Thursday, 2 April 2026

 Steve DIMOPOULOS (Oakleigh – Minister for Environment, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister for Outdoor Recreation) (10:21): In accordance with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, I table a statement of compatibility in relation to the Outdoor Recreation Victoria Bill 2026:

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (the Charter), I make this statement of compatibility with respect to the Outdoor Recreation Victoria Bill 2026 (the Bill).

In my opinion, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly, is compatible with the human rights protected by the Charter. I have this opinion for the reasons outlined in this statement.

Overview of the Bill

The purposes of the Bill include establishing Outdoor Recreation Victoria, whose objects include:

•   promoting sustainability and responsibility in game hunting, recreational fishing and boating, and commercial fishing and aquaculture;

•   optimising the social, cultural and economic benefits of outdoor recreation in Victoria in a sustainable manner; and

•   supporting the development of the outdoor recreation sector, the commercial fishing and aquaculture sector, and the aquaculture sector.

The purposes of the Bill also include repealing the Game Management Authority Act 2014 and the Victorian Fisheries Authority Act 2016.

Human rights issues

The human rights protected by the Charter that are relevant to the Bill are:

•   the right to equality before the law (section 8(2) and (3) of the Charter);

•   the right to privacy (section 13(a));

•   the right to freedom of expression (section 15(2));

•   the right to take part in public life (section 18);

•   property rights (section 20);

•   the right to a fair hearing (section 24(1));

•   the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty (section 25(1)); and

•   the right not to be tried or punished more than once (section 26).

Principles to which Outdoor Recreation Victoria must have regard

Clause 10 requires Outdoor Recreation Victoria to have regard to the principles set out in Division 3 of Part 2 of the Bill when exercising its powers or performing its functions. One of these principles is the principle of equity, defined in clause 15(a)(i) to include equity between persons irrespective of their personal attributes including age, physical ability, ethnicity, culture, gender and financial situation.

Section 8(2) of the Charter provides that every person has the right to enjoy their human rights without discrimination. Section 8(3) provides that every person is equal before the law and is entitled to its equal protection without discrimination. Section 8(3) also provides that every person has the right to equal and effective protection against discrimination.

Consideration of the principle of equity by Outdoor Recreation Victoria will promote the right of everyone to equality before the law under section 8 of the Charter.

Appointment of directors to the Outdoor Recreation Victoria Board

Under section 8(2) and (3) of the Charter, discrimination relevantly includes indirect discrimination, which occurs if a person imposes an unreasonable requirement, condition or practice that has, or is likely to have, the effect of disadvantaging people with a protected attribute including, relevantly, profession, trade or occupation, or race.

Section 18(2)(b) of the Charter provides that every eligible person has the right, and is to have the opportunity, without discrimination, to have access, on general terms of equality, to the Victorian public service and public office.

Clause 21(2) of the Bill provides that, in appointing a director to the Outdoor Recreation Victoria Board, the Minister must ensure, as far as practicable, that the directors of the Board collectively have the skills, experience and knowledge specified in that subclause, including governance skills, legal or regulatory experience, experience in outdoor recreation, commercial fishing or aquaculture, and knowledge of First Peoples culture, community leadership and perspectives.

While clause 21(2) may affect the potential for people who do not belong to particular professions, trades or occupations, or who are not First Peoples, to be appointed as directors, I do not consider that this would constitute indirect discrimination under the Charter. This is because such requirements are reasonable. The skills and experience specified in clause 21(2) are directly related to the responsibilities of the Board and they ensure that the Board has the specialist skills and experience to acquit its responsibilities.

Further, clause 21(3) provides that the Minister must not appoint a person to the Board if satisfied that the person has a conflict of interest specified in clause 25(1) (eg, because they hold a commercial fishery or aquaculture licence), or is in a position or role that is not specified but that would otherwise conflict with the role of director. I also do not consider that excluding people of certain professions, trades or occupations would constitute indirect discrimination. This is because clauses 21(3) and 25(1) are reasonable and serve the important purpose of ensuring the independence of directors and ensuring they make impartial decisions.

Section 18(2)(b) of the Charter is principally concerned with affording access to public office on general terms of equality. Given that I do not consider that clauses 21 and 25 constitute

discrimination, and that the qualifications they impose on eligibility for appointment to the Board (and exclusion from the Board because of conflicts of interest) are otherwise reasonably justified, I consider that clauses 21 and 25 are compatible with the right to take part in public life under the Charter.

Vacancies in the office of a director and removal from office

Under clause 23(1) of the Bill, the office of a director of the Outdoor Recreation Victoria Board becomes vacant if the director is convicted or found guilty of an indictable offence, or an offence that, if committed in Victoria, would be an indictable offence, or is removed from office, among other circumstances. Under clause 23(2), the Minister may remove a director from office if the director is convicted or found guilty of an offence against a relevant law, or engages in improper conduct, or if the Minister considers that the director is no longer suitable to hold office, among other circumstances.

The nexus between a criminal conviction and the vacation of, or removal from, office engages:

•   the right not to be tried or punished more than once (section 26 of the Charter);

•   the right to a fair hearing (section 24(1));

•   the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty (section 25(1)); and

•   the right to take part in public life (section 18).

