Boating Facilities Levy

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (12:21): I move:

That this house—

(a) acknowledges the importance of having safe and adequate boating facilities across South Australia for boat owners and fishers;

(b) condemns the state government for leaving $8.6 million of the boating facilities levy unspent in 2015-16; and

(c) calls on the state government to reduce the co-contribution to access funding from this collected levy to enable more money to be spent on improving boating facilities.

I am sure that many people in this chamber enjoy boating, fishing, being a tourist, pleasure craft and being a part of any form of waterway. It is just a great experience. Some people do it for pleasure, some people do it for an occupation and some people do it because they just like to do it.

I was almost born in a boat, grew up in a boat, competed in a boat and fished in boats. It is one of the great passions of life, as far as I am concerned, but this is an important motion for all boat owners and fishers. As I said, we do need safe boating facilities. They are vital anywhere, but more importantly here in South Australia, and it is not only for locals but for the visitors who use the coastal and inland waters. It really does support and create a massive economy, and it is important that is noted.

Under section 90 of the Harbors and Navigation Act 1993, the South Australian government collects the facilities levy from almost 60,000 boat registrations paid by recreational and specified commercial boaters. There are approximately 300 boat launching facilities across South Australia. There are more than 55,000 recreational vessels currently registered in South Australia and more than 140,000 licensed vessel operators. Close to 3,000 new boats were registered in the 2014-15 year. There are also about 305,000 South Australian boat licence holders.

Public boating facilities are generally owned and maintained by councils, although DPTI does own some of that infrastructure. The boating sector plays a particularly important role in tourism and outdoor recreation. South Australia's boating population is growing, and it is growing at a consistent rate, which I think is really important to note. Its consistent growth is about 3 per cent per annum, with more than 5,000 kilometres of coastline, vast gulfs, shallow inlets, inland rivers and waterways within South Australia to support that diverse range of recreational and commercial boating pursuits, including fishing, bluewater cruising, inshore water sports and, of course, the tourism industry that thrives when it comes to any form of boating activity.

The provision of high-quality infrastructure facilities and access for recreational boating enthusiasts is imperative for the state's tourism, attraction, environmental protection and wellbeing in coastal and river communities. I note that as of 30 June 2017 there was $7.95 million in the boating Facilities Fund. That is a slight decrease from 30 June 2016. However, that is nearly $8 million sitting in the Treasurer's bottom drawer. That is money that has been collected from the taxpayer. Essentially, the Treasurer is double-dipping on this money. Not only is he collecting the levy for a reason, for a purpose—to make boating better and safer, to attract an economy, to grow our economy in South Australia—but he is also using it for the budget bottom line. Again, it is the taxpayer being used for the benefit of the Treasurer.

By way of background on how the levy is collected, the facilities levy is collected on the registration, inspection or survey of vessels. Levy moneys are used for establishing and improving boating facilities on South Australia's coastal and inland waters, including boat ramps, temporary mooring facilities or wharves, channel improvements, aid to navigation and the 24/7 emergency VHF marine radio services. Local councils and large community organisations can apply for funding contributions from the fund towards eligible projects, provided that a commitment is given to accept an ongoing ownership, operation and maintenance of that facility.

Funding assistance is usually provided on a dollar-for-dollar basis. It is a 50 per cent co-contribution of that total project cost. The facilities levy currently ranges from $30 for recreational vessels, comprised of personal watercrafts, and normally increases for every extra metre of the boat length, so commercial vessels obviously pay the majority of the levy. What are we actually getting for that levy? As I say, we are not getting enough because it is the taxpayers who are paying another tax on their registration, and they are looking for the support that they need. They need safer boat ramps, they need safer navigational aids, they need better reasons to attract people and they need better reasons for people to go out and purchase a boat.

At some point in my life, I have used the majority of boat ramps in South Australia. With a safe boat ramp, it is easy to launch, it is easy to navigate and, particularly if you are coming in at night, it is safer. I have also launched on some very dangerous boat ramps, and Marion Bay and Elliston are great examples. Many of these boat ramps deal with ocean swell, they deal with rough water and they deal with almost no lighting, so it really does come down to putting people in danger for the sake of withholding the spending of that money.

