Press conference, Devonport, Tasmania

MURRAY WATT, MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER: Well, terrific to be back in Devonport with my good friends and colleagues Anne Urquhart and Senator Josh Dolega about an important announcement for Tasmania and, in particular, the West Coast. The Albanese Government has always made clear our support for a sustainable salmon industry in Tasmania, and what that means is that we want the sustainable jobs to remain in place in Tasmania in this important industry and ensuring that the industry remains environmentally sustainable as well. Today I’ve got an announcement to make that is a win for jobs and a win for the environment in Tasmania. Today, I’m announcing that I have made a decision about the application for reconsideration of earlier decisions when it comes to salmon farming in Macquarie Harbour. Just to give you a little bit of the history of this, and what I’m doing today is confirming the original decision made in 2012 by the then Environment Minister to approve salmon farming to occur in Macquarie Harbour as long as it complied with a range of conditions, including following a state management plan. So that was the decision that was made back in 2012, and that’s why we’ve seen salmon farming occur in Macquarie Harbour since that time. 

So today what I’m doing after a thorough process to consider the reconsideration applications that were made by a number of groups is confirming that original decision, which means in practical terms that salmon farming can continue operating in Macquarie Harbour while also, of course, complying with the strong environmental conditions that were imposed, including the requirement to follow a state government management plan.

As I say, though, we are also very focused on protecting the environment in Macquarie Harbour; in particular, we want to protect the endangered Maugean skate forevermore. As a result of the advocacy of Anne Urquhart, then a Senator, now the Federal Member for this area, the Albanese Government is investing around $37 million all up in water quality and other factors to ensure that we can protect the Maugean skate forevermore.

I’ve been involved in discussions about this matter for some time and I’m yet to find anyone who wants to see the Maugean skate made extinct, and that’s why we’ve been working so hard with scientists, the industry and others to ensure that we are putting in place arrangements and funding to ensure that we do see the Maugean skate live forever more and, in fact, to increase its population numbers.

And that’s why we will be investing $18.3 million, in particular, for the oxygenation of Macquarie Harbour. The point of that is to ensure that we do see sufficient oxygen levels in place to protect the skate. And that builds on a two-year trial, which has been occurring to ensure that the oxygenation works from a technical sense. And what we’ll be doing now is scaling up that oxygenation to ensure that we do see sufficient oxygen levels in Macquarie Harbour into the future.

So, as I say, today’s decision does follow a very thorough reconsideration process that began in 2023. We’ve undertaken significant procedural fairness steps to ensure that a variety of groups, from a conservation perspective and an industry perspective, have their say. We’ve considered all of those submissions thoroughly, and the end result is that we will be confirming the original decision made in 2012, which means that salmon farming can continue operations in Macquarie Harbour, subject to those strong environmental controls. 

I’ll hand over to Anne Urquhart now, and happy to take your questions.

ANNE URQUHART, MEMBER FOR BRADDON: Thanks, Murray. Thanks very much. And look, this is a fantastic decision. I have been a very strong advocate over many years for good, sustainable, good environmentally sustainable jobs right across this region, and this provides certainty for workers at Macquarie Harbour. But not only in Macquarie Harbour, it provides certainty for jobs right across Tasmania. There are literally thousands of jobs associated with this industry right across the island of Tasmania, from processing, transport, logistics, packaging, food – you name it, there are so many jobs associated with this. We hear from many people that there’s only, you know, a few handful of jobs on Macquarie Harbour, but in a broader sense, there are many, many jobs that are supported because of the activities in there.

As I said before, I have always stood for good, clean, sustainable jobs, and this decision, now that the Minister has just outlined, which locks into the 2012 decision, is that these jobs will continue, it provides certainty for those workers, particularly in Macquarie Harbour. They have been through an enormous, turbulent time for a number of years, and they deserve to have the right of the security of their jobs in an environmentally sustainable industry. And I am really excited to be able to pass that message on to them that this decision has been made and that their jobs will continue. But also, for the environment, it is really important that we make sure that we have good, environmentally sustainable jobs. And we have done that over the amount of investment that we have put into looking after Macquarie Harbour as well.

There are a number of factors that need to be taken into account when we look at Macquarie Harbour. But certainly, the things that we are putting into place are making sure that we end up with a good environment within the harbour that can sustain those good jobs as well.

MURRAY WATT: Happy to take questions.

JOURNALIST: Is it good process for the federal government to change the law and then base its decision on its own law change?

MURRAY WATT: Well, every decision we make when it comes to environmental approvals is in compliance with the law. It’s no secret that the government amended the legislation prior to the last election to outline a path to deal with reconsiderations, and we’ve now applied the law. Obviously, Tasmanians and all Australians had their say on that at the last election, and I think it’s possible to infer from those results that Tasmanians supported the approach the government had taken.

