Legislative Council - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2025-10-28 Daily Xml

Contents

Algal Bloom

The Hon. F. PANGALLO (15:18): My question is to the Minister for Primary Industries on the topic of the algal bloom. Has the government assessed the potential economic and social impacts that a 50 per cent reduction in bag limits for key species may have on regional tourism and related industries, including charter boat operators and accommodation providers? Specifically, has any modelling been undertaken to anticipate potential cancellations or declines in bookings?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries) (15:19): I thank the honourable member for his question. The impacts on coastal communities are a key part of our government's response to the algal bloom. In terms of the specific arrangements in regard to fishing, both commercial fishing and recreational fishing, we have very much been conscious of how to continue to allow recreational fishing at appropriate levels so that regional communities, particularly those coastal communities that rely on fishing in a significant way for their tourism, can continue.

In terms of the 50 per cent reduction to four species in the Spencer Gulf, we have enabled recreational fishing to continue. Of course those who like to fish for those particular four species are disappointed. I have also seen on social media recreational fishers who have said that their experience is about the experience on the water, going out for a day's fishing, and that they personally, those individuals, won't be impacted by the reductions in the bag and boat limits.

Those individuals say that it is about the experience of being on the water and that they very rarely catch their bag limit. I certainly know that there are a lot of recreational fishers—perhaps some in this chamber—who are very unlikely to catch a fish, however hard they try, and therefore that they won't be affected. On the other hand, of course, there are avid fishers who will very frequently reach their bag or boat limit, and they are understandably very disappointed.

We need to try to get the balance right, and I have said in many public forums and media that it's not an easy balance to achieve. We want to have sustainable fisheries, and that is one thing that all the fishers across the state, whether they are recreational, commercial, charter boat or traditional, are keen to see, that we have sustainable fisheries going forward. The harmful algal bloom is unprecedented. We are still understanding its impacts, which are changing all the time, and so therefore we will make the best decisions we can based on the data that we have.

It's also an interesting question in terms of its implications from those opposite, given that last Friday the Leader of the Opposition in this place said that this all should have been done sooner. 'It should have been done sooner,' they said. I would ask, 'What modelling did they do?'

The Hon. N.J. Centofanti interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: What modelling had those opposite done to say that this all should have been done sooner? What stock assessments?

The Hon. N.J. Centofanti interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: What evidence? What data were they relying on? It would appear they were relying on none. They were putting their finger in the air, feeling the wind and making their decisions.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Now, on the one hand they claim we should not have made any decisions without going through the MSFMAC or without doing modelling. On the other hand, they are saying, 'No, you should have done this a long time ago.' They can't have it both ways. They can't have it both ways. They are showing their insincerity—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —and their attempt to politicise what is a devastating impact of the algal bloom across our state.