<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2009-07-16" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>51</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>3</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="3565" />
  <endPage num="3644" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Marine Parks</name>
      <page num="3602" />
      <text id="20090716d5916fb990b1427580000506">
        <heading>MARINE PARKS</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="3120" kind="question">
        <name>Mr PEDERICK</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Hammond</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2009-07-16">
            <name>MARINE PARKS</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2009-07-16T14:35:00" />
        <text id="20090716d5916fb990b1427580000507">
          <timeStamp time="2009-07-16T14:35:00" />
          <by role="member" id="3120">Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (14:35):</by>  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?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Cheltenham</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Environment and Conservation</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Early Childhood Development</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister Assisting the Premier in Cabinet Business and Public Sector Management</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2009-07-16">
            <name>MARINE PARKS</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2009-07-16T14:35:00" />
        <text id="20090716d5916fb990b1427580000508">
          <timeStamp time="2009-07-16T14:35:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1812">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):</by>  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.</text>
        <text id="20090716d5916fb990b1427580000509">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.</text>
        <text id="20090716d5916fb990b1427580000510">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.</text>
        <text id="20090716d5916fb990b1427580000511">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.</text>
        <text id="20090716d5916fb990b1427580000512">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.</text>
        <text id="20090716d5916fb990b1427580000513">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.</text>
        <text id="20090716d5916fb990b1427580000514">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.</text>
        <text id="20090716d5916fb990b1427580000515">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.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>