MARINE PARKS

Mr TRELOAR (Flinders) (14:37): My question today is to the Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, who is having a busy day, indeed. Minister, will the reduced fishing activity on the state's West Coast, as a result of the government's marine parks sanctuary zones, impact on the government's $1.5 million commitment to a fish unloading facility at Thevenard?

The Hon. P. CAICA (Colton—Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation) (14:37): This question was raised with me in the street last week by a representative of the fishing industry. I thank the member for his question because he is a decent bloke.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P. CAICA: The government has naturally considered a range of options in relation to the implementation of the marine parks. After all, this is one of the most significant conservation programs ever undertaken in this state. We have always been committed to achieving a balanced outcome that increases protection to the marine environment, whilst also ensuring people's lifestyles and livelihoods are protected, and part and parcel of that are the arrangements that have been entered into across government to make sure that the pragmatic approach to sanctuary zoning is done in such a way that it not only minimises impact on current activity but it takes into account prospective growth in a variety of areas.

I am not aware that the government has made a $1.5 million commitment, and I am told that the commonwealth may have been looking at some aspects of Thevenard and the use of the port there, but from the state government's perspective, I am advised that there has been no commitment from the state government for such a port.

Notwithstanding that, what we have done—and the information that we have been able to gather from transport, from aquaculture, and from other areas of government operations—is to make sure that when we do zone these areas, we take into account current activities and potential future activities to zone in such a way that we do not minimise the potential for ongoing economic growth. That is why I said that, on all occasions, we have looked at pursuing what would be a balanced outcome that increases the protection of the marine environment while still taking into account those particular matters. Madam Speaker, whilst I have got the opportunity, when we talk about marine parks—

Mr Williams interjecting:

The Hon. P. CAICA: Well, I can answer your question. Ask it again. Go on, ask it again.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P. CAICA: I refer back to a press release that was promulgated on 6  December 2002—

Mr PENGILLY: Point of order, ma'am. The point of order is relevance. The question was directly related to the $1.5 million for the fish unloading.

The SPEAKER: Member for Finniss, we do not know what he is going to say, so I do not think that your point of order is relevant yet—unless you can read his mind. Minister.

The Hon. P. CAICA: And when talking about marine parks, the then environment minister, the honourable member for Davenport, said:

The government has taken the view that this is an issue which must be addressed now before it is too late and future generations are left with marine issues which will be much more difficult to fix than to prevent.

The Hon. J.D. Hill: And that's what you're finding.

The Hon. P. CAICA: That's right. In addition to that, too, Madam Speaker, the then Liberal government's position on marine parks was:

MPAs [that is, Marine Protected Areas] in South Australia will be multiple use—

similar to what I said to my good friend the member for Flinders—

but will have some high-core protection areas that may exclude some activities. The—

Mr WILLIAMS: Point of order.

The SPEAKER: Order! You are talking about relevance, I presume?

Mr WILLIAMS: Yes.

The SPEAKER: I was actually thinking about the question. Part of the question was: reduce fishing activity in marine parks, etc. Minister, I would ask you to wind up your answer. We only have a few seconds left.

The Hon. P. CAICA: Madam Speaker, I will point out where this is relevant. The MPAs under the Liberal vision would be multiple use but will have some high-core protection areas that may exclude some activities. The impacts of this will be considered on a case-by-case basis, but also, they say, the management plan—

Mr WILLIAMS: Point of order. Surely he has had enough leeway to wind up his answer in his limited time?

The SPEAKER: Thank you. The wording in the question was broad enough to encompass it. Minister, have you finished?

The Hon. P. CAICA: Yes, I have.

The SPEAKER: Thank you. I am glad you have finished. The member for Adelaide.