What do we need to do? I know that in my electorate in the Riverland we have a high number of boating facilities. I acknowledge that there have been a number of local councils accessing that boating facilities money in recent times. It was great to see the Qualco Boat Ramp and the Rilli Reserve Boat Ramp completed and a long-awaited $1.2 million project at the Berri riverfront considered. That money gave us the opportunity to attract events, to attract people and to attract tourists. Once upon a time, when tourists came to the Riverland they would look at a boat ramp that was slippery, dangerous and people would not bring a boat.

They would either bring their caravan or they would just come and stay. But now, if they bring a boat they normally stay longer, they spend more money, they go to the tackle shop, they buy bait, they put beer or drinks in their esky and they might even put a meal in there and go up the river and stay there for the day. It is about stimulating the economy. It is a great way to build South Australia's economy. It is about bringing money from someone else's economy, interstate or out of town, into a local economy and helping that community improve their bottom line.

We look at other current projects, such as Milich's Landing in Loxton. I do note that since its inception, the Marine Facilities Fund has provided $24 million in contributions towards boating facilities around the state. It really is a great outcome, but we are not seeing enough of that money flowing into facilities to make them safer, to make boating easier and better, and to stimulate people to go out there and upgrade their boat, fill up their tacklebox with new tackle and buy more bait, and drive to a destination with their family. It is about stimulating our economy.

In relation to the $8 million sitting in the government coffers, there could be much more spent. We will only find that out if we elect a Liberal government, because we are going to reduce that co-contribution. We are going to make sure that that money is spent. We are going to give everyone an opportunity—every community, every council, every boating facility—to exacerbate what we would like to see. We would like to see safety concerns addressed and easier use for our boating facilities.

As I have said, if there is a reduced co-contribution incentive to spend that money, it is a great initiative and great outcome for an economy that is begging. It is biting on the heels of the South Australian economy to improve. We know that we have many thousands of recreational fishers and many boat owners. How do we encourage them to spend more money? It is about providing better facilities and making sure that boating is a better experience. Reducing that co-contribution will stimulate people to spend money. It will incentivise councils to put up more applications to improve facilities, and build new and safer facilities.

The District Council of Loxton Waikerie's Boating and Riverfront Facilities Plan 2015-2023 outlines priority projects. This is just one example of what could be achieved in South Australia. Some of these upgrades or projects—they are going to be done over a number of years; they are not just going to happen in one year—include the Daisy Bates Boat Ramp in Loxton, the Paisley Boat Ramp at Blanchetown, the Kingston on Murray Boat Ramp, the Waikerie Lions Park Boat Ramp, the Holder Boat Ramp at Waikerie, Loxton Aquatic Club Boat Ramp, the Waikerie Boat Ramp on Edgar Bartlett Drive, and the Ramco Boat Ramp. The riverfront projects include the Habel’s Bend Riverfront, and the Waikerie Riverfront at Peake Terrace.

We have seen a long overdue relocation of a caravan park at Waikerie. I congratulate the private investors and the council on making this happen. We are now looking for upgraded boat ramp facilities to complement that caravan park so that people will bring their boat, so that they will go to the tackle shop and buy bait, and spend money in the local shops. This will ensure the boat ramps are utilised, as well as the local shops. As indicated in the plan, the council simply does not have the annual budget for these upgrades.

This Liberal initiative will reduce the co-contribution and make it easier to achieve these facility upgrades. It is about incentivising. This is one example of a council area that can have that money stimulated and spent. With similar scenarios across the state, the projects are out there, but it is about incentivising councils and private enterprise to come in, put forward their money and make boating better and safer. The financial burden on the councils needs to be stimulated. We need to spend more of money that is collected.

Obviously, when the councils take over these facilities, they have to maintain and upgrade them. They have to keep the lights on. They have to make sure that the pontoons keep floating. They have to make sure that these facilities are attractions that bring people to the regions. That is why we see parking meters at boat ramps. That is why we see a co-contribution: to make sure these upgraded facilities are part of a great tourism experience.

They are part of helping the commercial sector and the commercial sector is chipping in. It is not about looking for free rides and it is not about looking for money for nothing. It is about everyone co-contributing and making sure that more people have this great experience. It is about making more people want to buy a boat and making more people get into a boat knowing that they are going to be able to catch a fish and will be able to experience what I have experienced all my life.