JOURNALIST: The Bob Brown Foundation was due to have a hearing on the legislation change in the Federal Court. Is the timing of your announcement to stop that from going ahead?

MURRAY WATT: No, I mean, obviously, any group can take any legal action that it chooses to do. But what we’ve tried to do is make a decision on this matter as quickly as we can to provide certainty for all parties involved in this decision, and that’s what we’ve done.

JOURNALIST: Should they have not had the chance to have their case heard in the Federal Court first, though?

MURRAY WATT: Well, it’s up to any party to decide whether they want to challenge government decisions or pre-decisions in the courts, and that’s what those groups have chosen to do. What we have done, as I’ve said, is undertake very thorough procedural fairness in the run-up to making this decision. Of course, as you say, the amendments were passed before the election. We’ve applied the law as it now stands, and we’ve gone out of our way to ensure that all groups have had their say on this decision before I’ve made it.

We’ve gone out to the conservation groups seeking their views on how we should apply the law. We’ve gone to industry groups asking their views about how we should apply the law. We’ve thoroughly considered all of their submissions, and we’ve now made the decision to confirm the 2012 decision, which allows salmon farming to occur in Macquarie Harbour subject to strong environmental controls.

JOURNALIST: Was the decision based on science or on politics?

MURRAY WATT: The decision was based on the law, so the law required us to consider various factors in reaching this decision, which we’ve done. We’ve considered the submissions that different parties have put to us, and we’ve applied the law and made this decision.

JOURNALIST: If there’s another decline in Maugean skate numbers due to reduced dissolved oxygen, will you need to reconsider this decision again?

MURRAY WATT: Our intention is to lift the number of Maugean skate that we see in Macquarie Harbour. And that’s, again, why we’re investing $37 million all up in oxygenation, captive breeding and other techniques to improve and maintain water quality and to actually lift the population of Maugean skate. It’s really encouraging that we’re seeing some positive signs from the captive breeding program that’s underway and that our government is funding. And we certainly are working towards seeing that population not only survive but to increase over time.

JOURNALIST: The Bob Brown Foundation is going to challenge your decision based on that the industrial fish farm operations do not apply under Macquarie Harbour. What do you make of that announcement?

MURRAY WATT: Look, any group is entitled to have its say and to take whatever legal action they want to take. My job has been to interpret the law and apply the law. I believe that I’ve done that, and if other groups seek to challenge that decision, that’s entirely their right.

JOURNALIST: Can you guarantee that the Maugean skate won’t go extinct as a result of your decision?

MURRAY WATT: Well, our government has a policy of not allowing any extinctions, any new extinctions, of any species. And, again, that’s why we’re investing heavily to not only maintain the population of the Maugean skate but to increase it.

JOURNALIST: What science informed your decision?

MURRAY WATT: What informed my decision was the law, the changes to the law and the submissions that we received. All of I refer you to have a look at those submissions if you’d like to do so. We considered all of those submissions. I can take you through the factors that needed to be considered if you’re interested, under the law. That’s what I applied in making this decision.

So if you look at the amendments that were made to the legislation earlier this year, essentially what had to be considered by the minister of the day was whether the original decision – in this case the 2012 decision made to originally approve salmon farming – whether that that was not a controlled action because it would be taken in a certain manner. That is the case for this decision. It required that the manner in which those activities be undertaken, included a requirement to comply with a state management plan. That applies here. It required that the particular action is being taken. Obviously, the action being salmon farming is being taken. And it required that that action has been ongoing for at least five years. So, all of those circumstances were met, which meant that in applying the law I am not in a position to revoke the earlier decision made in 2012 and need to confirm it, and that’s what I’ve done.

JOURNALIST: That’s going to be pretty on the nose of a lot of people that really are concerned about the environment. What would you say to those Tasmanians?

MURRAY WATT: Well, I understand that there are mixed views on this issue, as there are on almost every issue in Tasmania. In my experience, Tasmanians don’t agree a hundred per cent with any decision that governments make. But, again, you know, this issue was really well ventilated before the last election. Some groups sought to make it the defining issue of the election, and what we saw was Anne Urquhart elected to the electorate of Braddon with the largest swing of any Labor candidate in the country. So, I understand that there are mixed views about this, that there are some people who support this decision, some people who don’t. But I think we received a pretty clear endorsement from the Australian people at the last election about the changes we made to the law. That’s not about an endorsement of this decision, I should say. That’s obviously been made, you know, without regard to those factors. But we’ve applied the law. We’ve made the decision, and that’s the result.

JOURNALIST: What environmental groups were consulted as part of this process?

