Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources) Share this | Hansard source

Having listened to the contribution opposite, you could be excused for thinking that we are actually removing something. The truth—and what the Australian public need to know—is that we are, in fact, not removing anything at all, because there is absolutely nothing in place. There are no protections in place.

Senator Whish-Wilson interjecting—

I take the interjection from Senator Whish-Wilson, and I acknowledge his pragmatic approach to this, because he actually said in Friday's paper that, whilst he thought that the marine protections that were being put forward by the government with this suite of marine management plans were woefully inadequate, they are better than nothing—because we have got nothing at the moment. So I acknowledge that, Senator Whish-Wilson. To say that we're removing the largest amount of marine parks ever in the history of the universe is once again not true. You can't remove nothing. There is nothing in place. We have no protections in place, and it would be fair for those opposite to actually be honest about that. To also come in here and say that there has not been adequate opportunity for consultation with the crossbench is really quite ridiculous. Notice was given last Tuesday for this motion to be moved on the next sitting day. That was a week ago. So, one week ago, the Labor Party indicated that they were intending to move the motion the following day. It was then postponed, postponed, postponed and postponed. So I would suggest that the reason that you have said that you didn't have adequate time to come in here and debate this with the people who are going to make the decision today is that you probably just thought you had the numbers and now maybe you don't. We certainly hope you don't.

The campaign that's been waged in this place has been about misinformation and scaremongering. We're not rolling anything back; there's nothing to roll back. There are no supertrawlers coming, and the opposition know full well that there are no supertrawlers coming. There are no new boats and no foreign fishing boats coming in—and they know that.

Senator Pratt interjecting—

You know that this has absolutely nothing to do with fisheries management practices in relation to foreign fishing boats. This is about a set of protections for management plans for the marine reserves that have been already been gazetted. It has nothing to do with the boats that possibly can fish in Australian waters. You know that there are no proposals for foreign fishing boats or large factory fishing boats to come into Australian waters. So I don't know why you continue to scaremonger about this.

One of the most damaging things about this debate, and the scaremongering and the lies that are being spread out there in the wider community, is that it damages our international reputation. Quite rightly, we're very proud in Australia of our international reputation for fisheries management. To have the international media and the international social media—that anybody can get their hands on—believe that somehow we are damaging something when we are not, that we are rolling back protections that don't even exist and that we are damaging market access for our wonderful clean, green seafood that we are able to catch in Australian waters, damages our environmental credentials for absolutely no reason.

So what is the debate all about? This debate about marine parks is pretty simple. It's about a shared resource; our oceans are a shared resource. They do not belong to any one group, although you'd be excused for thinking otherwise. And it's also about a balanced approach: considering the needs and accommodating the needs of all of the users of our marine environment. It's about striking a balance between environmental concerns, social concerns, cultural concerns and economic concerns. And it's also about the right of Australians to eat seafood. It's about the opportunity for people who live in Alice Springs, who can't actually go fishing, to be able to eat Australian seafood. It's also about encouraging Australians to get out and go fishing. It's actually about delivering good results for Australians.

When it comes to marine parks, Labor talk big about what they're going to do, but it's coalition governments that deliver. Let me remind the chamber that, in 1998, it was actually John Howard who committed to the establishment of a national representative system of marine protected areas in the context of oceans policy. This led to the South-east Commonwealth Marine Reserves Network in 2000. Today, it is fitting that it is we in this chamber who are seeking to introduce a suite of management plans for marine reserves in Australia. It is part of our heritage that we deliver on things. We don't rush off into ideological positions that completely and utterly destroy the opportunity of all Australians to enjoy our wonderful marine environment in a sustainable and sensible way.

The other thing is that, if we are successful in bringing in these management plans, 36 per cent of our marine waters will be under marine park protections of one sort or another. This is more than three times—in fact, 3½ times—the international benchmark of 10 per cent, which was set and is known as the Aceh target. Once again, we start off with the position of those opposite, where ideology beats the science; where politics beats the evidence; where inner-city concerns beat regional communities; and where unaccountable foreign-funded ENGOs are taken notice of before we listen to the Australian people. All I can say is that we, as a government, have made a very clear decision and a clear determination that we are going to base what we do on science and on the interests of the Australian public—the people who actually own our marine environment, our oceans and the fish that swim in it. We are not going to be held to ransom by the wants of some ENGO from the Northern Hemisphere.

What we want to know is: why is Labor's plan all about fawning to these Northern Hemisphere ENGOs and the inner-city greenies, who, I'm sure, don't even know where the Coral Sea is, let alone have ever been there? We do know that the whole campaign has been run on fake news. The email campaigns that we've seen from these ENGOs, like the Australian Marine Conservation Society and Save Our Marine Life, have been unbelievable. To call them rank and tawdry xenophobic dog-whistling would be about the most accurate way of describing them.

