❓ Mr. Rundle questions the Minister for Environment about the South Coast Marine Park consultation process and the influence of the Pew Charitable Trusts. The Minister vehemently denies lack of consultation, defends Pew's involvement, and highlights extensive community engagement and adjustments made based on feedback.
AnsweredQoN 900Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
SOUTH COAST MARINE PARK
900. Mr P.J. RUNDLE to the Minister for Environment:
I refer to the south coast marine
park, a process that is not only dangerously lacking in consultation but also
relying upon the advice of the United States–based
lobby group Pew Charitable Trusts as opposed to science-based information.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order, please!
Mr
P.J. RUNDLE : Noting that the trust
purports to speak on behalf of 27 environmental lobby groups, I ask the following.
(1) Did it design the map for the
park or was it determined through community consultation?
(2) Has the minister presented the advice or plans
from Pew Charitable Trusts to his counterpart in this project , the
Minister for Fisheries?
Several members
interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Order, please!
900. Mr P.J. RUNDLE to the Minister for Environment:
I refer to the south coast marine
park, a process that is not only dangerously lacking in consultation but also
relying upon the advice of the United States–based
lobby group Pew Charitable Trusts as opposed to science-based information.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order, please!
Mr
P.J. RUNDLE : Noting that the trust
purports to speak on behalf of 27 environmental lobby groups, I ask the following.
(1) Did it design the map for the
park or was it determined through community consultation?
(2) Has the minister presented the advice or plans
from Pew Charitable Trusts to his counterpart in this project , the
Minister for Fisheries?
Several members
interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Order, please!
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(2) Thank
you, Speaker. I know the member for Roe is a lot of things; I did not know he
was a comedian as well. Seriously, that question is a load—I have used
the phrase before—of pure, unadulterated malarkey, and I am about to tell the member why. The member
for Roe is nodding away, which is great because this is good
information. Today they tried to rev the member up; they gave him some angry
pills and wheeled him in. He is still grinning, which I love—I love
that about him! I am delivering a wonderful outcome for the member in his
community. There has never been a consultation process more exhaustive than
this—more inclusive, more involving of local community groups from
right across the landscape down there. We have had six community reference
committee meetings over a period of 18 months. We have had consultation. Every
licensed fisher was contacted and asked to give their view. Not all the fishers
involved wanted to avail themselves of that
service, but 31 did. We met them wherever they wanted to meet, whether it was Albany, Hopetoun, Esperance or Perth. We have 10 different sectoral
advisory groups representing recreational fishers, commercial fishers,
conservation interests and community interests. The extent of consultation
continues to this day. The member for Roe is making assertions about the
process. It is not over yet. The member has not seen the information going to
the public on which we will invite public comment. Indeed, people who have
already contributed to the process will get a second go and be able to make
their views known.
I will just follow up on this issue
about Pew. The member for Roe seems to have an issue with an organisation that has its origin somewhere else,
as if it is some dark, mysterious, evil empire or organisation undermining our very way of life.
Mr P.J. Rundle : It started in
May 2020.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : Member, this
is good stuff. You should wait to hear it!
I wonder what the member thinks of
the Salvation Army, the Red Cross or the RSPCA. Will he ever put any trust in
these organisations that have their origin overseas? They must be evil; they
must be un-Australian! Pew is an organisation that has its origin, its genesis,
overseas. It has Australian members, Australian management, making Australian
decisions, consulting with the community, in the same way that we have an
RSPCA, a Red Cross and all sorts of organisations that might have had their
origin overseas that have a valuable contribution to make in Western Australia.
Pew is one group. As I said, there are 10 different sectoral advisory groups,
all with a chair, that all go out to their various sectors to consult and make
a contribution to the process.
I say again that this is the most
thorough and extensive consultation and it goes above and beyond statutory requirements. Already, we have had input that has
seen some of the sanctuary areas come back. I point to the removal of 118 000 hectares, or 147 kilometres of coast,
that has been taken out of the sanctuary zones on the basis of feedback and consultation. Five proposed sanctuary zones have been removed entirely, 11
have been amended significantly and another nine have also been altered. We are
open and are hearing input from all sectors.