MURRAY WATT: My recollection is that there were three different reconsideration applications made – the Bob Brown Foundation, the Humane Society, and I’ve momentarily forgotten the third one. But all of those groups who made reconsideration applications were consulted and provided with an opportunity to provide submissions.

JOURNALIST: And how has the salmon industry reacted to this announcement?

MURRAY WATT: I haven’t personally spoken to anyone in the salmon industry about this, so I guess you’ll need to ask them what their decision is – what their reaction is.

JOURNALIST: You’ve both said this is a win for the environment. How is it?

MURRAY WATT: Well, because we are scaling up the oxygenation activities that we have been trialling to ensure that we do see sufficient levels of oxygen in Macquarie Harbour to support the Maugean skate population into the future. It’s a win for the environment because we’re funding captive breeding programs. You know, again, if you want to have a look at the range of activities we’re undertaking – and that is only because of our determination to protect the Maugean skate, and that’s what we intend to be the outcome.

JOURNALIST: Your decision puts a lot of faith in the Tasmanian EPA to regulate this industry. Do you have faith in the Tasmanian Government to actually do this appropriately?

MURRAY WATT: Look, I’m not going to express a view positively or negatively about government departments. But, of course, everyone’s got a role to play in this situation. We need the salmon industry to operate in a sustainable manner. We need state agencies to operate effectively. We need federal government agencies to operate effectively. You know, I speak for the federal Department of Environment, and we will certainly be approaching it that way ourselves.

JOURNALIST: Do you believe that the salmon industry is broadly compatible with sustainability?

MURRAY WATT: What we’re trying to do both in this decision and in others is to ensure the long-term sustainability of this industry in an economic and an environmental sense. You know, we are strong supporters of the salmon industry in Tasmania and the jobs that it creates, the families that it supports and the communities it supports. And we’re also very strong supporters of protecting Tasmania’s incredible environment. Again, that’s why we’re making very large investments in this species in Macquarie Harbour, and that’s why we’re undertaking a lot of other investment in Tasmania – to protect its incredible environment.

JOURNALIST: You talked about the state government management plan. To my knowledge, that’s a decade, if not two decades old. Is that up to scratch and enough to govern these industries?

MURRAY WATT: Well, again, I’m not going to express a positive or negative view about state governments, but we, of course, expect all state governments to maintain the highest possible standards. And I’m sure that’s something they’ll consider.

JOURNALIST: On to Robbins Island, the decision has been delayed seven times. Do you think that’s a good enough process?

MURRAY WATT: What we’re always determined to do is make decisions under the law that properly apply the law with the full possible range of information. That has required a number of extensions to that decision. You’ll be aware, the statutory time frame requires a final decision by the end of the month. And it’s certainly my intention to meet that time frame.

JOURNALIST: So you can guarantee that that will be met before the deadline of August 29, then?

MURRAY WATT: That’s certainly my intention.

JOURNALIST: Have the ongoing delays to this decision caused uncertainty for both the company and also the communities concerned about the project?

MURRAY WATT: I think you’re probably able to seek views from the company and the community about that to determine how they feel about it. But I think as a general rule, of course, the more we can be providing certainty about these sort of project decisions, the better.

JOURNALIST: On the MMG tailings facility, will a decision on its preliminary works for the tailings dam near Rosebery be made this year?

MURRAY WATT: I know that the last two projects you referred to are the ones that Bob Brown is campaigning on. To be frank, I haven’t had a single briefing on that project since I took over the role of Minister. So, once I’ve been briefed on that I’ll be in a position to give you some more information.

JOURNALIST: This has also been delayed for over two years. Have these delays caused uncertainty for Rosebery?

MURRAY WATT: Again, you’re free to talk to people in Rosebery and the companies about that. I haven’t even been briefed on that matter.

JOURNALIST: Why haven’t you been briefed on it?

MURRAY WATT: Because there’s been a range of other projects requiring decisions imminent, up until now, and that’s what my focus has been on, whether it be Macquarie Harbour or Robbins Island or the number of projects that I’m dealing with in other states as well. There are hundreds of projects that are currently seeking approvals, before me and our department. I’m not in a position to give you answers on all of them.

JOURNALIST: Okay. So, it’s not really a priority?

MURRAY WATT: That’s your interpretation. And, again, I know Bob Brown is campaigning very heavily on those issues, but we don’t respond to what Bob Brown sees as a priority, we respond to the hundreds of projects that we consider to be - that need to be dealt with.

JOURNALIST: Why have decisions on these Tasmanian projects been so delayed?

MURRAY WATT: Well, I’m not sure that it’s true that all of those decisions have been delayed. In some cases, we rely on proponents to supply us with information. In some cases, it takes time to interpret that information. But we always operate as quickly as we possibly can to apply the law.

JOURNALIST: Onto the regional forest agreements, will it be brought under – sorry, will the Tasmanian regional forest agreement be brought under new national environmental standards?