Let me set the record straight. No solely managed fisheries in the Australian Commonwealth are subject to overfishing, nor have they been for the last five years. The total allowable catches for all Commonwealth fish stocks are set at very conservative, ecologically sustainable levels. Any vessel operating in Australian waters must follow Commonwealth fishery rules and regulations. There are absolutely no exceptions to that whatsoever. No fishing vessel is allowed to fish in declared non-take protected marine areas or green zones, and there are no approvals in place for any foreign fishing vessels to operate in Commonwealth waters. Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of the campaign run by ENGOs is the damage, as I said, that it's done to our international reputation. But I've got a message: I think the people of Australia will wake up tomorrow morning and realise that it is fake news and that we are putting in place protections for our marine environment that will make sure that we have a sustainable environment. We protect our marine environment, but we don't lock people out of doing things in that marine environment, unless there's a scientific reason to do so.

The coalition government's approach is to strike a balance between protecting the marine environment and the economic interests of our current and future generations. It's based on evidence and independent science; it's based on exhaustive consultation with all legitimate stakeholders. Our world-class management of Commonwealth fisheries has been complimented: we are recognised internationally as the best fisheries managers in the world. I hope you won't disagree with that. It also seeks to minimise the economic impact on our professional fishers, because we believe Australians have the right to eat Australian seafood. It retains access for recreational fishers to 97 per cent of the waters within 100 kilometres of the coastline, which is where most people fish. And it will cost taxpayers significantly less than the colouring-in competition that was undertaken by those opposite when they had the pens in their hands.

Our message to the Australian community is quite simple. We want all Australians to be able to enjoy their oceans. We support the right of every Australian to drop a line over the side of their boat, no matter how far out to sea they go. We support our sustainable fishing and aquaculture industries and the thousands and thousands of jobs they provide—

Senator Pratt interjecting—

And most of them are in regional areas, Senator Pratt—something that you probably wouldn't know about. We want all Australians to be able to enjoy safe, sustainably harvested, fresh, healthy Australian seafood. We have actually listened to the Australian people first and foremost, and not to foreign-funded ENGOs who have no skin in the Australian game. We support and trust the Australian public to continue to look after their marine environment rather than looking, with no scientifically proven reason, to stop them from enjoying that environment.

What really annoys Labor is that the coalition plans actually protect more environmental features than the plans that they put forward. We are intending to protect 509 conservation features, including reefs, seamounts and canyons. Three hundred and forty-four sites have received the highest levels of protection, compared with their 331. We have green zones that are more than 20 times the size of Kakadu, or half the size of New South Wales. We have protected sea floor habitats totalling almost the entire size of Victoria. We have also protected iconic sites of ecological significance such as Ningaloo, Osprey Reef, Geographe Bay, Bremer Bay canyon and Kangaroo Island, to name but a few.

But we have also enabled our recreational fishers—those five million Aussies who like to go fishing—to enjoy what in some cases might be a once-in-a-lifetime fishing opportunity in the Coral Sea. We've protected their ability to do that. We've given them a chance to fish at some of the most iconic reefs, such as Kenn Reef, Bougainville Reef, Marion Reef and Wreck Reef—reefs that have had no damage whatsoever done to them by fishing in the past. We're saying that the limited type of fishing that occurs is going to cause no damage and we think that Australians should be allowed to continue their responsible fishing behaviour.

We also want to protect our professional fishers such as Walker Seafoods, who are based out of Mooloolaba. We want them to be able to continue to fish their Marine Stewardship Council certified tuna, because they've spent the money to get themselves certified by an internationally recognised organisation and they've got access to markets around the world because they are sustainable. We want them to continue to be able to fish. We want our northern prawn fishers to continue to supply us with beautiful banana prawns, and we want Australians to continue to enjoy their oceans and not be locked out of them.

It's not just me who wants this. Importantly, the relentless campaign by Labor has actually galvanised the recreational fishing industry and the professional fishing industry as one behind the plans that are being proposed. Our recreational and professional fishers strongly support the coalition government's management plans for marine parks. They include the Australian Fishing Trade Association, the Game Fishing Association of Australia, the Australian Recreational Fishing Foundation, Seafood Industry Australia, the Northern Territory Seafood Council, the Queensland Seafood Industry Association and the Northern Prawn Fishery Industry association, just to name a few. I thank our commercial and professional fishers for the support and the valuable advice that they have given the coalition government over the last three years as we've developed these plans and come along this journey.

Australian waters belong to Australian people—not to the Labor Party, not to the Greens, not to foreign-funded ENGOs, but to all Australians. Our oceans are a shared resource, another concept that seems to be lost on those opposite. Our oceans are for the enjoyment and the benefit of all Australians. With the coalition's marine parks and our world-class fisheries management, the Coral Sea will continue to be the 'Serengeti of the seas' and will still be able to be enjoyed by Australians. The coalition management plans deliver a balanced and scientific evidence based approach to oceans protection. They enable tourism and well-managed fishing activities. They support local communities, they support local jobs and they support local economies.

I also put on the record my thanks to the independent panel of Colin Buxton, Bob Beeton and Peter Cochrane, who worked tirelessly to develop the background that supported the decision, and the consultation that was undertaken by the Director of National Parks. I acknowledge the extraordinarily high level of work undertaken by her and her consultation process with her team.

So I stand here today to say that I am very proud of this set of very balanced plans that we are hoping to put in place to protect our marine environment into the future. I reject the comments that were made by those opposite that we are winding anything back. We are not. We are putting the plans in place to protect, for the first time, our marine environment. So I stand here to oppose your disallowance motion, because I believe that the plans that we have before us strike the right balance for all Australians.