Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The government will not be supporting the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment Bill 2014. I will go through first broadly what the bill does and also the Greens' proposed amendment, which we will not be supporting either. I will go through some of the reasons why we take a different approach on this issue.

The bill amends the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act to repeal a sunset provision and enable the minister to establish an independent expert panel to conduct an assessment of the potential environmental impacts of a declared commercial fishing activity and to prohibit the declared fishing activity while the assessment is undertaken. On the Greens' proposed amendment, I will quote from Senator Whish-Wilson:

The Greens have put up an amendment to ban supertrawlers and vessels with freezing capacity over 2,000 tonnes. That is a globally recognised tonnage of fish that is being looked at by groups right around the world.

He goes on:

We consider that we need separate legislation for any size over that.

He goes on:

We would ask that Labor, through Senator Ludwig, who brought this forward, consider a proper amendment that will ban this type of fishing activity in this country once and for all. This is what millions of rec—

recreational—

fishermen across this country want—

apparently, according to Senator Whish-Wilson.

We do not agree with the Greens and we do not agree with the Labor Party on this issue. The reason the government opposes this bill as well as the amendments is that the amendments will have no effect on the recently expired or current declaration made under the now lapsed legislation. We support commercial, recreational and Indigenous fishers and are committed to the continuation of Australia's well-managed fisheries. The coalition has confidence in the sustainability of Australian fisheries managed by the Australian Fisheries Management Authority. We will make any decisions regarding fisheries management based on the science. We will not be rushed. We will consider the expert panel report in its entirety and make appropriate decisions.

The government is aware of the concern among a range of groups, including recreational fishers, about the potential impact of supertrawlers on Australia's marine environment, protected species and local fish stocks. We intend to build public confidence in the fishery and fisheries management more generally. Commercial fishing has to be both environmentally and economically sustainable.

Agreeing to this bill would mean that the Minister for the Environment could declare any fishing activity at any time, and who knows what a future environment minister might do with that? For instance, he or she, in future, might consider that there is uncertainty associated with small rowboats and declare them, which would then mean that an expert panel would be established to investigate the matter, all at the cost of the taxpayer. Senator Ludwig is only bringing this back now, we believe, to play cheap wedge politics, and the Greens, not surprisingly, are jumping on the bandwagon.

Now I want to go back to Labor's record on this issue and their hypocrisy on this issue. It was Tony Burke, in his role as Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, who created this issue by inviting these types of vessels as part of his 2009 Small Pelagic Fishery Harvest Strategy. I quote:

… there are considerable economies of scale in the fishery and the most efficient way to fish may include large scale factory freezer vessels.

That is from page 2 of the Small Pelagic Fishery Harvest Strategy, from the Australian Fisheries Management Authority in 2009. Indeed, the former minister proudly trumpeted:

This is the first time a trawler with a storage capacity of 2000 tonne or more is likely to operate in an Australian fishery …

Then, as the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Tony Burke completely bungled the development and introduction of the declared fishing activities bill in September 2012. This legislation was so bad that it needed amendment within hours of introduction. Labor clearly did not understand fisheries or fisheries management. Their bill initially banned recreational charter vessels. The declared fishing activities amendment was so bad that there was a 12-month sunset clause to kill it off.

As I said earlier, Senator Ludwig is bringing this back now to play cheap politics, notwithstanding that appalling history of mismanagement of this issue by the Labor Party and particularly by the former minister. But we know, in fact, that Senator Ludwig did once stand up for Australian fisheries. I quote from then Minister Ludwig in August 2012, responding to a Greens motion:

This disallowance motion is a message that the Greens political party do not support sustainable catch limits based on science.

Agreed. He continued:

It is a message that says the Greens want fisheries managed by politics, not qualified fisheries managers.

Well, we agree. He continued:

And it says that the Greens do not support the commercial operators who fish in some of the world's best managed fisheries.

He went on:

That message should be well understood, because I have no doubt that the same disregard for the science and management of our commercial fisheries will be extended to the legitimate pursuit of recreational fishing. As minister for fisheries—

this was Senator Ludwig saying this at the time—

I will not allow the emotive politics of the Greens political party to run fisheries management policy in this country. We will ensure that the Australian Fisheries Management Authority is independent, that it makes independent decisions based on the science through its expert commissioners and on the facts that are presented to them. They will continue to make decisions based on sound judgement to ensure that fisheries are sustainable and meet all the ecological requirements—and, moreover, predicated on the precautionary principle so often espoused by the Greens.

He went on:

Why? Because AFMA will continue to apply sound policy to ensure that we will have sustainable fisheries now and into the future. For those reasons, the government oppose this motion.

That was a reasonably succinct position put by the then minister as to why we should reject these kinds of moves, why we should reject this Greens view of the world, which is not based on science. It is based on their version of cheap politics. It is based on their aversion really to any economic activity using our natural resources.

We know what the Greens are on about, but unfortunately the Labor Party in opposition has moved far closer to the Greens than we would like to see and, I am sure, much closer than many Labor senators would like the Labor Party to be. Many senators, I am sure, would be concerned about the Labor Party pandering to the Greens.