Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I might I say this: Senator Wright, of course, gets caught up in all of her rhetoric. She gets caught up in her antipathy towards any harvesting of the sea. I am one of those who loves harvesting from the sea, quite frankly. I enjoy nothing more than heading out of Port Lincoln in my little boat and catching things like sharks—you know, sharks, which are dangerous creatures and hurt people. But not only that: they consume thousands of kilograms of protein every year that Senator Wright wants to protect. They consume the sardines, they consume the baitfish, they consume a whole range of things. I like catching them, I like cooking them and I like eating them. What I do is: I cut them up, I breadcrumb and deep-fry them. It is beautiful. It is something for the whole family to really enjoy.

I am a consumer of protein just like the tuna consume protein. In Senator Wright's world, the tuna, if they were not captured by the tuna fishermen, would not eat anything at all. They would not chase those tasty sardines and those little pelagic fish. They would not eat the 12 kilos of other fish in order to put on one kilo of their own growth. No! They would swim through the ocean and not eat anything at all. It is not like we can force feed crew. It is just preposterous to presume that, somehow, by capturing some smaller fish, fattening them up and adding enormous value—and it is a world-pioneering experience—we are doing damage to the environment.

Let me tell you what does damage to the environment: a fishing industry that is not managed as well as the Australian fishing industry. We are at the very top, in South Australia in particular, of managing the fishing industry—particularly the southern bluefin tuna industry. If we go back to the issue of quotas, I remember when quotas were reduced for many nations when the Howard government was in—it was a fine government—because they had been doing the wrong thing. They had not been counting quotas. They had been virtually doubling the fishing over what they should have been. But Australia was protected in that reduction of quota, because we did the right thing. Quite frankly, I was very proud of the government. Minister Abetz was, I think, the fisheries minister at the time. He went in and fought on the international stage. He said: 'Why should we be penalised when we are doing the right thing by the global fish stocks and sticking within our quota?'

Of course, that did not take place under the previous government. Quotas were reduced despite Australia being, perhaps, the best managed fishery in the world. Based on my own experience and the experience and wisdom of those who go out and fish for tuna commercially, there are more tuna out in the Great Australian Bight than ever before. It is quite extraordinary how much is available out there. It is because it is very, very well managed. So I do not buy what Senator Wright is peddling.

It is worth noting that the Greens—that extreme environmental movement, if you will—has long had this antipathy towards any harvesting of southern bluefin tuna. I remember when Mr Peter Garrett, one of your former ministers, Mr Deputy President Marshall, was an environmental campaigner rather than a political campaigner. He was head, I think, of the Australian environment council or something like that. He was actually pushing for an entire time ban on any commercial fishing of southern bluefin tuna. It was preposterous. It was absurd. But this is just how the extreme green fringe want to actually stop people from harvesting the bounties of the sea. It is right for us to question. If we going to complain not based on science and not based on evidence but on some emotive unfairness to the fish and prohibit Australians, or anyone else for that matter, from sustainably catching important food for the world, where are we going to end up with this? If we allow government to encroach at these sorts of emotive levels, what is going to happen in the future? Are they going to continue to prosecute, prosecute and prosecute the case until it is the recreational fishermen that, ultimately, suffer?

Recreational fishermen are, in many respects, great environmentalists. They do the right thing. I support the fisheries officers that go out, check and make sure that we do the right thing, because we want to see fish stocks maintained. I do not want to see the rape and pillage of the sea, because that would be entirely inappropriate. We need to make sure that things are sustainable. That is why we cannot, in all conscience, listen to the types of rhetoric of the emotive arguments that are not put forward based on any real science apart from—