MARINE PARKS

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (14:45): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries questions concerning compensation for those affected by the government's marine parks legislation and regulations.

Leave granted.

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD: There has been considerable discussion in the media and elsewhere recently about who will actually be eligible for compensation by reason of the declaration of the marine parks that the government has recently put in regulation. It seems clear that some fishermen—or fisherpeople, perhaps—will have to cease their business due to the fishing restrictions that are imposed in some cases. Whilst the government argues that these are not extensive, obviously they do affect some individuals. It seems clear that some will have to close their businesses, in some cases, and this is a very significant impact on their livelihood, of course. A report on Adelaidenow recently stated:

Fisheries Minister Gail Gago said the Government would buy out affected businesses but would not reveal how much had been budgeted for compensation.

That was back in November of last year. So, some four months later, my questions for the minister are:

1. What is the budget allocation for compensation for those affected by marine parks? Has the minister decided on a figure yet and, if so, can she divulge that figure?

2. Will compensation be restricted to those in the fishing businesses directly or will it be extended to other businesses that will suffer loss of trade indirectly, such as tourism-related businesses?

3. On what basis will compensation be assessed, including where fishermen suffer loss of income and also no longer have any use of their plant or equipment as it is no longer required and no longer suitable as they are no longer fishing in that area?

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for State/Local Government Relations) (14:47): I thank the honourable member for his most important question. Indeed, the displaced effort from our marine parks and payment for that is quite central to the future of our marine parks and it is something that we have worked with the industry on to ensure that we are in agreement, as best we can be, about the process involved and the value of payments.

The government, obviously, is very committed to ensuring that marine parks help protect our marine environments, whilst also attempting to minimise the impact on the state's commercial fishing industry. To achieve this, the government has kept its commitment that marine parks would have less than 5 per cent economic impact on the state's fishing industry, measured as an impact on the statewide annual gross value of production (GDP). This was achieved by minimising the overlap of high conservation marine park zones with important fishing grounds.

The estimated impact on the final plans approved in November is 1.7 per cent of statewide commercial fishing. The final SARDI estimates of displaced commercial fishing activity took into account additional fishing industry supplied data and are available on the SARDI website. The government's long-standing position has been to utilise a number of steps in relation to displaced effort, and we have been very open and involved the industry in devising these steps: avoid displacement by pragmatic zoning; redistribute effort, only where possible, without impacting ecological or economic sustainability of the industry; and market-based buy-out of sufficient effort to avoid negative impacts on the fishery (in other words, voluntary acquisition).

We have made very clear that we would only use compulsory acquisition as a very last desperate measure. The assessment to date from our office, and also feedback from the industry, is that it is highly likely that we will be able to do this through a voluntary mechanism. There is nothing in the marketplace that indicates that we will not be able to do that.

So, in light of the need to consider future fisheries management—the commercial fisheries—the catch effort reduction program will be administered by PIRSA. Independent expertise in the fishing industry, fisheries management and fishery buyback programs have been engaged to contribute to the program design, and the fishing industry is currently being consulted on the draft plan before being finalised, so that plan has either just gone out or just about to go out, and again we will make sure the industry is happy with that.

The draft plan focuses on providing an opportunity to commercial fishers to offer licences and entitlements for surrender. Ex gratia payments will be made in consideration of those licences and entitlements surrendered. Licences and entitlements available for transfer through brokers on the open market we will also consider. In addition, the Marine Parks Act 2007 provides that, if the statutory rights of an authorisation holder are affected by the establishment of a marine park, the government must pay fair and reasonable compensation to the holder of the authorisation.

I look forward to continuing to work with commercial fishers as the marine park management plans are implemented to deliver effective conservation outcomes for South Australia and our marine environment, without undue impacts on our commercial fisheries, which are obviously very important to us as well. The amount we have budgeted for has not been disclosed, and we do not intend to disclose it as it is likely to prejudice the commercial negotiations we undertake with fishers. It certainly will be of a value that is fair and reasonable.