The member for Colton is an avid fisherman. I know he spends a lot of time on the beach and on the jetty, and I am sure he would never ever knock back any opportunity to get his backside into a boat. I know the member for Flinders is not an absolute fisherman, but he does enjoy a boating outing. The member for Mount Gambier himself has a passion and that is to be by the sea and to go out there. The member for Mount Gambier has a different experience. Whenever he goes out fishing, he brings back crayfish: when we go fishing, we bring back King George whiting. We all have these different experiences.

The strategic plan recommendations must be reviewed by government. I am calling on the government to look at reviewing the 50 per cent co-contribution, to spend that money wisely but to make sure that the money is spent, so that we can actually stimulate an economy and make sure that every South Australian has the opportunity to get out there, catch a fish, enjoy a ski in the river and enjoy a boating experience. I say to everyone in South Australia that there is no better experience than an experience on the water.

I have been an avid fisherman, an avid recreational diver and a recreational waterskier. I will not say that I have been a professional waterskier, but I had the honour of representing South Australia for 25 years. I had the exceptional experience of representing Australia for five years, and it was all about good boat ramps, good experience and being safe on the water. I commend this motion to the house and I look forward to contributions from other members.

The Hon. P. CAICA (Colton) (12:36): I do not want to be disrespectful to the member for Chaffey, but I could not quite comprehend the logic, if there was any, in his contribution. I will explain that a little bit further as we go along, particularly the areas where he talked about reducing the contribution and incentivisation and those types of things. To me, again without being disrespectful, it did not make any sense and I did not understand it. I might have to go back to the Hansard to find out what you were actually saying and, more importantly, what you were meaning by what it was you said.

There were many things I did agree with the member for Chaffey on; that is, boating makes a significant and important social and economic contribution to South Australia through both the commercial and recreational fishing industries. That of course includes tourism-related activities, just as the member for Chaffey was talking about. I would like a dollar for every time I have gone down to the bottom of Yorke Peninsula to catch salmon that you can buy for 99¢ from the fishmonger. I have used two tanks of petrol, I may have used a carton of beer and I have certainly bought food along the way, all these types of things. I have spent several hundred dollars along the way to catch not even an esky full of salmon that I could have bought for 99¢.

There are many people around South Australia who do that. Having said that, I do like the taste of fresh salmon. There is nothing wrong with them and anyone who does not like them does not really like fish, but it is about the experience, and that is what the member for Chaffey was speaking about—how this all contributes to the economic wellbeing of our state. That economic wellbeing can be further enhanced by making sure that we have fish there for people to catch and also that we have facilities and resources in place that enhance that experience and make it more popular for people to undertake those activities.

For many of our regional coastal townships, marine activities form the economic lifeblood of the community. I am very pleased of course that, contrary to those opposite who thought that the introduction of marine parks would destroy that, it has not at all and it is still booming and going very well. There are approximately 60,000 vessels currently registered in South Australia, and the number of people with boat licences is growing at a rate of over 3 per cent per annum. I am glad to say that I am a card-carrying member of that group that has a boat licence. The state government recognises the growing popularity of boating and continues to invest in new boating facilities and supports ongoing maintenance of marine assets, and it is critical that we do that.

As the member for Chaffey said, since 1996 the South Australian government has been collecting a facilities levy from boaters. The money is being used in partnership with councils who co-contribute—and I will focus on the co-contribution a little bit later—for the maintenance of existing facilities and providing, of course, for new boating facilities where that can be undertaken. This ongoing investment helps to improve boating safety, access ramps, wharves, navigational aids and enables communications through the marine radio network.

As was the case with the member for Chaffey, the government believes having safe and adequate boating facilities across South Australia for boat owners and fishers is a key and very important and critical component of having this industry in place. The Facilities Fund, established under the Harbors and Navigation Act 1993, raises approximately $3 million per year. Is that enough? Maybe there are other ways by which we can collect more money into the future, but I am not here to discuss that today, and I most certainly will not be here to discuss it this time next year because I will not be here.