MURRAY WATT: You might recall that when we were elected in 2022, the then Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek committed that we would be applying national environmental standards to RFAs, and that remains our position.

JOURNALIST: Do you think that the RFAs provide insufficient environmental protections and need to be reformed?

MURRAY WATT: Well, I think that one of the reasons Graeme Samuel recommended that we apply national environmental standards to RFAs was to ensure a strong and sustainable regulatory regime around forestry. And I think that’s a good thing. I’ve seen that members of the forest industry have accepted they need to maintain social licence for their industry. So, you know, we support the application of those standards to RFAs.

JOURNALIST: Are you planning to reform the way in which RFAs operate in any way as Environment Minister?

MURRAY WATT: You probably are aware that we are undertaking wide-ranging consultations with a very large number of groups – industry, environment, community – around the reforms of the environment laws federally. These are some of the issues that we’re working through, and obviously, I’m not in a position yet to say what that legislation is going to look like. But we’re certainly aware of the concerns people have about these issues.

JOURNALIST: And will the Samuel review form part of that?

MURRAY WATT: The Samuel review remains the blueprint for these reforms. I wouldn’t be guaranteeing that we’ll do every single thing that Graeme Samuel recommended, but one of the things about Graeme’s review was that his recommendations were widely welcomed, whether it be by industry groups, environment groups, the general community. So, I think that five years on, it does form a good blueprint.

Of course, once we get to introducing a bill in the Parliament, we’ll require the support of either the Coalition or the Greens. And I hope that they are listening to environment groups, industry groups and the general community who desperately want to see reform.

JOURNALIST: On to the potato virus – sorry – potato mop-top virus has been discovered on a farm in Tasmania. This has not been detected in Australia before. What biosecurity concerns does this raise?

MURRAY WATT: Yeah, well, my understanding is that Biosecurity Tasmania is leading the investigations into this. Of course, if there’s federal support required, then we’d be very happy to consider that. But, you know, we do need to take very seriously the biosecurity threats that Tasmania and the whole country faces. That’s why when I was the Agriculture Minister, we significantly increased the budget for biosecurity compared to what we’d been left behind by the former Coalition Government. They were on track to cut our national biosecurity budget by over 25 per cent at a time when we’re seeing increased numbers of biosecurity risks around the world and here in Tasmania. So, we’ve done everything we possibly can to control those biosecurity threats, and we’ll keep working with Tasmania and other states to do that.

JOURNALIST: Will you be playing any role in tracing, eradicating or containing the virus?

MURRAY WATT: As I say, this was discovered yesterday, and it’s being led by Biosecurity Tasmania, but whether it be my department or the federal Department of Agriculture, I’m sure we’ll be remaining in close contact with them.

JOURNALIST: Did our biosecurity protocols fail in this instance?

MURRAY WATT: I think it’s way too early to say that given that the investigation has started into an event that was detected yesterday.

JOURNALIST: And what is your plan to protect other states, such as South Australia, should the virus spread?

MURRAY WATT: Again, this was discovered yesterday, so I don’t think anyone would reasonably expect us to have a fully made plan within 24 hours. But we do have strong biosecurity arrangements in place with the states, and I’m sure they’ll apply in this situation as well.

JOURNALIST: And what support will you be offering to Tasmania’s vital potato industry?

MURRAY WATT: Well, what I would say is that even I, not being from Tasmania, understand the importance of the potato industry to Tasmania. In fact, my good colleague standing beside me has had a very long work history working with that industry here in the North West. So, we understand it’s really important to farmers, it’s really important to those processing workers, and we’ll remain in close contact with Tasmania to determine what support is needed.

JOURNALIST: On krill, what’s your reaction to the unprecedented recent closure of the krill fishery in the Southern Ocean after krill fishing companies hit the catch limit?

MURRAY WATT: I’ll give you some general comments. You know, we as a government want to see industry operate in a way that guarantees the current and future safety of our environment. That’s whether we’re talking about on land or at sea. So, we will always look at ways that we can improve standards, working with industry to secure that kind of an outcome, and that applies to the krill as it does more generally.

JOURNALIST: On tech science funding, the Australian Centre of Excellence in Antarctic Science will run out of funding in the middle of next year. What are you going to do about it? Will you extend it?

MURRAY WATT: Well, I think you just said that the funding will run out at the end of next year, so we do have some time to consider these matters. I understand there’s concern from a range of quarters about Antarctic funding. You know, I’m very proud of the fact that Australia is a world leader when it comes to Antarctic research, and Tasmania leads that more than any other part of the country. So, we’re very supportive of that research continuing. You know, this is a range of programs we’ve got to consider funding for, and we’ll do that in the usual course.