Tom Venning (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise in this chamber to speak in strong, unwavering support of the fishing communities of Port Lincoln and the broader regional fishing communities of Australia and to address the High Seas Biodiversity Bill 2026. Unlike everyone from the government on the other side of this chamber, I will not just boringly read out the sanitised talking points you are endlessly repeating. The people who elected me, the people whose livelihoods are directly impacted by the legislation we debate in this room, deserve far better than bureaucratic echoes. They deserve honest representation and they deserve a measured, realistic critique of what this legislation actually means for their futures.

Let me say clearly at the very outset that this parliament should absolutely support sustainable oceans and biodiversity. The high seas belong to no single nation, and governing them demands exactly the kind of international cooperation that this treaty represents. But let me be equally clear, true sustainability is never achieved by sidelining the very people who have been carefully managing these marine resources for generations. There is a growing concern radiating from Port Lincoln, and it stems from the fact that, increasingly, decisions are being made about the industry rather than with the industry. I want to make a point here, one that highlights a strange and persistent hypocrisy in our national policy. It is the simple fact that everyone in this place treats the oceans profoundly differently to the land. When a farmer harvests the land, works the soil and produces food for this nation, they are rightfully championed as heroes of food security. We celebrate them. Yet, when our fishers head into the oceans and harvest the sea, providing that exact same service of feeding our nation, they are treated with suspicion. They are treated not as stewards but as environmental risks and poachers to be mitigated and managed. It is a double standard that is deeply offensive to the thousands of Australians in this industry.

Port Lincoln, Ceduna, Streaky Bay, Whyalla, Wallaroo and Edithburgh—they are not just picturesque coastal towns; they are also huge economic powerhouses for my community. Port Lincoln is Australia's undisputed seafood capital. It is home to the largest commercial fishing fleet in the entire Southern Hemisphere. We are talking about a town of about 14,000 people, and its seafood sector supports thousands of direct jobs and exponentially more in flow-on industries. I'm talking about boatbuilders, transport operators, maintenance crews and processing workers. The list goes on.

The southern-bluefin-tuna industry alone is worth around $120 million annually to the region. It forms a critical pillar of the broader regional economy. This is not just a seasonal hobby or a fading legacy industry; it is a modern, highly sophisticated and globally competitive export sector. It supplies a premium product to demanding international markets, particularly Japan and increasingly across the broader Asia region. This is an industry that has survived by evolving, innovating and adapting to every challenge thrown its way, and so many challenges have been faced by the seafood industry.

Here is the critical point that this government is fundamentally failing to grasp. Australia's seafood industry is already one of the most strictly regulated and undeniably sustainable seafood industries in the entire world. As Seafood Industry Australia consistently and accurately highlights, our commercial fisheries operate under robust, science based quotas. They operate under strict monitoring regimes and binding international agreements. This is not a rogue sector that needs to be forcefully brought into line by bureaucrats from this place who have never caught a bream, let alone a bluefin. This is a sector that is already leading the world in stewardship, and yet, despite this world-class performance, we continue to see layer upon layer of new regulation arbitrarily added. I hear it directly from the operators on the ground and on the water. In parts of the tuna industry, it feels as though there are now as many or even perhaps more people regulating the industry from Canberra than there are boats working out on the water. The situation is utterly ridiculous. The feeling within the industry is crystal clear. They are being overregulated, completely overburdened and woefully under consulted, and it needs to change.

This matters deeply because there are severe real-world consequences when ideological policy gets too far ahead of practical reality. If we overreach with regulation, we risk pushing hardworking Australian operators—the ones who actually follow the rules—straight out of global markets. We risk replacing Australian seafood with dubious imports from countries with far fewer environmental and labour standards. We already import 64 per cent of the seafood that we eat—64 per cent!—yet we have the best seafood in the entire world. Ultimately, we risk hollowing out proud regional communities, like Port Lincoln, that completely depend on this industry to survive and thrive.

Let us be honest about the severe pressures facing this sector right now. I have to strongly question the timing of this bill and the broader regulatory push in the face of the current fuel crisis crippling our operators. Right now, skyrocketing input costs—particularly diesel fuel—are forcing some operators to make the heartbreaking decision to cut their trips simply to stay financially viable. And, right now, because of the harmful algal bloom in the coastal waters along South Australia, boats are needing to travel twice as far to catch their quotas—twice as far when the fuel is twice as expensive. It is a double whammy.

Margins are incredibly tight. Business confidence is fragile. The absolute last thing this industry needs in this precise moment is additional regulatory uncertainty imposed from above without genuine, respectful engagement. What the region needs is practical and tangible support not more red tape. They need infrastructure that keeps them safe and helps them operate efficiently. That is exactly why I'm pushing for Doppler radar on the lower Eyre peninsula, supported by a massive petition from the local community.

