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

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (Senator Ludwig) to a question without notice asked by Senator Siewert today relating to the Western Australian Offshore Constitutional Settlement.

This is about the northern area of the North West Slope Trawl Fishery, which I believe has been caught up in a stoush between the Western Australian state government and the federal government over the Offshore Constitutional Settlement. This area was left off by mistake and, when that was recognised, there was an agreement between the state and federal governments that the area would no longer be open for trawling and a regulatory process was put in place so that the area was closed to trawling. Since that agreement expired at the end of last year, the industry has been self-regulating to ensure that the area is not fished.

But that self-regulation is about to come to an end. Our very deep concern here is that, once it does come to an end, the area will subsequently be accessible for trawling, and species that had been adequately managed prior to that and not subject to that sort of pressure will of course now be subject to pressure. Trawling is a very different type of fishing from the fishing that is up there at the moment. So the concern is that this ecologically sensitive area will be subject to trawling and that will have an impact on the benthos of the area and on some of the species that the area is renowned for.

I am deeply concerned that we will not only be subjecting an area that has been recovering to, we believe, inappropriate fishing pressure; the concern here is that this area is being sacrificed because the state and federal governments have not been able to reach an agreement on redrawing some of the boundaries for the Offshore Constitutional Settlement. Whilst the Western Australian government did at first, to give them their due, seem to be interested in making sure that this area was protected, it seems to have given up on it in the bigger tussle over where the boundaries should be, reaching an agreement with the federal government on the Offshore Constitutional Settlement, and, therefore, this area is being sacrificed. We were told in question time by the minister that there are ongoing discussions and I was very pleased to hear that. But I would be even more pleased if the government agreed that while this was going on the area would not in fact be re-opened and there would be ongoing protection for it, as the fishers in the Kimberley area are asking for. I am sure the minister is aware of it, because I am sure he has seen the letters coming from the fishers in that area. They are deeply concerned about the impact that trawling in this area will have on the ecosystem.

Given that the government is currently looking at how it is rolling out marine protected areas around the country, particularly in the north-west and across the north of Australia, it seems to me to be a bad sign that we cannot even reach agreement over an area on which there is a great deal of agreement on the need for some protection. The fishers are on board for protecting this area and yet the Western Australian government and the federal government cannot reach agreement.

The minister says that an ecological risk assessment is being done. I know that the local fishers are very concerned that this area is in fact going to be open and trawling will be allowed targeting species that still have not reached adequate population levels. As I said, the benthos of this area is going to be destroyed through trawling in areas that have not been subject to this level of pressure.

Just today I was at a launch for a new assessment of the values of the marine resources of this country, which are in the billions and billions of dollars. One of the things that this study by the Centre for Policy Development has highlighted is the value of marine protected areas—the value that these areas have in protecting our fish stocks. Essentially, this area, although it is not an official marine protected area, has been playing that role because it has been protecting these fish stocks. If you look globally at the state of the marine environment and the state of our fish stocks, this report highlights the absolutely essential nature of ensuring that we have our fish stocks protected. It also highlights the role that protecting our fish stocks plays and, in fact, the leading role that Australia has been playing in our sustainable fisheries management. We are very proud of that. I am sometimes critical of it but I am one of the first to acknowledge that we do play a lead around the globe in our approach to fisheries management.

I believe that this area plays a part in ensuring our sustainable fish stocks and fish resources. It is a shame that an area that has been protected through— (Time expired)

Question agreed to.