Mr BAYLEY (Clark) – Honourable Speaker, I move –
That the House: –
(1) Refers the following reference to the Standing Committee on Government Administration Committee A to inquire into and report upon the mass salmon mortality events and contributing factors with the following terms of reference: –
(a) examine and report on the responsibilities of the varying parts of Government in charge of approving and regulating the aquaculture industry and the efficacy of current laws, regulations and practices to protect and inform the public;
(b) examine and recommend improvements in the way these responsibilities are established and executed;
(c) ensure appropriate public consultation is conducted on all matters;
(d) any other matter incidental; and
(e) that the Committee reports by 25 September 2025. (11 March 2025)
I will require a vote.
An environmental and industrial scale disaster has and continues to be played out in Tasmania’s south-east waters. We do not need to retread the ground that has been well covered this week by the Greens and the independent member for Braddon, Mr Garland. It is a statement of fact that this is an environmental and industrial scale disaster. We all know that the salmon mass mortality crisis is a tragedy. It is a tragedy for workers and it is a tragedy for the environment. It affects Tasmania’s overarching brand and, from and various angles, the economy.
All of us in this place are united in our concern for communities who are currently being impacted by the salmon mass mortality crisis, be they residents upset and frustrated over their local environment and the loss of amenity they have experienced or workers working overtime and out of area to desperately deal with a situation that I acknowledge is distressing and that they will find distressing. Industry and government have called this situation unprecedented. During unprecedented times, community members rely on their officials and institutions for guidance.
There is no rule book on what you are supposed to do when you head down to your local beach and see salmon carcasses strewn from one end to the other. Information has not been forthcoming from public health. Information on how the community should respond if they come into contact with material has come third‑hand from public health and late in the process from an email the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) sent to a community group which quoted public health information internally provided to the EPA. Coming into contact with decomposing carcasses or globules of fat, regardless of how they died or how they got there, is a health concern. Encountering them on public land or water with the expectation and historic experience is for a clean, safe, and natural encounter is a shock to the system.
On ABC radio last Friday, a member of the community told a heart-wrenching story. Recently diagnosed with cancer and scheduled for a double mastectomy, the community member was heading to her shack at Surveyors Bay, a place she has been visiting for 27 years. She was looking forward to a swim in the waters that she loved so much with the people she loves before she began treatment for her illness. She was not able to take that swim because she was unsure about the potential impacts to her health from swimming in waters that had been exposed to an unknown bacterium. To the extent that it is possible during an unfolding crisis, people should be able to have clear access to information that may have an impact on their health.
Today we are calling for an inquiry into the government’s management of this crisis. We acknowledge that the EPA is investigating this event and it is important that this investigation continues. They have a remit to investigate how this event occurred and whether the salmon companies have operated according to their licence conditions.
We also know ‑ after questioning, I might add ‑ and acknowledge that Biosecurity Tasmania are also investigating the biosecurity and animal welfare concerns surrounding this event, within their remit. This is an incredibly important investigation to establish the factors that led to disturbing video footage released last week.
It is evident to the Greens and to other members of this place that the government and its departments have not managed this crisis according to their remit, and that is the issue that requires the oversight of parliament. Information on public health impacts has not been forthcoming. Ministers are apparently unclear about what issues fall into their portfolio areas. Different departmental areas appear siloed and operate in isolation, second guessing the action and responsibility of others. There appears no central point of coordination. Mixed messages have been given to communities about whether or not it is safe to swim. The acting director of the EPA was unable or unwilling to answer questions about where salmon remains were being disposed of and the nature of non-compliant disposal. In the other place this afternoon, we also heard allegations of salmon remains being dumped on Crown land. Information that you would expect to be simple about what this bacterium actually is and how it ended up in our waters has been opaque and confusing, including to marine biologists who are experts in this field.
