Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

I, and also on behalf of Senators Colbeck, Askew and Chandler, move:

That the following matter be referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 18 December 2024:

The Minister for the Environment and Water's refusal to make a decision on the future of the salmon industry in Macquarie Harbour and end the uncertainty for the Tasmanian families whose livelihoods depend on it, with particular reference to:

(a) the recent improving oxygenation levels and significantly improved prospects of the Maugean skate;

(b) the need for bipartisan support of the salmon industry;

(c) the catastrophic effect a negative decision would have on the community of Strahan;

(d) the disastrous effect of continued delays of this Government making a decision; and

(e) any other related matters.

I move the motion standing in the names of the senators just mentioned, some very fine Tasmanians who actually care about the salmon industry and want the best outcome for the people that work in that industry, the families they support and the communities they're a part of. That's why we're moving this motion today—because it's high time, past time, as a matter of fact, that a decision was made by this Labor government on this industry and its future in Tasmania. The motion, for those listening along at home, is about establishing an inquiry into the salmon industry and the decision-making process of this minister, Minister Plibersek, the Labor environment minister, who, at the behest of the Australia Institute, the Bob Brown Foundation and, of course, Labor's taxpayer funded Environmental Defenders Office, has sought to review permits that have been in place since the year 2012, permits that were issued by then environment minister Tony Burke in the last Labor government. So, at the behest of those groups, the industry now has Damocles's sword hanging above it with no certainty in sight.

The motion asks us to take note of the fact that it has now been quite some time for the minister to make a decision—we're up to about a year now—and the minister's refusal to make a decision is creating great uncertainty. So we want to investigate: the recent improving oxygenation levels and significantly improved prospects for the maugean skate; the need for a bipartisan approach to the future of the salmon industry, which I think is important—reasonable parties of government should be on the same page here; and the catastrophic effect a negative decision would have on the community of Strahan. While it does say 'Strahan'—we'll come back to this in a later clause of this motion—the decision to, in effect, shut down the salmon industry, which is an option this minister has before her, one she refuses to exercise in either direction, could be far-reaching. It could have ramifications for thousands of Tasmanian salmon workers, approximately 5,000, their families and the communities they live in. And, of course, we want to investigate the disastrous effect of continued delays of this government making a decision.

All we want is certainty. That's why we're having this conversation. It is incredible that we are, after a year of talking, community visits and political leaders going and pledging support for this industry. We've had the Prime Minister fly to Tasmania saying he has got the salmon workers' backs. The opposition leader did the same thing, and he committed in policy terms to actually make a decision to support the industry and indeed then go and change the laws to ensure that this never happens again. As my friend and colleague Senator Colbeck points out, the Leader of the Opposition indeed drove to Strahan. He went and looked the workers in the eyes. He saw their workplace to understand firsthand exactly what was being experienced here and why making a decision urgently, in favour of the industry, when you look at the facts and you look at the science, was so critically important. The minister hasn't gone to Strahan, nor has the Prime Minister. They've been to major population centres, like Hobart, but they haven't gone to speak to the workers impacted by this decision.

So here we are a year on—several conversations, meetings, media events and platitudes from Labor ministers about the future of this industry, but no movement and no certainty. Even the Tasmanian Labor opposition want this government to act. That includes the state member for Lyons, Ms Rebecca White, former Labor leader. She has lost three state elections now, but she has been tapped on the shoulder to replace incumbent Labor member for Lyons in this parliament, Mr Brian Mitchell. They knew they weren't going to win the seat, so they thought, 'Well, we'd better fly someone in and gift her that seat.' She has said in the Tasmanian parliament that this government, this Labor government, of which my colleagues opposite are a part, should make the right decision and support the salmon industry. As recently as a month or so ago, she said the minister should make the right decision and support the industry. I will be very interested to see whether Ms White continues that narrative as the federal candidate for Lyons or whether she will adopt the new-found view that seems to emanate through the federal Labor caucus, which is: 'We'd just better wait and see. Let's have a little bit more of a look at things. What's another year? Let's kick the can down the road to the other side of a federal election.' That's what's happened here. You can be guaranteed that for this minister, who is worried about the Greens nipping at her heels electorally in her electorate of Sydney, making a difficult decision of this nature will come at a cost to her in her seat. If she supports the salmon industry—which, I can see, some on the other side would like her to do—she'll lose votes in her electorate, so she doesn't want to make a decision. She wants to protect her job, and the price of saving her seat is the jobs of Tasmanian salmon workers—families who are making plans and who are planning what they should do for their kids with the lack of certainty around future employment: 'Should we stay in Strahan or should we move on?' These are the conversations happening now, as they head into their second Christmas with this Labor uncertainty—a minister who refuses to make a decision in favour of the industry based on science and fact. This is something that should be in Labor's DNA—standing up for workers in industries like the salmon industry—but that is not what is happening here.

