Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Environment and Communications References Committee's report, Regulation of the fin-fish aquaculture industry in Tasmania. First of all I acknowledge the submitters to this inquiry, the industry, who provided assistance, those who came along to hearings and the secretariat staff for their assistance in putting together this report.

Growing and processing salmon is one of Tasmania's most valuable primary industries in terms of production value. It contributes close to half a billion dollars annually to the economy. It employs 1,570 workers in 26 of the 29 local government areas and it supports a further 3,700 jobs indirectly, with the potential for many more in the near future. Put simply, the industry is too important to turn a blind eye to any possible adverse impacts.

Committee members came to the inquiry with open minds to recommend change that was supported by the evidence. By the same token, we also wanted to shine a light on any concerns that turned out to be unfounded. One of the most striking findings of the inquiry was the significant disconnect between perceptions of some in the community about the environmental effects of our salmon industry and evidence from the peer-reviewed research and objective environmental data.

The inquiry was prompted by concerns about whether the activities of the industry were leading to decreased dissolved oxygen levels in Macquarie Harbour, affecting waterway health and potentially impacting negatively on nearby abalone farms. Since that time, the CSIRO has released a report which found that the total organic load associated with river discharge is a hundred times that of salmon production in Macquarie Harbour. Independent monitoring undertaken by Aquadynamic Solutions also showed that dissolved oxygen levels have actually returned to late 2011 levels. Another important advance since the inquiry was launched was the release of the Buxton report, which showed no link between the activities of the salmon industry and the productivity of abalone farms.

These reports add to what is already an extensive body of research. The Commonwealth government and the salmon industry have jointly funded 96 research projects worth more than $25 million in support of sustainable development of the industry, with 20 active projects and four that are about to start. This research has covered a broad range of areas with a focus on environmental management, farm management, animal health and disease mitigation and threatened and endangered species. Notably, the industry itself has also proactively invested more than $200 million in research over the last 30 years—much of it done in partnership with the highly respected scientists at the CSIRO and the University of Tasmania's Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies. With a vibrant research community on our doorstop, Tasmania's salmon industry has benefited from the contribution of some of the brightest minds in the field.

The committee received extensive evidence that the impact of the industry on the surrounding environment is small, and that the industry is single-mindedly focused on continuous improvement. As well as commissioning independent research, the industry maintains a rigorous regime of environmental monitoring. The broad-scale environmental monitoring program, which is recognised as world's best practice, analyses water quality by measuring factors like water column nutrients, dissolved oxygen levels and salinity. It has found no significant impacts on the broader environment from the salmon industry. The industry also spends half a million dollars a year in maintaining third-party certification through international bodies which have standards far exceeding anything mandated by the federal and state governments. These cover a range of areas including benthic effects, water quality, nutrient release, biosecurity management, fish health, stocking densities and interactions with wildlife and critical and sensitive habitats and species. Of course there are very real business imperatives for the industry to invest heavily in their environmental credentials and sustainability practices. It is not just a matter of branding and market premiums, although these are very important. It actually goes to the very survival of the industry. If these multimillion-dollar businesses are to continue in the long term, then sustainability must be a prime consideration.

Ninety percent of Tasmanians are either strongly or somewhat in favour of the industry, but concerns still proliferate in parts of the community. When perceptions are not validated by the research and expert advice, they can breed unjustified anxiety and potentially inflict serious damage to this important industry. It is for this reason that the committee has recommended that the state government increase data release and integrate more formal public input into planning processes. Clearly as the industry expands there will be an ongoing need to carefully monitor its interactions with the surrounding environment. But, on the basis of the expert evidence provided to the committee, there is no justification for further regulation. To further burden this industry with red tape when there is no evidence of a direct detrimental impact on the environment would not only be a waste of resources but also a reckless and onerous imposition on an industry that should be lauded for its impressive environmental credentials. I commend the report to the Senate.

Question agreed to.