Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am delighted to report to the Senate that I am in no way a risk to the sustainability of Australia's fish stocks, given the fact that despite many efforts to the contrary I have never, ever been able to catch an edible fish in my entire life. So I have a very, very keen interest in this subject, being a passionate consumer of fish. I rise, as I know others do—it is tremendous in this place to actually have a high degree of consensus—to speak on an issue that is of interest to all of us, and that is the accuracy of labelling and the giving of an opportunity for consumers to know where their product came from.

As Senator Xenophon and the range of others who are co-sponsors have said, this is an area of great interest. We have had the RRAT references committee chaired by Senator Sterle and the RRAT legislative committee chaired by Senator Heffernan, which have spoken in favour in this area. One of the points I do wish to clarify when people speak about the exemptions that restaurants, bars, cafes and hotels share at the moment with regard to food labelling is that exemption is not confined to fish. It is confined to any product or any produce, be it beef, be it lamb or be it any other product. Let us just be clear that we are not at the moment in a situation in which fish is the only accepted product.

What we do have at this time, as pointed out by the National Seafood Industry Alliance in a very well-structured campaign, is a circumstance in which if somebody goes into a shop to purchase fish, then they do know the origin of the fish under current legislation and regulation around Australia. There is a sign there saying, 'Is this a product of Australia, Thailand, Vietnam, New Zealand or wherever it is?' Then when they go into a restaurant, bar, hotel or fish and chip shop and they say to the person, 'Is this is a product of Australia?' there is no way for that waiter or person who is providing that service to know. This is at the core of the position being put forward by Senator Xenophon and other colleagues to overcome and to change. The other point that is so relevant in this discussion is that we already have a circumstance in the Northern Territory where in the retail space—in the food consumption, at the point where the product is about to be presented to the customer—the customer in the Northern Territory does have that opportunity. That is because we know the origin of the product—be it Australian or be it whatever—is there for all to see.

There have been allegations saying that this is trying to be protectionist about the Australian product. No, it is not. It is one of the distressing pieces of information to me, particularly since we are in the largest island continent on the earth, that 70 per cent by volume or by weight of our fish is actually imported. That is not 70 per cent by value; 70 per cent by weight or by volume is actually imported. I do not believe this measure is directed at some form of Australian protectionism. I think it is more directed at giving the Australian consumer the opportunity of knowing where the product came from. If they choose to actually select the Australian product, there may be all sorts of very good reasons for that.

I do want to, if I may, divert the attention for one moment whilst relevant. That is to speak to the excellence of the management of Australian fisheries. You may ask the question, 'Why is it that 70 per cent of our fish is imported? Is it because of poor management of the Australian fisheries?' I for one want to make the point very, very strongly that it is not. As you know, there is in existence internationally the Marine Stewardship Council. I am a Western Australian. I know Senator Sterle and Senator Siewert finds themselves in the same position and, from his origins, no doubt Senator Whish-Wilson as well—we will drag you into the camp for a moment also! The first fishery in the world to so be awarded by the Marine Stewardship Council for its sustainability was the West Coast Rock Lobster Fishery. It continues to this day to enjoy that accolade by the Marine Stewardship Council for its certification as a sustainable fishery.

Whilst today is not the time to be speaking more about that, I think it is relevant to actually draw to the attention of people interested in this subject that this Australian fishery is a very, very well-managed fishery. I understand, and Senator Colbeck will no doubt correct me if I am wrong, that the certification by the Marine Stewardship Council has now been extended beyond the West Coast Rock Lobster Fishery to a pelagic fishery and even beyond. I think it is important that anyone interested in this subject is aware that this Australian fishery is in very, very good hands. It is very well managed. In fact, the actual take of fish for commercial and recreational purposes is a very small proportion of what is accurately estimated to be the actual stock size.

Like Senator Xenophon, I want to encourage others to use this opportunity to speak, so I will not use all of my time, except to remind people here in the chamber that the outcome that we are all trying to achieve here today will only happen as a result of a fully consultative process. That consultative process requires the cooperation of the state and territory governments and New Zealand. As we move, hopefully, towards a resolution in August, where we are able to vote on this, I for one hope that we will be able to take on board all of those inclusions that should come into play for a successful resolution.

Following the hepatitis A outbreak earlier this year, the Prime Minister formed a working group of ministers because of the high level of concern and the relevance to human health. That working group of ministers includes the Minister for Industry and Science, Ian Macfarlane; the Minister for Agriculture, Barnaby Joyce, the Minister for Trade and Investment, Andrew Robb; the Minister for Small Business, Bruce Billson; and the person who has got carriage in this place of this area, the Assistant Minister for Health, Senator Nash. I trust there will be a high degree of cooperation by all of us so that we can take on board and include the outcomes of that working group and actually progress this.

But I want to make the point that the government is now taking action and it does hope to pass the legislation, to give producers time to adjust and to implement the new country-of-origin labelling laws. If there are objections by retailers in the states of Australia, we need only direct them towards the experiences in the Northern Territory, which tend to have been positive. But I again want to remind everybody in this chamber that it will only take place through a consultative process with the states, territories and New Zealand. Let us be clear on what Food Standards Australia New Zealand can and cannot do. FSANZ cannot approve standards. They can only provide advice and they can only report on existing standards. So, before we go to groups like this to set them tasks, let us be clear on what they are able to achieve and not able to achieve. At the end of the day, to give full effect to this, it is going to require a high degree of cooperation from the states. Federally, we can pass the legislation but then all we can really do is to say, 'We think this is critically important and, constitutionally, you at state level should play your role in making sure this comes to pass.'

For the Western Australian fishing and aquaculture industries, seafood country-of-origin labelling as it applies to restaurants and other retail food outlets, such as fish-and-chip shops, hotels et cetera, is eagerly awaited and anticipated. I think Senator Sterle would agree, as others would from their home states, that we are very proud of our product. We are very proud of the Australian product. We are very proud of the way in which it is harvested and the sustainability of the fishery. This is something that we should be proud of and should reflect.

I will conclude my comments by moving away from the Australian consumer for a moment and talking about the inbound consumer, the tourist coming into Australia. When we as Australians go to countries like France, Italy and others, and to Asian countries to our north, we have a great expectation of actually sampling the local fare. My wife is an example when it comes to France, particularly. She has a passion to eat locally, to enjoy the local produce around us. That is probably one of her greatest expectations and probably one of the greatest inhibitions on my wallet!

Nevertheless, if we then translate that to the incoming or inbound visitor to Australia, one can only imagine, using barramundi as one illustration, that their expectation and hope to use and consume the Australian product would be as high as ours.

So, I say to Senator Xenophon and to his co-movers in this area that there is a great expectation. But let us work together, let us make sure that we do comply with all the requirements in terms of the consultation process. Let us reach agreement in this place so that we can send a message loudly to the states and territories that this is where we stand federally and this is where we encourage them at their state jurisdictional levels to actually proceed.