The expenditure of the fund is administered by the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure. The fund's balance at the end of the 2015-16 financial year was $8.613 million. I think the point that the member for Chaffey was making was that that money ought to be expended and ought to go out as quickly as it comes in—I am paraphrasing here—but it certainly should be spent. In doing so that would reduce, if you like, the requirement or incentivise (I think were the words used) a greater level of money being sought. But I cannot see how that will occur if you reduce the onus on councils and others to co-contribute for the money that is being taken out of that particular fund, and $8.613 million is not a lot of money. I hardly think that hypothecated fund is underpinning and propping up the budget as was asserted by the member for Chaffey. That is not the case and it is quite laughable.

Mr Whetstone: Spend it then.

The Hon. P. CAICA: I will get to why it is there and how it will not be there for much longer. The funds expenditure is already committed. This is the point: the $8.613 million is already committed. I know, Deputy Speaker, that you might know that to be the case, but if you do not I certainly know the member for Schubert would because he knows everything. From the member for Chaffey's perspective, what I say is that money is already committed and that is why we are opposing this particular motion.

The funds expenditure is already committed to approved council boating infrastructure projects that are currently underway and a further commitment has been made for navigation aid upgrades over the 2017-18 and 2018-19 financial years. The perception that there are millions of dollars available for further applications for the fund is absolutely false.

Mr Whetstone: Rubbish.

The Hon. P. CAICA: He says, 'Rubbish.' I am telling the member for Chaffey and the chamber what the facts are, not the nonsensical if not illogical assertions that were made by the member for Chaffey about how we would incentivise and stimulate through a different form of use of this funding. It just did not make sense to me. As I said, I know Hansard are pretty good people in making us sound better than we really are when we speak, but I cannot see for the life of me how you are going to change this to be accurate on his occasion.

The perception that there are millions of dollars available for further applications of the fund, as I said, is false. Typically, the fund contributes 50 per cent towards the cost of boating infrastructure projects where the facility is owned, operated and maintained by councils or other statutory authorities. This has been the contribution recommended by the SA Boating Facilities Advisory Committee, who assess the applications on their merit and make funding recommendations to the minister. This particular committee is made of people involved within the boating industry and, I presume, those other people from regional South Australia who have their finger in the pie in this particular industry.

The level of co-contribution is not fixed by the legislation, but the SABFAC has historically determined that this level is the most appropriate, as it ensures that funding can be allocated to multiple locations and projects and that councils have maximum commitment to the ongoing operation and maintenance of the facility. As opposed to what was being said by the member for Chaffey, the fact is that when this money is used it is the incentive for councils to co-contribute to that. That is where the incentivisation comes from.

A strategic plan for boating infrastructure is being developed which defines priorities going forward and provides a framework for the SABFAC to assess future project funding applications. The member for Chaffey also rolled off, I do not know, it might have been 10, 15 or 20 boat ramps in his area that could do with some upgrades. Of course, it is a competitive process, and the money that is collected is not enough to address every boat ramp. It needs to be undertaken in such a way that those commitments to funding are prioritised, and prioritised by an organisation or a committee that recommends those to the minister.

The approved expenditure from the fund is at a rate of $1.05 million per year for contributions to boating infrastructure projects in addition to the navigation upgrades of $1.1 million per year to 2017-18. The 2017-18 state budget identifies a further $9.3 million over two years for marine facilities, including upgrades and repairs to a number of jetties. I am pleased that, after 16 years of trying to get a decent upgrade for the Henley Jetty, that will be done. In my retirement, I will be able to walk down the jetty with my crab nets on a jetty that is in far better condition than is at the moment. It is safe, but it could be improved.

I will get back to how I want to finish off, Deputy Speaker, if I can. The member for Chaffey says that he wants to see the co-contribution reduced, that we should be using the money that we already have and that by using the money that we already have that in some way is going to incentivise others to co-contribute, bearing in mind that, on one hand, he is talking about reducing the co-contribution. Again, it did not make sense, and the analysis of how to stimulate it did not and does not make sense to me. I do not understand it.

The best way is to continue to incentivise councils to make sure that the committee puts forward proper and appropriate projects to the minister for his consideration, which will then have money expended on those projects from the fund that is available to council on the understanding that they and their community, and indeed all South Australians, are getting a good outcome out of the work being done with the money that is co-contributed to by the council.