I have to say this: not one group
deserves to have 100 per cent of its desires met. This is a grown-up process.
This is about reaching a consensus and striking the right balance. We will
listen to all people with a view, as we have commercial fishers or people with
an environmental or conservation interest, and we will make the right decision.
We will consult. We will continue to consult and there will be opportunity for
public comment. I am extending that commentary period from three months to four
months, again, beyond statutory requirements, because we are going the extra
length.
This is an incredible part of the
world. Scientists are still discovering species almost annually down there. It
is such a special part of our state. The member for Roe should be leading the
push to have it preserved and protected for the community for all time.
you, Speaker. I know the member for Roe is a lot of things; I did not know he
was a comedian as well. Seriously, that question is a load—I have used
the phrase before—of pure, unadulterated malarkey, and I am about to tell the member why. The member
for Roe is nodding away, which is great because this is good
information. Today they tried to rev the member up; they gave him some angry
pills and wheeled him in. He is still grinning, which I love—I love
that about him! I am delivering a wonderful outcome for the member in his
community. There has never been a consultation process more exhaustive than
this—more inclusive, more involving of local community groups from
right across the landscape down there. We have had six community reference
committee meetings over a period of 18 months. We have had consultation. Every
licensed fisher was contacted and asked to give their view. Not all the fishers
involved wanted to avail themselves of that
service, but 31 did. We met them wherever they wanted to meet, whether it was Albany, Hopetoun, Esperance or Perth. We have 10 different sectoral
advisory groups representing recreational fishers, commercial fishers,
conservation interests and community interests. The extent of consultation
continues to this day. The member for Roe is making assertions about the
process. It is not over yet. The member has not seen the information going to
the public on which we will invite public comment. Indeed, people who have
already contributed to the process will get a second go and be able to make
their views known.
I will just follow up on this issue
about Pew. The member for Roe seems to have an issue with an organisation that has its origin somewhere else,
as if it is some dark, mysterious, evil empire or organisation undermining our very way of life.
Mr P.J. Rundle : It started in
May 2020.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : Member, this
is good stuff. You should wait to hear it!
I wonder what the member thinks of
the Salvation Army, the Red Cross or the RSPCA. Will he ever put any trust in
these organisations that have their origin overseas? They must be evil; they
must be un-Australian! Pew is an organisation that has its origin, its genesis,
overseas. It has Australian members, Australian management, making Australian
decisions, consulting with the community, in the same way that we have an
RSPCA, a Red Cross and all sorts of organisations that might have had their
origin overseas that have a valuable contribution to make in Western Australia.
Pew is one group. As I said, there are 10 different sectoral advisory groups,
all with a chair, that all go out to their various sectors to consult and make
a contribution to the process.
I say again that this is the most
thorough and extensive consultation and it goes above and beyond statutory requirements. Already, we have had input that has
seen some of the sanctuary areas come back. I point to the removal of 118 000 hectares, or 147 kilometres of coast,
that has been taken out of the sanctuary zones on the basis of feedback and consultation. Five proposed sanctuary zones have been removed entirely, 11
have been amended significantly and another nine have also been altered. We are
open and are hearing input from all sectors.
I have to say this: not one group
deserves to have 100 per cent of its desires met. This is a grown-up process.
This is about reaching a consensus and striking the right balance. We will
listen to all people with a view, as we have commercial fishers or people with
an environmental or conservation interest, and we will make the right decision.
We will consult. We will continue to consult and there will be opportunity for
public comment. I am extending that commentary period from three months to four
months, again, beyond statutory requirements, because we are going the extra
length.
This is an incredible part of the
world. Scientists are still discovering species almost annually down there. It
is such a special part of our state. The member for Roe should be leading the
push to have it preserved and protected for the community for all time.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.