Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present the report of the Joint Select Committee on Northern Australia on the inquiry into opportunities for expanding aquaculture in Northern Australia. I also present the minutes of the proceedings. I move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

I want to spend just a couple of minutes highlighting this unanimous report of the joint standing committee. I emphasise it is unanimous and I congratulate both the chairman of the committee, my colleague and friend the Hon. Warren Entsch MP, the member for Leichhardt, and also Ms Alannah MacTiernan, the deputy chairman, a Labor member obviously of the lower house. Regrettably, I hear that she, like other sensible Labor members from Western Australia, is leaving the sinking ship and getting out while she can with some dignity. I say the 'sensible people, because not only is Ms MacTiernan the deputy chairman of this report—and she contributed quite significantly to the conclusions of the committee—but the committee also included other, if I might say, sensible Labor members like Mr Gary Gray and the Hon. Warren Snowdon, who made significant contributions to the committee's determinations.

Other members of the committee included George Christensen, the member for Dawson; Senator Canavan, who is with us today; Ms Natasha Griggs, the member for Solomon in the Northern Territory; Senator Dean Smith; and Ms Melissa Price, the member for Durack—the biggest electorate in Australia. Of course, Ms Price is particularly interested in aquaculture in that whole electorate of Durack, which takes in three-quarters of the state Western Australia and is in that northern part of Western Australia, which has great opportunities for aquaculture and development into the future.

Northern Australia has a natural advantage for aquaculture production, including a long coastline, pristine waters, the availability of suitable land and, of course, its proximity to Asia. The tropical climate also encourages high aquaculture growth rates, and there are a number of aquaculture species which occur naturally in Northern Australia. Most seafood consumed in Australia is, regrettably, imported and this provides local producers, including aquaculture ventures, with significant opportunities to increase market share through import replacement

The obstacle, however—and this has been well canvassed during the committee's various hearings around the North—is an exemption from country-of-origin labelling requirements for food prepared for immediate consumption, such as restaurants, cafes, clubs, and fish and chips shops. I mentioned in the Senate a couple of weeks ago that the Northern Territory does require that labelling. Unfortunately, the rest of Australia has not yet got to that. I continue to hope that something will be done in the future, because consumers in restaurants should be allowed to make informed choices, and the committee has recommended that this anomaly be removed.

The aquaculture industry in Northern Territory is relatively underdeveloped compared to other Australian jurisdictions. But, I have to say, barramundi and prawn aquaculture are poised to expand. The committee spent some time in prawn farms near Cardwell, north of Ingham, and near Cairns. We also saw a wonderful barramundi farm in the Northern Territory in the southern suburbs of Darwin, which is going gangbusters, if I could say that. So these people who are developing those businesses have proved it can be done.

Across the Top End and the Torres Strait there is greater potential for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander management of coastal waters and fisheries. There is the potential for sea ranching of clams, oysters, pearl meat, triton shells and trochus shells. For example, there are moves to increase the involvement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in crocodile farming and Trepang ranching enterprises. As well, triton shells can be produced for the environmental management of the crown of thorns starfish. These developments can boost Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employment.

The Australian south sea pearling industry is facing significant challenges, including widespread damage arising from the oyster oedema disease. Consequently, the committee has recommended that a pearl industry recovery task force be established to fund research to identify the causative agent and possible remedial action. The committee has been encouraged by the move to create aquaculture development zones in Western Australia and the Northern Territory, which will ensure certainty for industry by defining approval conditions and reducing approval times.

In my own state, in North Queensland, I am embarrassed to say, by contrast, the development of aquaculture, which is influenced by the need to protect the waters of the Great Barrier Reef, has seen so many impediments to a degree not commensurate with the projected impact on the health of the Barrier Reef. There is a pressing need, the committee discovered, particularly in Queensland, for scientific certainty and regulatory clarity concerning potential aquaculture industry impacts. To assist science based decision making, there should be research into the potential for environmental impact arising from aquaculture ventures in areas adjacent to the Barrier Reef. We were heartened by the degree to which there is common ground amongst stakeholders as to how to resolve any development impasse, such as we have seen in Queensland over the last 15 years. The committee is confident that the aquaculture companies are taking steps to reduce their environmental impact and to comply with environmental regulatory requirements. The expansion of aquaculture in the North increases the need for a skilled workforce, and training institutions will need to provide industry-focused training courses to meet the anticipated skill set.

