Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

What an absolute mess! I never thought we would be back here so soon trying to clean up another absolute debacle, but we are. We are once again here debating legislation as a result of this government following GetUp!, deciding it will make policy on the run as a result of what GetUp! has had to say. The best way to describe the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Declared Fishing Activities) Bill is GetUp! governing. It is a complete mess; it is a complete overreaction to a problem. It reminds me of what we saw with the Indonesian live cattle debacle. If proper processes had been followed from the very start, this bill would not be here today.

Let me step back and look at the roles each of the relevant ministers have played in the bill being debated today. There is the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, who has failed to do his job of standing up for AFMA and standing up for the science-driven processes that drive AFMA. He has been asleep at the wheel once again, like he was with the live cattle debacle. He has not put the science out there, he has not defended the science, and where questions have been asked about the science—relevant and pertinent questions, particularly when it comes to the impact on local fish stocks—he has not said anything. As proof of that, on behalf of the recreational fishermen in my electorate I wrote to the minister on 9 August asking him about the concerns they had raised about the impact on local fish stocks. I have not even had the courtesy of a reply yet. In the paper today we now see evidence that issues were raised about this as early as June, and yet there is silence from the minister.

What about the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, who is responsible for the great drafting of this legislation? Based on this piece of legislation the minister for the environment could not draft a grade 2 essay. It had been in the parliament for less than 12 hours, and we already had the member for Dobell and others already proposing amendments to him and telling him he had completely messed this up. And he has messed it up. Instead of boasting about what happened to the Greens in the council elections in New South Wales, maybe he should say their performance was because he is now so caught by environmental groups that he is the reason the Greens are declining—because they are all looking to him and saying, 'Minister for the environment, you are greener than green'.

That is the problem.

The minister for the environment should also look at the way he goes about things. Instead of his 'I, I, I', he should be thinking, 'I am part of a process. I should listen to what the minister for fisheries and the minister for trade have to say. I should listen to the party room, to the collective voices.' Rather just going out and saying, 'I am wonderful, I am this, I am that, I did this', he should just let go of the ego a little bit and get back to governing properly and with due process. We have that great example of him heading off to Victoria on a big media junket to try and highlight the impact of the trial the Baillieu government were going to do, putting cattle back into national forests. Now, there are some serious issues there, but what did the minister for the environment do? He got in his four-wheel-drive, with a great media pack behind him, tried to drive up into the Alps and got bogged. And that was the news story: he got bogged and then had to go back—all because it was a complete media stunt to get attention for himself rather than deal with the issues as he should have been doing.

Then there is the minister for trade. Where has he been? We know he was mute when the decision on the live cattle trade with Indonesia was made in the cabinet room. Now we find out that the Dutch government are watching this issue unfold and saying, 'What the hell is going on in Australia?' Our good reputation is now being trashed. The sovereign risk for Dutch companies is now being trashed. And where is the minister for trade—I mean the minister for the Whyalla wipe-out? Where is he? He is again mute on an issue which fundamentally goes to how we are seen internationally, particularly how our trade performance is seen internationally, and about how overseas companies can invest in this country without sovereign risk.

Apologies to Lewis Carroll, but I think he is going to have to rewrite Alice in Wonderland, because we have the minister for fisheries, Tweedledum, and the minister for the environment, Tweedledee; but now there is this new character, the minister for trade, Tweedledo-nothing—Tweedledum, Tweedledee and Tweedledo-nothing. That is what this government are like. The process around this is a sham. It would be laughable if it were not such a serious matter, because look at the powers the bill gives to Tweedledum and Tweedledee. The bill gives the minister the power to, with a stroke of a pen, prohibit fishing via an interim declaration, stating:

When making an interim declaration, the Minister may identify a fishing activity by reference to all or any of the following:

(a) a method of fishing;

(b) a type of vessel used for fishing;

(c) a method of processing, carrying or transhipping of fish that have been taken;

(d) an area of waters or of seabed.

So these minister's powers, which are not based on good process, not based on the science, can have an impact depending on the type of fishing, whether recreational or commercial; and the size of the boat, big or small; and so on. The only thing that is not mentioned in the bill, that they have not tried to cover, is the old fishing rod. It surprises me that they have not put that in there as well. I am surprised that they do not also want control of the fishing rod or, by extension, the handline. But they have not gone quite that far.

Under the bill, the government can prohibit a fishing activity if there is 'uncertainty about the environmental, social or economic impacts of the fishing activity'. They are saying: 'Forget about a science based approach, forget about driving industry certainty based on the science; we're going to take into account the social or economic impacts.' In particular, the 'social' aspect of this should be of great concern to everyone, because, as I said at the start, what we are seeing here is GetUp! governing. We are not seeing due process. We are not seeing the government listening to the scientific community or thinking about the various issues at stake and saying, 'Okay, if there are questions about certain parts of the science, let's have them investigated and looked at properly.' What we have here means that, if there is a campaign by people who are opposed to fishing full stop, their considerations can be taken into account and lead to the prohibition of certain types of fishing. For instance, if a popular fishing competition had been occurring for a number of years but, all of a sudden, there was a social media campaign against it, the bill gives the minister the power to stop the competition. It is not based on asking whether the catch from the tournament has any impact on fish stocks. Basically, the minister would have the power, based on a few emails and a few tweets, to stop such an activity.

The reason this is so alarming is that, when it comes to Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, there are people whose intentions might be fine but who do not know or understand the science and the practices behind what occurs in these important areas of our economy. Because of that, through misinformation and misperception, they can be misled. What we do not want to see is a government that will flip-flop, overreact or have a knee-jerk reaction to these types of issues, because it puts investment in those important areas at risk.

At the moment, with this bill before the parliament, who would invest in commercial fishing, knowing that, due to a social media campaign, the licence for that commercial fishing could be just pulled away? We will freeze investment in commercial fishing and Australian commercial fishing is the most sustainable in the world. AFMA has the best reputation of any fisheries management authority in the world, yet through this whole debacle we see all that trashed by these processes and trashed in an absolutely appalling way.

I cannot, in good conscience, support the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Declared Fishing Activities) Bill 2012 because it puts in jeopardy our way of life in Australia and I do not want that to occur. I do not want to allow fishing to be held to ransom by social media and I do not want governing to be held to ransom by social media.

We need to step back, to go back to proper process. We have to make sure that we govern this country with certainty, to ensure that people are encouraged to invest. Let us get on the record once again that the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, through his policies, encouraged this vessel to come here. We need to remind everyone that there are considerable economies of scale in the fishery and the most efficient way to fish may include large-scale factory freezer vessels. That is what the minister for the environment put in a publication in 2009. He tried to walk away from it yesterday, but he should be responsible enough to say, 'Yes, I did put that publication out.' So we encourage them to come in, and then what happens? There is a campaign against it. Does the minister say, 'Let's review the science again. Some issues have been raised with us, especially to do with local fish stocks. Should we look at the science around those areas and make a considered opinion? No, we won't, we will have a knee-jerk reaction. We will say to the people we encourage to come to Australia, "Sorry, sovereign risk, so you are basically parked for two years while we try to deal with the mess we have created."' At the same time, the government do not defend the science which has ensured that our fisheries management is regarded as absolutely world-class.

In my time in this parliament I have now seen two debacles. How this government handled live cattle export to Indonesia was a disgrace and the impacts are still being found. If this bill passes, it will be a similar debacle because the powers it will give to Tweedledum and Tweedledee are beyond the pale.

See this speech in context