There are very different views of what should be happening on the West Coast, in Macquarie Harbour. I know for a fact that, when they make their contribution, the Australian Greens and colleagues from Tasmania from that party will say that the industry is the worst thing ever, that it's going to end life on the West Coast and that we should shut it down. That's the call they've been making. But credit to them: I know where they stand, and I know exactly what they think should happen with the salmon industry. And I'd like to think, given we've said that if we are elected at the next election we will approve the operation of salmon farming in Macquarie Harbour and change the laws to ensure that decisions and events like this never happen again, people know where we stand: we stand with the industry. But the one group of people in this place I'm not sure about is the Australian Labor Party. Are they with the salmon workers or do they want things to drag on forever and a day, creating more uncertainty in that community? The Tasmanian Labor contingent and the state opposition in the Tasmanian parliament know where they stand. The Liberal government in Tasmania know where they stand. The Tasmanian Greens know where they stand. We all know where we stand, except for the decision-makers here in Canberra. The Australian Labor government, the Albanese government, friend of the worker, wants a future made in Australia but is causing untold harm by not making a decision.

I know there are some, as I said before, that would like to see a good outcome—some who have been described by others as 'salmon champions'. But the test of a real champion is one that delivers the outcome needed. The opposition can't force the government to make a decision. The Greens can't force the government to make a decision. Only those within the Labor caucus can force the government to make a decision. There is nothing stopping this minister. We had officials from the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water tell us just two weeks ago at Senate estimates that the extension of time for the Threatened Species Scientific Committee to look at the listing of the maugean skate had nothing to do with the decision-making process the minister was going through in reviewing the permits for salmon farming in Macquarie Harbour—not one thing to do with it. The science is in, and the department have all of it. They were finalising their report for the minister. It's there for her to make a decision on. This does not have to wait until after the election. There is no reason that those salmon workers, those men and women, honest Tasmanians, should have to wait for this minister to take in further information; it is there for a decision to be made.

That's why an inquiry is good, to understand why this minister persists in delaying. What is it that is holding up a decision that would provide certainty for those individuals, their families, their communities, this industry and the Tasmanian economy that would be harmed by this? You have to wonder: why is it being delayed? As we know, it's not the Threatened Species Scientific Committee and it's not the lack of desire from good Tasmanians of all political persuasions that want an outcome; it is purely about the politics. That's the thing; it is all about the politics. The government want to not have to explain to one side of the debate or the other why they've made a decision. They want to appease the Greens and they want to appease Greens voters, who they will hopefully get the preferences of to help them secure seats, but they don't want to annoy the workers. They would like to say: 'We've got your back and you'll have a job under us.' I'm afraid those words are hollow, and the workers down there on the West Coast are starting to know that and are starting to see that this is about protecting parliamentarians' jobs at the expense of the industry's jobs. There is a lot of madness out there.

I was reflecting on some of those vocal opponents of the industry and some of the things they've been saying, which is what's driven the minister to delay her decision—this fear of green groups and what they do. There's a document circulating in Tasmania called the Dennes Point Declaration, and it was signed by a group of anti-salmon-farming activists—some well known, some less well known. There are two versions of it, and I can't understand why! The first version, which was produced in October 2020 as they began their crusade against this science based, job-creating sustainable industry, called for a moratorium over any new industrial fish farms in Tasmania's coastal, estuary and river waters. It also called for an immediate government led transition out of coastal leases and into land based farms and true deep-ocean aquaculture.

Around this time, the former government announced funding—and it's been continued by the current government—for the Blue Economy CRC to investigate, as the Dennes Point Declaration describes it, true deep-ocean aquaculture. Soon after that announcement, our good friends from the Neighbours of Fish Farming and the Tasmanian Alliance for Marine Protection—so pleasantly named, so insidious in their motives—changed their Dennes PointDeclaration. I want you to spot the difference. They asked for this:

1. A moratorium on any new industrial fish farms in Tasmania's coastal, estuary and river waters.

2. An immediate government led transition out of the sea and into landbased farms.

What's missing? It's the move off into Commonwealth waters, into true offshore, deep-ocean aquaculture, which was something that we were trialling and seeking to do. But, because a good, science based approach to decision-making to try to resolve an issue meant that there was one fewer argument, they had to delete it from their declaration. It's proof positive that, no matter what you do, there are some in our community who, based on emotion, on politics and on the need for division and relevance, will never be happy. I tell you what: if we came up with further moves and things to appease this group, they would delete them from this declaration as well. It is just about an end to salmon farming.

I implore the government and salmon champions of all colours to stand up for this industry, to support an inquiry to understand why on earth we're still waiting for a decision. It's not about the science; it's all in. Workers deserve certainty before Christmas. We've got a sitting day left, and we could have this decision made before we go home from Canberra. While we're getting paid every fortnight as parliamentarians, these workers are worried about their jobs and about the future of this industry. We in the coalition stand with them. There is no reason for a delay. There is every reason to have an inquiry if the government isn't going to give us a decision before we go home.

So let's put people's words to the test here. The vote on this motion will clearly demonstrate where people stand on this, whether they're pro-industry or whether they want to prolong the uncertainty, team up with the Greens and shut down this industry.