HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2012-03-15 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

AQUACULTURE (MISCELLANEOUS) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 15 February 2012.)

The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS (17:28): I rise on behalf of Liberal members to indicate that the opposition will be supporting this bill. Given the hour of the day, my comments will be relatively brief. However, there are a few things that I think I need to point out in indicating our support for this legislation. First, the aquaculture bill of the South Australian parliament is the only one of its kind in this nation; in fact, I am not sure how many others there are in the world, but certainly South Australia was a leader in establishing an act for the aquaculture industry.

It was an initiative of the previous Liberal Government and one that I think is relatively well received within the industry in that they have their own act and they are not included under the Fisheries Act. While that bill has been in operation for just over a decade, it is time for that to be reviewed. It is something that generally the industry is keen to have reviewed and it is keen to update this act. I should reiterate the fact that they are very pleased to have an act that does cover the industry that is, in effect, farming of fish rather than the industries that are wild-catch fishery activities.

The Liberal Party has consulted quite widely in relation to this bill, and in addition to other meetings certainly the shadow minister for agriculture, food and fisheries in another place, Mr Adrian Pederick, member for Hammond, and I spent some time on Eyre Peninsula at the end of January, meeting with recreational fishers with representatives of aquaculture industry groups and enterprises, as well as other representatives of sectors within the wild-catch fishery sector.

We did that in concert with the local member for Flinders, Mr Peter Treloar. Because of other duties I had to return from the West Coast after a couple of days, but I had been involved in discussions in the areas of Tumby Bay, Port Lincoln and surrounding areas. Following my return to Adelaide, the members for Flinders and Hammond continued to consult on the bill and other related fishing industry matters, including marine parks, as they continued up the West Coast to Ceduna.

Subsequently I returned to Eyre Peninsula last week and spent three days with the member for Flinders, Mr Peter Treloar, in the area of Ceduna out to Fowlers Bay and back to places like Streaky Bay, Haslam and Smoky Bay. Smoky Bay I remember well as an area which, a decade or so ago, was a place with a lot of aquaculture activity. A lot at that stage was being conducted in backyard facilities within the residential community that is Smoky Bay.

At that time the then minister, the Hon. Rob Kerin, was approached for assistance to try to organise the aquaculture industry to be relocated in that community away from the residential area, so the aquaculture park was established. I remember playing a part in my support role to the Hon. Mr Kerin in his capacity as the minister for regional development at the time. It is good today to see that activity housed in that section away from the rest of the Smoky Bay community.

The member for Flinders also arranged for me to visit the community of Haslam, which is a little bit closer to Streaky Bay than Smoky Bay. Haslam, I think, is an area where we would hope the government might look seriously at doing something similar to what the previous government did in Smoky Bay. We have a situation where aquaculture is growing significantly in Haslam. There are a number of those aquaculture businesses operating out of residential properties in that community, and a number of local people are hopeful that some land adjacent to that community can be ceded perhaps to the council by the Minister for Environment, who I think is the holder of that land, so that some sort of similar aquaculture park could be established in that community.

Before moving away from the establishment of the original act, I should say that there has been significant interest from other jurisdictions into the way in which South Australia has regulated and worked with its aquaculture sector. I was reminded by my colleague the Hon. Michelle Lensink of the interest from New Zealand members of parliament who came here and sought out the Hon. Caroline Schaefer, our former colleague and the former minister for agriculture, food and fisheries, or it might have been called primary industries at the time. Those people came here to see the way in which the aquaculture industry is formulated in this state, and they sought out our former colleague to seek her wisdom in relation to that.

Also, I can well remember, probably in late 1999, hosting some Victorian members of parliament who represented coastal seats. They were envious of the development that the aquaculture industry had made in this state. They were very keen to witness what was being done in South Australia through the then new Aquaculture Act, and I was pleased to host those members on Yorke Peninsula, where a number of aquaculture activities were getting up and going and doing very well, and also following that a number of enterprises on Eyre Peninsula.

While there is general support for the bill, there are a number of areas that some members of the community, some participants in aquaculture and other fishing matters, have raised with us. There is certainly some concern from recreational fishers about the need for waste to be cleaned up properly and not cause harm or inconvenience for other people who use our gulfs and oceans. Obviously, there is concern about the fact that fishing or aquaculture waste can attract sharks and other occupants of the ocean that are not always welcome when humans are around.

The Hon. J.M. Gazzola interjecting:

The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS: My colleague the Hon. Mr Gazzola is itching to respond, I think. He knows far more about these matters than I do. Certainly, other issues that were raised with us included the licence and lease fee cost increases for aquaculture operators in recent years. My request at this stage is that the minister might bring back in the committee stage some coverage of why the increases have been increased in the way they have for various aquaculture leaseholders. It would be helpful if she could do that so that we could then examine that further as the committee stage progresses.

I have had some examples given to me in recent times of the increases that have been charged to the leaseholders. They include one whose fees went up from $5,000 to $74,000 and another example where one went from $2,700 to $30,900 over a 12-month period. If the minister could bring back some explanation of the rationale and way in which those fees were determined, I would be grateful. I think that would help us in answering those queries but also putting it on record.

I think there is also a genuine wish among all the sectors—the recreational and professional wild catch fishing sectors and aquaculture operators—that disused aquaculture sites should be dismantled. There is a fund within some of the aquaculture sector, certainly within the oyster industry, that has been established to enable those disused and abandoned aquaculture sites to be dismantled by people who know what they are doing.

I have also been advised that in recent times PIRSA Fisheries has been establishing its own fund to do this. It charges fees to the participants to facilitate this fund. My query to the minister (and I would be grateful if she brings this back at the commencement of the committee stage or in her second reading summary) is why, when there is a fund established by the industry and at their own volition—and there is a track record of those participants doing the work, going out and cleaning up a site that has been disused—there would be a duplicate established by the department when that is already working very well.

With those few words, I once again indicate that the Liberal Party does support this bill. Once again, we are very proud on the Liberal Party side that we were the party that introduced the aquaculture act into this parliament. It is the only aquaculture act in Australia and, certainly to some extent, around the world. We are very proud of that act. We are also supportive of the ability to review and amend the act. With those words, I indicate again our support for the bill.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. J.M. Gazzola.

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