A Doppler radar would provide critical real-time weather data to keep our fishers, farmers and community safe. This is the kind of practical investment the government should be focused on. Instead, we are here debating international treaties that threaten to tie our most productive industries in further knots. Seafood Industry Australia has been exceptionally clear on this matter. They fully support strong, decisive action against illegal and unregulated fishing. They support long-term sustainability, but they also desperately call for practical, workable frameworks developed in genuine partnership with the industry itself. That is the key word—'partnership'—because the people of Port Lincoln are not environmental vandals; they are the true stewards of the oceans. Their livelihoods depend on it. Their families depend on it. Their entire futures depend on it.

This brings me to the specific mechanisms being championed in the wake of this bill. We hear a lot about marine parks, but let's be honest with the Australian public. Marine parks have a fun name, a very friendly name. It sounds like a place you can take your kids on a Sunday afternoon, but we need to remember, and we need to call them exactly what they are. They are exclusion zones. They are lock-ups. Ironically, so many of these spatial closures have been transferred out to regional zones, conveniently placed far away from our metropolitan communities. Go figure! The city voters get the warm, fuzzy feeling of saving the ocean while the regional workers lose their livelihoods. It is a disgrace. My deep concern is that this treaty could very easily become a trojan horse for further domestic closures. What we must avoid at all costs is giving away our adjacent waters to the world to create massive, unprecedented marine protected areas between Australia and New Zealand, ultimately closing off our future food bowl to satisfy international optics.

We must ask ourselves what is truly happening in this chamber today. The minister has confirmed that his government is currently reviewing 44 Australian marine parks. We have seen the Greens use this bill as a convenient platform to call for a complete end to salmon fishing in Tasmania, the end of krill fishing and the aggressive expansion of no-take zones right across our domestic waters. This is no longer just a bill about high seas. It is the opening act of a radical domestic ocean closure agenda carefully dressed in the polite language of international obligation.

We already import a staggering 64 per cent of seafood that Australians eat. Let that sink in. It is upsetting to think that nearly two-thirds of our seafood comes from overseas. We do not import this because we lack the ocean. We have the third-largest exclusive economic zone in the world. We do not import it because we lack the scientific capability. We import it because a decade of poor decisions has treated Australian fishers as a problem to be managed rather than a vital sovereign food capability to be supported. This relentless, creeping regulation has systematically hollowed out the productive capacity of a sector worth billions to our GDP. Reducing access to well-managed Australian fisheries without addressing this massive reliance on imports simply risks outsourcing our environmental footprint to nations that do not care about sustainability. It does not improve the global environment; it merely shifts the guilt offshore.

If we are to implement the obligations under the BBNJ agreement concerning marine genetic resources, area-based management tools and environmental impact assessments, we must ensure that our domestic fisheries management is recognised and accredited within these broader environmental frameworks rather than duplicated. This was a clear recommendation from the Samuel review, and it must be heeded. We do not need cumulative regulatory burdens unintentionally constraining a sector that is essential to Australia's food security and regional resilience. I have spoken to the industry. I have read the drafts and the concerns of the people on the ground. Having consulted with experts like Daniel Casement, John Isle and Claire Webber, who understand the intricate realities of this industry better than anyone sitting in a department here in Canberra, I know that the industry is seeking certainty, consistency and basic recognition, not the continual layering of new rules over already well-managed world-class systems.

Protecting the high seas and feeding Australia are not competing objectives. We need this government, in the exact same breath as it passes this bill, to firmly commit to a domestic ocean governance framework that finally gives food production the exact same standing it currently gives conservation. My message to the government is incredibly simple: if this bill is to succeed, which it will—if it is to genuinely protect biodiversity while strengthening Australia's position globally—then the commercial fishing industry must be at the table from the very start, not as a token afterthought, not as a box-ticking consultation exercise, but as a respected, genuine partner, because, when you actually work with the industry, you get better policy, you get vastly better environmental outcomes and you get a much stronger, more resilient Australia.

I will hold this government to the absolute letter of this bill. This legislation is about the high seas. It is about areas beyond national jurisdiction. It must not be weaponised to lock up our local waters. I'm demanding that not a single additional hectare of Australian fishing ground be closed without a comprehensive, independent food security assessment. I'm demanding that no ground is closed without genuine consultation and I demand that no ground is closed without proper compensation for the operators whose businesses are destroyed by the stroke of a pen.

Let's protect our oceans but also let's back Port Lincoln. Let's passionately back Australian seafood. Let's support the families navigating tight margins and crippling fuel costs. And let's make absolutely sure that, in trying to lead the world with marine biodiversity, we do not accidentally or intentionally undermine the most sustainable, economically vital and proudly regional industries we already possess. We are watching closely, the regions are watching, Port Lincoln is watching, and we will not let this industry be quietly regulated out of existence.

See this speech in context