HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2021-06-22 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Aquaculture (Tourism Development) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 26 May 2021.)

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (12:46): I rise to make a contribution to the Aquaculture (Tourism Development) Amendment Bill. As we know, aquaculture is one of the cornerstones of South Australia's economy. The industry has been one of our large primary sectors here in South Australia. Deputy Speaker, you would know better than most what it means to have one of aquaculture's headquarters nationally and globally, as it has been recognised for many generations.

The direct output is estimated at over $300 million. What we see now is that 69 per cent of our output is generated in the regions of South Australia. Some of those most sought after and emerging products in the world are obviously southern bluefin tuna, Pacific oysters, yellow kingfish and greenlip abalone, just to name a few of our larger industries. We have seen some of those species farmed in South Australia in what we know as ranching with bluefin tuna, and yellowtail kingfish has been a relatively new industry within aquaculture but it is an industry that continues to blossom.

The mulloway and the mussel industries continue to grow. The abalone industry and our oyster industry have been industries that have been a benchmark for South Australia. Many would argue that going to a restaurant and having a delicacy—whether it is an oyster or some farmed abalone (as we all know, wild abalone is by far the abalone of choice), yabbies, marron, trout and Murray cod—gives people an experience that they cannot otherwise have unless they go out and catch wild stock. I have Murray cod farms in the electorate of Chaffey. They are emerging industries, breeding plate-size fish.

We have seen some of those other emerging industries, whether it be algae for fish food or kelp for some of the emerging industries to deal with climate change, particularly in stock and high-value pharmacy products. We are seeing now in the regions of South Australia the opportunity for aquaculture zone policies located within regional coastal areas of the state, including Limestone Coast, Yorke Peninsula, Eyre Peninsula and West Coast. The government has pledged support for sustainable growth that will grow resilient coastal communities.

Sir, as you well know, the opportunities for aquaculture are becoming more prevalent and more important, as we know that over time some of our wild stocks are under pressure. To satisfy the ongoing demand for seafood, and those delicious, delectable sea and freshwater products, we have to make sure that our government can stand side by side through the tough times and that we can regulate some of those industries to make sure that we have some of the beautiful products that come out of our waterways and oceans for generations.

We have pledged support for sustainable growth, and that will see the industry be more resilient and continue to grow. The amendments to the Aquaculture Act 2001 will allow a simplified assessment and approval process for building tourism structures related to aquaculture businesses. Tourism businesses will also benefit, and they draw tourists through fresh produce, whether it is oysters or tuna.

Some of those experiences are now becoming magnets for people right around the globe, and we know that COVID has put serious pressure on the viability of some of those businesses. Whether it is swimming with seals, experiencing dolphins or tuna farms, or popping a cork in an oyster bar out on an oyster lease—which is one of the great experiences and here in South Australia we have it right in our backyard—the aim is to grow this developing tourism sector and provide a one-stop shop approach to these businesses.

The bill will make it easy for aquaculture operators to obtain approvals for structures such as oyster tasting platforms, providing certainty for existing operators and encouraging further investment in aquaculture-related tourism. Businesses such as Oyster HQ are in your very backyard, sir, and whether it is in your electorate, next to your shack or just up the road from your farm, it is a great way to enjoy premium oysters that come out of those beautiful Eyre Peninsula communities.

My favourite, a Smoky Bay oyster, is always a unique experience, where people can experience freshly harvested oysters and refreshments on a platform in the water, which are providing a drawcard to attract visitors—at the moment, domestically, but I think into the future it will be a global drawcard. As it stands, the tourism platforms are not lawfully approved under the planning and development legislation, including oyster reefs. I think that is something that can be diversified in its current form.

We know that the government has committed significant money, and the Minister for Environment and Water has done an outstanding job in promoting and putting his support behind those limestone structures and then having them seeded with oysters, not only to give a habitat for fish and other marine creatures but also to provide a great experience for people who want to go out there and dive and who want to have a look at the man-made structure that attracts some of the great wonders of our ocean.

