Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I refer to reports on the weekend that the Japanese fishing industry has illegally taken $2 billion worth of southern bluefin tuna over the past 20 years. I note that this unreported and illegal catch of between 12,000 and 20,000 tonnes is double or triple Japan’s legal quota and that the Bureau of Rural Sciences has classified this species as overfished every year since it began reporting, in 1992. In light of this information, will the minister list the species as threatened under the EPBC Act, as advised by the Threatened Species Scientific Committee in September 2005? Will the minister now revoke the wildlife trade operation declaration under the EPBC Act that the fishery is ecologically sustainable?

Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not think anyone who looks at what has happened to southern bluefin tuna can be anything other than concerned about the species. However, stopping Australia fishing the species, and therefore withdrawing from the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna, would be basically walking away from international efforts to make sure that the species survives. The reports over the weekend of what Mr McLoughlin from AFMA said are alarming. The commission is going through an important process of looking at the rate at which the species is being fished at the moment. Of course Japan is a very major player in that fishery, as is Australia. There are many hundreds, potentially thousands, of jobs in Australia that rely on southern bluefin tuna. The absolute practical reality is that, if I stopped that international trade and closed down that fishery, those people would be out of work. I think there is a win-win situation here. I think that we can maintain our engagement in that fishery and we can maintain our engagement in the commission. The commission is going through a very robust scientific process at the moment to assess the size of the catch, to try to assimilate the sort of catch figures that Mr McLoughlin has reported at the conference and to try to make an audit of the catches from the various countries that catch the fish.

My strong view is that the survival of the species, which is very good for the environment, and the survival of the fishery, which is very good for Australian fishermen and their families, can be achieved side by side. For Australia to take the advice of the Greens and walk away from the commission and walk away from our engagement in the fishery and engagement with Australia’s fishermen and Australia’s fisheries management—which is the best in the world and is recognised as the best in the world; and we also contribute to international conservation efforts through organisations such as the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna—would in fact be bad for the environment. That is not untypical of what the Greens suggest policy-wise. Quite often they come up with suggestions that are very bad for the environment. But, in this case, not only would it be counterproductive for Australia’s environment and for the survival of this species but also it would be very catastrophic for another species—that is, Australian fishermen and their families.

Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask a supplementary question, Mr President. In recognition of the failure of the international community to protect this species through the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna, will the minister nominate the species for listing at the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, CITES?

Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I will not, because quite often internationally we are not able as a community of nations to get ideal results. Does that mean you should just pull up Australia’s stumps and walk away? Quite frankly, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has not really been particularly successful in addressing climate change yet, but would you suggest that Australia stops working on climate change and walks away from it? No, we should work domestically on fisheries issues and climate change issues and work internationally. To pull up our tent and walk away would be an act of stupidity for the environment and for our economy.