AFMA Chair hits out at unlawful quota claims
Chairman of
the Australian Fisheries Management Authority Commission, Michael Egan,
said today he was very confident that the catch limits set by the
Commission for the Small Pelagic Fishery were legally set.
Mr Egan was
responding to recent claims by Andrew Wilkie MP and an ‘update’ letter
sent to Mr Wilkie by the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office.
He said that neither
Mr Wilkie, nor the Ombudsman’s office, seemed to understand that the
total allowable catches for this fishery were not set by the South East
Management Advisory Committee, nor were they set by AFMA management or
staff.
“It is the
responsibility of the AFMA Commission, a completely non-partisan,
independent statutory authority, to set the total allowable catches for
Commonwealth fisheries”, Mr Egan said.
“In setting these
catch limits the Commission considers the advice of AFMA staff, together
with scientific advice from our relevant resource assessment group and
the advice of the relevant management advisory committee, which is set
up to gather the opinions of various interest groups, including
environmental and recreational fishing groups, fishing industry
participants, scientists, economists and the states.”
“The views of
members of these groups are not always unanimous, and the Commission
takes into consideration all views expressed by their members in the
full knowledge that they will have different perspectives, different
interests and different agendas. Ensuring that all interests are heard
is the very purpose of the laws that require these groups to be
established.
“I emphasise,
however, that none of these groups set the catch limits --- not the
resource assessment groups, not the management advisory committees, not
the CEO of AFMA or AFMA’s staff --- but rather the independent AFMA
Commission.”
Mr Egan said he was disappointed that the Ombudsman’s office had not made this clear in its ‘update’ letter to Mr Wilkie.
“I am sorry also
that the Ombudsman’s office did not point out to Mr Wilkie the
representational role of management advisory committees. If it had, Mr
Wilkie and others may have been less ready to assert the commission of a
capital offence by SEMAC, rather than an unintentional slip-up.
“I am even more
concerned, however, that the Ombudsman’s office provided Mr Wilkie with
its ‘update’ in time for his protest rally on Saturday, but has so far
not corresponded with either AFMA or the AFMA Commission.
“I would have
expected this not only as a matter of courtesy, but also to provide us
with a fair and reasonable opportunity to remedy what I believe are
significant oversights in the Ombudsman’s ‘update’. In fact, we would
not even have had access to the ‘update’ if Mr Wilkie had not attached
it to his media release.
“Given that the
Ombudsman’s office had stated that its investigation of Mr Wilkie’s
complaint was to be ‘conducted in private’, I believe that AFMA and the
AFMA Commission are entitled to a full explanation.
“It is vitally
important that the Australian public, complainants and government
agencies and officials should always have confidence in the bona fides
of the Ombudsman’s office.
“Given the recent
controversy over the Ombudsman’s office preparing questions for Greens
senators, I would have expected it to be exceedingly careful not to
behave in any way which raised the slightest concerns about its
impartiality and objectivity.”
Mr Egan said the AFMA Commission had nine members appointed during the terms of fisheries ministers Burke and Ludwig.
“They include five
who are fisheries and scientific experts, four who are current or former
heads or deputy heads of Commonwealth, state and overseas agencies, a
current chief executive of a national professional association and
myself, a former NSW Treasurer and Minister for State Development.
“All of us, together
with the AFMA staff, are committed to the well-being of Australia’s
maritime environment and the sustainability of Australia’s fisheries.”