The debate might be: is there enough money being collected and are there other ways by which we can collect it? Indeed, if the member for Chaffey gets into government, he might use general revenue to do that. I do not know, but I think it is a debate worth having. I look forward, in my retirement, to following that debate as it unravels into the future. We will not be supporting this particular motion in its current form.

Mr BELL (Mount Gambier) (12:46): I rise to make a brief contribution in support of the member for Chaffey's motion that this house acknowledges the importance of having safe and adequate boating facilities across South Australia for boat owners and fishers. In the South-East, we have 165 vessels located along the Limestone Coast, so obviously boating is very important not only recreationally but also from a professional point of view.

I would like to commend the rock lobster fishermen, who contribute significantly to our region. The season began just a couple of weeks ago, on 1 October, and will stay open until the end of May. For the eighth consecutive year, the total allowable catch for the southern zone rock lobster fishery is set at 1,245 tonnes. The state rock lobster industry generates around $300 million in economic activity each year, directly supporting regional and coastal communities and generating about 1,300 full-time equivalent jobs.

I would like to highlight the impact of an upgraded boat ramp. About two years ago, the Port McDonnell boat ramp was upgraded with a contribution from state, federal and local government. It was an upgrade of around $2.3 million. Since that time, we have seen a 15 per cent growth in tourism in the area. A large part of that is in response to the boat ramp and the foreshore upgrades that were included in the upgrade. The boat ramp was widened to four lanes and was able to accommodate large commercial as well as recreational marine vessels, doubling its capacity as well as making it safer and quicker for boaties to get out.

There were two floating concrete pontoons added to the boat ramp to allow for the handling of heavy tonnage that comes in through the professional catches. As Port MacDonnell is a gateway to South Australia from a water point of view, as I said, it has seen an increase in the growth of usage, as well as tourism in the area. That is the type of thing that putting this fund to good use can actually do. It has a great spin-off in terms of income and revenue coming into regions.

I would like to encourage other areas, whether it is the Glenelg River, Beachport or Robe, to continually look at—they do have very good boat ramp facilities—improving those facilities for recreational use. I commend the member for Chaffey for bringing this motion to the house and fully support the notion that co-contributions and spends on these types of facilities have a positive impact on the local economy. With that, I conclude my remarks.

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (12:51): I would suspect very obviously that I have absolutely no hesitation in supporting the motion of the member for Chaffey. The fact is that my electorate has boundless kilometres of coastline, extending from Sellicks Beach right around the Fleurieu to Middleton, as well as 500 kilometres of coastline around Kangaroo Island, so boat ramps is a matter that is pretty dear to my heart and to my constituents' hearts.

Firstly, let me say that there has been substantial work done on the Victor Harbor boat ramp in particular. However, there has been a strong push for a number of years to have additional facilities put in adjacent to the causeway and, indeed, to have a marina. The late Mike Westley was a very strong advocate of this, and there are a number of people in Victor Harbor who are keen to have it for a variety of reasons, not the least being the sea rescue people.

On the island, there has been a demand for boat ramps for a long time. Emu Bay has been struggling for about 30 years. There is a push for the boat ramp not to be done by some who do not want more people using Emu Bay. In a nutshell, I am very supportive of the member's motion and urge the house to endorse it.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (12:52): I rise to support this motion by the member for Chaffey, which in the first part acknowledges the importance of having safe and adequate boating facilities across South Australia for boat owners and fishers but also condemns the state government for leaving $8.6 million of the boating facilities levy unspent in 2015-16. This has been an ongoing issue for years with boating facilities funds.

I obviously have many, many kilometres of river in my electorate, from Goolwa right through to Bow Hill. I have been given various reasons over time as to why these boating facilities funds are not spent. One reason, which went on for at least 18 months, was that they did not have gender equity on the board. Gender equity is fine, but to hold up boating facilities because they could not fill a board position, no matter who they needed on that board, I find ridiculous, to be frank. I find it ridiculous that that happened in that instance.