It has been said multiple times that this event is unprecedented. On one level, it is. This is the largest ever mass mortality in Tasmanian salmon’s history. After any unprecedented event, it would be expected that the parliament would scrutinise how the event was handled by those that the community has placed their trust in to manage it, to review whether the current procedures were followed, to establish any failures that may have occurred, to ensure that the right departments are in charge of the right aspects of the response.
A parliamentary inquiry would not subsume or overrule any investigation undertaken by the EPA or Biosecurity Tasmania, but it would help us as legislators to understand how this mortality event came to pass and to ensure that it never happens in Tasmanian waters again. In fact, the findings of any government investigation or inquiry can be included in the committee process to add to the knowledge base and inform recommendations.
Otherwise, where do they go? To a government in trade? Quite likely to gather dust, as has happened so many times before. Just like so many other things we have had a parliamentary inquiry into, like the referral of the Yole stables racing matter. Ben Yole has been the subject of many investigations over the last little while, but there is no reason not to examine how that came to pass and what factors or structures could change.
I am sure that no one in this Chamber wants to see this happen again. The Greens do not want to see this happen again. We have a responsibility as a parliament to ensure that this does not happen again, on behalf of the workers who have been put into incredibly difficult positions during this crisis by the salmon industry and on behalf of the community who have expressed deep concerns about this event.
The Greens and the independent member for Braddon, Mr Garland, have asked multiple questions from the government regarding their response to the salmon mortality crisis and they have been fobbed off or gone unanswered. We have asked the Premier if he would increase the EPA’s funding and powers, whether EPA roles were exempt from the government’s hiring freeze to ensure they are fully staffed while they respond to this crisis, whether the government takes accountability for the policies they have brought in that lead to this event and whether the government would take appropriate action over any industry mismanagement?
The minister for Primary Industries has been asked numerous times by the independent member for Braddon regarding the serious biosecurity questions this event has raised. Multiple questions were asked about the strain of bacteria and whether or not it posed a risk to human health. There still has not been any public advice from public health on how the public should respond if they come into contact with the material. We have only third hand advice from an email the EPA sent to a community group that the material should not be handled and if you do handle it, you should wash your hands.
We still have no understanding about how a strain of a so-called endemic bacteria that was formerly considered to be an east-coast strain found its way into the D’Entrecasteaux Channel. Perhaps this is a case of too many cooks in the kitchen with the Minister for the Environment, Minister for Primary Industries and Water, and Minister for Business, Industry and Resources all notionally being responsible for different aspects of this event.
Our question is, is this the best way for an event like this to be handled? Is the necessary coordination between governments occurring? Recent questioning in parliament indicates that it is not.
It is well established that the climate crisis is also a human health crisis. We need only to look at the recent pandemic to see the interrelationship between the environment and human health. It is not clear to the Greens from the response to this event that the EPA, the Department of Natural Resources and Environment Tasmania (NRE Tas) and the Department of Health have the procedures in place to co-manage an environmental and public health disaster. This may be unprecedented, but it will not be the last.
In order to learn, to adapt, to improve and to address outstanding issues, we need a thorough, transparent, publicly accessible process. Just as argued previously in the debate about an inquiry to look at the GBEs, it needed to be a public one, with public with capacity for the public to engage, for the capacity for the public to view the transparency. The best way to do this is through a parliamentary inquiry.
In fact, we believe it is our responsibility as parliamentarians. As elected representatives, we have an obligation to look deeply into this incident, address it and learn from it, so that we can change and make things better from it. Yes, we come from different policy positions on salmon. That simply means we will bring different perspectives, different information and different approaches, and probably a different, better outcome than leaving this to the government, and this government of all governments.
We have constructed this motion and engaged in this debate without rhetorical politics to make it easy as possible for members to support.
This is a matter of deep public importance. From the Greens perspective, we are hearing from communities who are concerned, frustrated and angry. No doubt other parties are hearing from workers. There is nothing to fear from acting in the public interest and from being open and transparent. At times like this it is clear that the public interest is best served by initiating a cross‑Chamber inquiry to transparently and publicly understand the crisis and recommend a collective way forward.