We had unanimity of thought from scientists from James Cook University, from the Australian Institute of Marine Science and even from GBRMPA in the end acknowledging that the impact of aquaculture on the Barrier Reef is minimal, and a figure that I recall was less than a one per cent impact on the Barrier Reef. Yet the Queensland government has enormous regulatory impediments to the expansion of the industry there. So it was good to see the scientists telling us—not us telling them—that the regulations are old-fashioned and based on science that has long past.

In a number of its recommendations, the committee has recommended that the proper science work needs to be established—some baseline science work that is up to date and takes into account modern methods and modern technology—so that we can encourage this industry, which, the evidence shows, has no real impact on the Great Barrier Reef. Yet the committee heard time and time again evidence from people who had been attempting to spend millions of dollars on aquaculture and create hundreds of jobs in northern Australia and who have just been stymied by government regulations—including to a degree, I have to say, by Commonwealth government regulation through the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The evidence to the committee, as I say, indicates that now all of the insiders, including the GBRMPA, believe that there is a way through it.

The committee thought it would be a worthwhile advance to do in Queensland what has been done in Western Australia and, I understand, the Northern Territory—that is, for the scientists, in conjunction with state government, who regulate these things, to indicate beforehand an area of the coastline where aquaculture could be established without any chance of a negative impact on the Barrier Reef. There would be a lot of the coast of Queensland where that would apply. That would encourage investors in, and that means wealth for Australia, it means import replacement and it means jobs, jobs and jobs for northern Australians in an area which, currently because of the mining downturn, desperately needs jobs.

I am pleased to present this report on behalf of the committee. I want to thank all those who participated in the inquiry by providing submissions, appearing at public hearings and hosting inspections. Again, I congratulate all of those on the committee who participated and contributed to the outcome of this inquiry.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the joint position adopted by the committee to look at the opportunities in the Northern Territory arising from aquaculture, but I just want to take up some of the issues that Senator Macdonald has failed to raise in his report on the challenges that the Northern Territory faces. One of the big challenges that the Northern Territory faces is climate change, and one of the challenges that the Great Barrier Reef faces is the bleaching of coral as a result of climate change. Work by the CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology has predicted that by between 2030 and 2070 Northern Australia is likely to experience hotter temperatures, more intense rainfall and more intense cyclonic events. These are issues that cannot be ignored when you are looking at the development of the Northern Territory.

Time and time again I have heard Senator Macdonald basically deny the existence of climate change. He has got a form of words that he uses constantly to try to say that he is not in the climate denier camp. But from my understanding of what Senator Macdonald has said over the years on this issue, he really is living in the past on this issue.

These are the issues that we have to deal with: an increased risk of salt water inundation and erosion in coastal territories in the Northern Territory, while inland areas will experience more high temperatures and they will have more drought, flooding, dust storms and bushfires. The scientists from the CSIRO are saying this. Although the Northern Territory produces half of Australia's run-off, it is considered to be water limited for two reasons. Firstly, there is high evaporation and evapotranspiration for most of the year. Secondly, the potential for water storage is constrained. I welcome the report, but we just need some realism about the challenges that the Northern Territory will face in terms of climate change.

The other area I think needs to be looked at in the Northern Territory in the years ahead is the issue of trying to improve the living standards of people in the Northern Territory—as we want to improve living standards around the country. Yet the policies that this government, the Abbott-Turnbull government, have been proposing certainly do not go to improving the living standards of Australians. What would a GST have done for the Northern Territory? A GST would have harmed rural and regional Australia more than most other places. Yet, what do we hear from the National Party? Zip, nothing. They are quiet about a GST. They have said nothing. They came in here and were not prepared to take on the Liberal Party—the big brothers of the National Party—and were prepared to impose a GST on people in rural and regional Australia, including people in the Northern Territory. There will be $80 billion pulled out of health. If we are talking about creating an aquaculture industry in the Northern Territory, surely you need to have a decent health system and a decent education system. If you are going to grow the Northern Territory, you do not do that by pulling $80 billion out of health and education around the country, including in the Northern Territory. You do not cut back the pensions for Australians, as the 2014-15 budget was about to do. It was about to cut back the pension for pensioners in this country and increase the pension age to 70. These were the things that the National Party and the Liberal Party sought to impose upon the Australian—

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Macdonald, do you have a point of order?