The member for Colton asserts that the money is allocated. Why was it not allocated in the year it should have been spent? That is the question. This is the frustration for the Boating Industry Association, for boaties right up and down the river and around the coast and for councils and communities: that these funds, which are taken from boat users, are locked up and not made available for facilities that are crucial so that people can enjoy their recreational pursuits along the river and out to sea. It is a real frustration that this money is not spent in a timely fashion. It is another excuse the government uses to store up their budget, having a bit more in the coffers. I certainly commend the member for Chaffey for bringing this motion to the house, and he has my full support.

Mr TRELOAR (Flinders) (12:55): I rise today to support the very excellent motion brought to us by the member for Chaffey:

That this house—

(a) acknowledges the importance of having safe and adequate boating facilities across South Australia for boat owners and fishers;

(b) condemns the state government for leaving $8.6 million of the boating facilities levy unspent in 2015-16; and

(c) calls on the state government to reduce the co-contribution to access funding from this collected levy to enable more money to be spent on improving boating facilities.

Each and every one of the contributors from this side of the house has talked about, amongst other things, the importance of boating in their particular electorates. There is no doubt that, on Eyre Peninsula and the West Coast, with that vast coastline—not too many inland waterways, member for Chaffey—it is a very popular pastime for local residents to go to the beach and fish. Often a family has a shack at whichever bay is closest, and there are also many thousands of visitors who come to Eyre Peninsula each and every year, often with their boats and, if not, then at the very least to do some fishing.

The facilities that we are able to provide for these visitors and regular fishers are so critical to their experience. It does not need to be too difficult. We are very conscious of making tourism the third spoke in a very important regional economy. Primarily, we produce agricultural products and seafood products, but that tourism factor is one that we can really work on and build on. We need to make it a very attractive and user-friendly situation.

The state government collects boating facilities funds on top of every registration, inspection or survey of vessels for more than 55,000 recreational boating vessels across South Australia, which use approximately 300 boat launching facilities in South Australia. The facilities fund is used for establishing and improving boating facilities in South Australia's coastal and inland waters, including boat ramps, temporary mooring facilities or wharves, channel improvements, aids to navigation and 24/7 emergency VHF marine radio services. The facilities funds also contribute to the 277,000 or thereabouts recreational fishers in this state, many of whom fish from jetties or boats.

That is a very large number of recreational fishers. It is always hard to put an exact number on it. I know there are at least three in this chamber at the moment. It is a very important part of our leisure time in South Australia. I would just like to talk briefly in the remaining moments about another issue that is related, and that is in Port Lincoln where a group known as the Tacoma Preservation Society have been looking for a long time to secure a permanent mooring or berth for the Tacoma. The Tacoma is an iconic vessel in Port Lincoln and within the tuna fishing industry because it was really from that vessel that the tuna industry was founded out of Port Lincoln.

It was built in Port Fairy in Victoria and sailed by the Haldane family across to Port Lincoln because they heard that there were fish at Port Lincoln. The rest is history, as they say. They went fishing from the Tacoma for bluefin tuna and, amongst other things, went prawning and were involved with some other fishing along the way. The industry we see today is very much a result of the initial efforts of the Haldane family and the vessel they fished from. I am a great supporter of local history and recognise that this is a very important vessel. I think it is a priority to find a permanent home for this wonderful wooden boat.

We have not managed to do that yet, but I suspect that we will eventually. Of course, there are a lot of parties involved in any discussion. It is not always easy to reach a resolution, but with so much money sitting in the boating levies fund—I think we are up to about $8.6 million, and $3 million is collected annually—there is absolutely no point in the government continuing to hoard this money just for the sake of having funding sit idle in a bank. My suggestion is that it not just be used for jetties, boat ramps and all those things, which are very important, but also just occasionally there is another very important use for some of this money as well.

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (12:59): In closing, I thank all the speakers for their contribution to this motion. I would like to update the member for Colton. I think he has had his head in the bait bucket for too long, because the boating levy has not been spent. In 2014-15, there was $6 million; in 2015-16, there was $8.6 million; and in 2016-17, there was $7.9 million. It is funny how the government could be spending that money in the 2017-18 year, funny about an election coming up.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: You need to wrap up your remarks.

Mr WHETSTONE: The Liberal Party policy minimalises the co-contribution to a maximum of 20 per cent to assist councils—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is 1 o'clock. You need to wrap them up.

Mr WHETSTONE: —and I thank everyone and commend the motion to the house.

Motion negatived.

Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00.