MARINE PARKS

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (14:35): My question is to the Minister for Environment and Conservation. In the event that the government implements the Marine Park 6 boundaries, as proposed in January 2009, or something similar, does it anticipate compensating commercial fishermen for the loss of a large proportion of their traditional fishing grounds?

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Minister for Environment and Conservation, Minister for Early Childhood Development, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation, Minister Assisting the Premier in Cabinet Business and Public Sector Management) (14:35): The question really demonstrates the member's complete lack of understanding of the marine park process because he suggests that the declaration of the boundaries in the manner suggested has some impact on fishing. Of course, the declaration of the boundaries does not have any effect on anyone's rights to do anything.

The zoning process, which will be undertaken over the next couple of years in detailed consultation with the affected activities, will grapple with that question. Of course, the 100 per cent result, if we can achieve it, is to have no effect on any industry, and that is certainly our desire. We have given substantial commitments to all the industries affected that, as far as possible, their activities will not be affected by the marine parks process.

For example, with respect to all aquaculture zones, which provide for existing and future aquaculture activity, it has been made clear that no sanctuary zones, which would have the effect of precluding those activities, will be in any of those areas. In relation to the wild catch fisheries, we have also given commitments that we will try to zone in a fashion that will cause no or minimal effect in relation to their industries.

It is not in our interest to carry out a zoning process that has any effect on industry. We want to make sure that we have not only a thriving recreational sector, which has its own economic benefits, but also a thriving commercial fishing sector because, as we heard earlier from the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, this is a very important industry for our state.

We need to ensure that we have not only a thriving fishing industry that creates prosperity for future generations but also a marine environment that is capable of providing enjoyment for future generations. One should not underestimate the economic importance of protecting our marine habitat, as our marine environment, of course, is a source of tourism and an opportunity to create prosperity for those regional communities the member says he is concerned about.

Within the legislation, we included the capacity to compensate any fishing interest that has been affected or displaced effort that has occurred as a consequence of the marine park process; we hope not to have to use it, but it sits there as a commitment to the commercial fishing interests that they will be compensated should that occur. However, our objective is to make sure that we carry out the zoning process in a way that avoids that effect.

To assist those opposite to understand the marine park process, it is not about having large areas that exclude all activities. The size of a marine park is deliberately designed so that we can protect the marine environment in a way that does not necessarily involve the preclusion of people fishing in the whole marine park. They are multi-use marine parks, and the lion's share of the marine parks will, in fact, be habitat protection, which will have no implications for the lion's share of any fishing.

So, it is a complete misunderstanding and a misrepresentation by those opposite to suggest that the marine park process is damaging to the vital interests of the commercial or recreational fishing sector.