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Acting Deputy President, I raise a point of order. I hate to interrupt Senator Cameron, because, as I said before, he is so entertaining—if inaccurate—but we are discussing a report on aquaculture. It is a very serious report, and it will do much to help an industry in the North. I ask that Senator Cameron return to the topic and give us his thoughts on aquaculture.

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This really demonstrates the absolute incompetence of the Liberal and National parties understanding the implications of climate change on building this nation, especially in the area of the Northern Territory. I have just gone through what the Bureau of Meteorology is saying will happen in the Northern Territory and I have just told you what the CSIRO is saying, but you want to blindly ignore these challenges. You can do as many reports on aquaculture and you can build as many dams in the Northern Territory as you like, but you have to deal with the reality of climate change and its implications on the Northern Territory and on Australia in general. So I am very—

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Cameron, resume your seat. Senator Macdonald, I take it you have a point of order?

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Acting Deputy President, I raise a point of order. Again, I do not like to interrupt Senator Cameron, but this is a unanimous report by the Labor Party, the Greens and the coalition. Climate change, if it is mentioned at all, does not figure in any of the recommendations. I think it is barely referred to anywhere in the report, so Senator Cameron needs to be at least remotely relevant to the inquiry before us.

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am being entirely relevant, because, if you are talking about building industry in the Northern Territory—whether it is aquaculture, the cattle industry, the farming industry or meat processing—these are the issues that the country will have to face in the future. Senator Macdonald just does not get it. Senator Macdonald does not understand these issues. Senator Macdonald is a climate change sceptic and he just refuses to accept the reality of what climate change will do in the area of aquaculture and in the area of farming around this country. The CSIRO tells you these are the issues. The Bureau of Meteorology tells you these are the issues. The various scientists in the universities around the country tell you about these issues, but you, Senator Macdonald, just do not accept it. When I am saying that I think this report needs to be seen in the context of climate change in the Northern Territory, that is when Senator Macdonald interjects; that is when Senator Macdonald demonstrates his ignorance of the issues that are before this country on climate change.

Another area that will be a challenge for any aquaculture industry, and industry in general, in the Northern Territory is the exploitation of 457 visa workers, and if the aquaculture industry is not to end up like some of the industries around the country where 457 visa workers are being exploited then that is an issue that we will need to deal with when we are building an aquaculture industry. Looking after people who come here to be on holiday and looking after people who come here to get a job are remote from the thinking of the coalition. They are quite happy for exploitation of 457 visa workers. They do not deal with it in a concrete way.

So I am just raising the prospect that if we are to have an aquaculture industry in the Northern Territory then decent wages, decent conditions and protections for the workers and dealing with climate change are some of the issues that will need to be dealt with. It is fine writing a nice report with all of the positives, but you have to understand that there are issues that go to climate change and the exploitation of working people.

This is a report that I welcome. I welcome the joint report, but I simply want to bring a bit of reality. The pests and diseases that the CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology say are going to arise from climate change, both for animals and humans, are issues that we will need to deal with.

Senator O'Sullivan interjecting—

Again, we have got the doormats of the National Party in here. Senator O'Sullivan loves interjecting when I am on my feet. It does not make much sense when he interjects with me. It does not make much sense at all when I hear his contributions here.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I take a point of order on Senator O'Sullivan's interjection, where he cast aspersions on Scotsmen—my forebears. I think he should be made to withdraw that.

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rule that there is no point of order.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is a bit hypocritical of Senator Macdonald, who has raised my accent in the past. I am actually a real Scot, Senator Macdonald; I am not a pretend Scot like you. I am a real Scot—I was actually born there. I do not have to come in here in a kilt to try and pretend that I have got a link back to Scotland. You have raised issues about my accent in the past—that is fine. I do not have a glass jaw in these things. I can give it and I can take it. That is what real Scots do—not like you, up on your feet every two minutes, trying to be a pretend Scot with a glass chin. We do not have a glass chin where I come from. We can give it and we can take it—not like the Macdonalds that you seem to represent.

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the Senate take note of the report.

Question agreed to.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Perhaps Senator Cameron meant to continue his remarks?

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh yes, that is a good one—I should continue my remarks! I should continue my remarks and hopefully we can continue this debate.

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Okay, thank you, Senator Cameron.