Again, the bill proposes to provide like-for-like approval powers to the minister responsible for the Aquaculture Act 2001 for aquaculture-related tourism structures where they are established inside an approved aquaculture zone, as exists for the aquaculture farming structures. Should the bill pass the parliament, the government will work with Oyster HQ and SA Premium Oysters to become compliant with new requirements providing them with the certainty operators have been seeking.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON (Ramsay) (12:53): I give notice that I am the lead speaker for the opposition. The Aquaculture (Tourism Development) Amendment Bill was introduced here in the House of Assembly on 26 May 2021. According to the government, it will streamline the application process for tourism developments within aquaculture zones, enabling the Minister for Primary Industries to approve development. At this point, he does not have that power. There are currently 12 aquaculture zones in South Australia: Ceduna, Streaky Bay, Whyalla, Coffin Bay, Port Lincoln, Port Augusta, Port Pirie, Whyalla, Kingscote, Kingston and Mount Gambier.

The minister, when making his second reading speech, said this will merely replicate existing requirements currently under the jurisdiction of other ministers. Currently, applicants have to apply for development consent under the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act of 2016 via the State Commission Assessment Panel (SCAP) and also to seek authority to construct on the seabed from the transport minister. The idea of this bill is to create a one-stop shop instead—to streamline the ability for these aquaculture tourism operations to go ahead.

I will indicate that, while we support the bill at this early stage, there are a number of queries in regard to the complexity of the environmental and planning protections that will be in place. We also want to know how this new one-stop shop will maintain those protections.

This is an incredibly important industry for us. If you look at aquaculture, we are quite a leader in this area, not just within Australia but across the world. Of course, often we look for investment opportunities for people to invest in aquaculture, and the South Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI) work closely to commercialise these opportunities around aquaculture and invite global interest in investing in these industries.

In South Australia, we have aquaculture in barramundi, tuna and finfish, abalone, mussels, oysters, yabbies and algae as well. So it is quite diverse, even though tuna, as I understand, is the largest proportion at 61 per cent, followed by finfish at 19 per cent. This is very premium, high-value often exported product. While this is an opportunity for tourism operations, we should proceed with caution, because this is an area that is incredibly important to the South Australian economy.

In fact, there is massive growth here. We just heard the member for Chaffey say it is about $300 million. In 2018-19, it was $211.7 million. That is the aquaculture part of our seafood product. It took 43 per cent of what we produce here in South Australia or what we catch, so it is a significant part of what we do in the fisheries area.

There is, though, a very new and emerging tourism opportunity here in South Australia. We know that this bill seeks to provide existing and new aquaculture operators the opportunity to apply through this one-stop shop to encompass tourism opportunities such as viewing and tasting platforms.

We understand that the intent of this legislation is that the primary purpose of the operation must be for farming and that the tourism element must only be to value-add to that operation. Given that that is the situation, that is something that must be maintained: that it value-adds but that the primary operation would be around aquaculture.

There are protections relating to the structures. We heard in the briefing that was given to the shadow minister that these structures must be demountables and that the licence is only for a 30-year lease. However, at this point we cannot see that that is actually defined within the bill, so we will have some questions about whether that is policy or how that will be clear.

At the moment, the feedback is that to apply for permission to add, say, a tasting platform to an aquaculture farm, applicants must currently apply for development consent under the Planning Development and Infrastructure Act via the SCAP and also to talk with PIRSA, which must consult with the EPA. We recognise it is a rather complex situation at the moment to achieve the authorisation to have these tourism operations.

Labor has reached out to different industry stakeholders and also people involved in conservation. They broadly support this bill, although there have been some concerns about ensuring that the EPA standards remain as stringent once the application is made to PIRSA alone.

The CHAIR: Member for Ramsay, before we go into those concerns I wonder whether you might like to seek leave to continue.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT