the member for Lyons and the member for Solomon have been kind enough on different occasions to introduce me to members of the fishing sector in their electorates. I know from that experience the truth of some of the issues raised by the member for Wide Bay in terms of not only the pressures, the most severe of which is the price of fuel, but also the issues of exclusion zones, including but not limited to marine parks, import sustainability and, of course, stocks being under pressure because of illegal fishing.

The Leader of the Nationals also raised a concern about the appropriations that were being made for AFMA. I received advice during that speech that the bill does not task AFMA with new tasks in relation to illegal foreign fishing but does task AFMA with better tools. This is implemented by AFMA in consultation with Customs and Defence, and appropriations made on illegal foreign fishing are consistent with the former government’s appropriations. AFMA is itself implementing a business efficiency review to pursue efficient service delivery to AFMA levy payers. The member for Moore raised an issue with respect to the scientific research program, referring to its abolition. I would say in response that it would be probably better described as its completion. It was set up, I am advised, as a six-year program. Under the final budget of the previous government there was an appropriation for 2007-08 which has been used. There was never an appropriation for 2008-09. It was a five-year project that ran to the end of its five years.

As I informed the House when the bill was introduced, the legislation contains amendments which deal with both the governance issues and the capacity to combat illegal fishing. There are other issues that have been raised, and I will save my contribution on those until we get to the amendments, which I understand will be moved when we consider the bill in detail.

AFMA is a government agency that manages the Australian fishing industry’s access to fish stocks in Commonwealth waters and international fisheries agreements to which Australia is a party. Close to 16,000 people are directly employed in the seafood industry. These include the members of the Lakes Entrance Fishermen’s Cooperative in Victoria, who only a few weeks ago hosted me at their seafood processing facility; men and women who get up before the sun rises every morning and receive at the metropolitan fish markets fish that then go on to the capital cities of Sydney and Melbourne; and tuna farmers, like Hagen Stehr in Port Lincoln, who rely on international fisheries agreements to which Australia is a party for an allocation of internationally shared fish stocks. The legislation improves the accountability of AFMA for the management of a significant natural resource, to better manage the fish stocks and to provide jobs for Australians into the future.

The change of government has not changed the need for Australia to maintain its tough stance on illegal fishing in Australia’s waters and international waters to which Australia is a party. The AFMA managing director will report directly to the minister on matters relating to illegal foreign fishing under this legislation. This will improve the accountability of AFMA to the minister on illegal foreign fishing and enable the commission to get on with its job of managing Commonwealth fisheries.

The legislation also introduces new measures that will provide enforcement officers with better tools, improved tools, to combat illegal foreign fishing. The hot pursuit measures in the legislation better enable enforcement authorities to apprehend support vessels that frequently stop just outside the Australian fishing zone. More rigid stowage provisions, while maintaining a right of free passage, will make it more difficult for intending illegal foreign fishers to despatch and retrieve fishing equipment and avoid prosecution.

Strong enforcement provisions in our fisheries legislation reflect the Australian government’s absolute commitment to protect our fish stocks. They ensure Australia continues to support international efforts to address illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and to send a strong message to foreign fishers about the consequences of fishing illegally in our waters. This bill will ensure that the Australian government is equipped with more robust enforcement, compliance and governance arrangements to secure sustainable fisheries for future generations. One of the key aims of the reforms is to ensure that the new arrangements involve minimal disruption to the fishing industry and AFMA personnel.

The reforms to AFMA were announced by the previous government in October 2006, and bipartisan support was offered at that point by the then Labor opposition. Further delays will only serve to create uncertainty for the fishing industry and for the staff and directors of AFMA. I thank all members for their contribution to the debate and do urge the swift passage of this bill through both houses.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.