Rights not to be punished more than once and to have a criminal charge decided by a court

Section 26 of the Charter will be relevant if the vacation of the office of a director or the removal of a director from office under clause 23(1)(b) and (2)(f) of the Bill constitutes an additional ‘punishment’ for an offence for which the person has been finally convicted. This right may also be relevant to clause 23(2)(c), which allows for the possibility that a criminal charge could be considered by the Minister as relevant to the assessment of suitability to hold office, or to clause 23(2)(d), which allows for removal if the director engages in improper conduct. Relevant to the concept of punishment, and following recent decisions of the High Court concerning the constitutional validity of schemes involving ‘legislated punishment’ in the Commonwealth sphere, it may be suggested that the right in section 24(1) to have a criminal charge decided by a court implies a principle that a person may only be punished as a result of a charge being proven in a criminal proceeding.

In my view, clause 23 does not engage sections 24(1) or 26 of the Charter because the vacation of, or removal from, office of a director by reference to a criminal charge (as part of an assessment of suitability to hold office, or of improper conduct), or to a conviction or guilty finding of criminal conduct is not to be characterised as imposing a form of punishment for the following reasons:

•   The mere fact that a law operates to directly impose a detriment on a person does not make it punitive. Rather, the criteria by reference to which the detriment is imposed, and also the purpose for which it is imposed, are central to determining whether the imposition of a particular detriment is properly characterised as punitive. Clause 23 serves a protective purpose, being to ensure the integrity and good governance of the Outdoor Recreation Victoria Board, and to safeguard the public’s trust and confidence in it. Consistent with this purpose, a criminal charge will not result in automatic removal from office. Rather, pursuant to clause 23(2)(c) and (d), a criminal charge may be a factor in the Minister’s consideration of a person’s suitability for office or as part of the Minister’s determination of what constitutes improper conduct.

•   The effect of being removed from office under clause 23(2), is to prevent a person whose eligibility has come into question from undertaking the responsibilities of the Outdoor Recreation Victoria Board.

•   Finally, the nature of the detriment being imposed (ie, vacation of or removal from office) is not associated with a criminal sanction. A person would not be liable for subsequent sanctions of a criminal nature, such as a fine or imprisonment.

Accordingly, clause 23 does not amount to double punishment for the purpose of section 26, or engage the determination of a criminal charge pursuant to section 24(1), and these rights are therefore not limited.

Right to be presumed innocent

The Supreme Court has found that the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in section 25(1) of the Charter appears to apply only in criminal proceedings, which would not include the vacation of, or removal from, office of a director under clause 23.

In the event that section 25(1) was found to have application beyond criminal proceedings, then if the Minister were to take a criminal charge into account in considering whether a director was no longer suitable to hold office under clause 23(2)(c), or had engaged in improper conduct under clause 23(2)(d), section 25(1) may be limited. However, I consider that any such limitation would be reasonably justified. As noted above, the purpose of clause 23 is to safeguard the integrity of these offices, which is legitimate and important.

Further, as a public authority under the Charter, in making this assessment the Minister must act compatibility with the Charter, including giving proper consideration to the right to be presumed innocent. Accordingly, I consider that any potential limitation would be in proportion to its aim and that clause 23(2)(c) and (d) would be compatible with section 25(1) of the Charter, if it were found to have application beyond criminal proceedings.

Right to take part in public life

As noted above, section 18(2)(b) is principally concerned with affording access to public office on general terms of equality. As being convicted of a criminal offence is not a protected attribute for the purposes of discrimination under the Charter, it follows that the right to take part in public life is not limited by clause 23.

Disclosure of interests by a director and information

Section 13(a) of the Charter prohibits unlawful or arbitrary interferences with a person’s privacy. Section 15(2) of the Charter provides that every person has the right to freedom of expression, which includes the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds.

Clause 29 of the Bill requires a director who has a pecuniary interest in a matter being considered by the Board to declare the nature of that interest at a Board meeting. In addition to pecuniary interests, clause 30(1) requires a director who has an interest in a matter being considered by the Board to disclose the nature of the interest to the chairperson. Clause 30(2) requires the chairperson, if they have an interest in a matter being considered by the Board, to disclose the nature of the interest to the Minister.

Right to privacy

To the extent that the disclosures required by clauses 29 and 30 contain personal information, the Bill will engage the right to privacy in section 13(a) of the Charter. In my opinion, any limit on the right to privacy imposed by these clauses is reasonable and justified. The information disclosed is limited to a relevant interest, being either a pecuniary interest or a type of interest specified in guidelines made by the Board pursuant to clause 30(3). These clauses are aimed at ensuring the independence of the Board and only apply to directors and the Chairperson who have all voluntarily assumed roles to which special obligations apply, including these obligations to disclose matters that are within the public interest to declare. Accordingly, I consider that any interference with the right to privacy would be lawful and not arbitrary.

Clause 32 of the Bill prohibits a person who is, or has been, a director, authorised officer, officer or employee of Outdoor Recreation Victoria from disclosing any information obtained during the course of the person’s duties, except as authorised under clause 32.

Freedom of expression

In respect of section 15(2) of the Charter, by prohibiting disclosures of information, clause 32 may impose a limitation on the right to freedom of expression. In my view, this is a lawful restriction which is reasonably necessary to protect public order within the meaning of the internal limitation in section 15(3), which has been interpreted broadly. Further, this restriction is limited to information obtained during the course of a person’s duties and is subject to the exceptions specified in clause 32(2), including where the person reasonably believes that the disclosure is necessary in certain circumstances. Accordingly, I am of the view that clause 32 imposes no limitation on the right to freedom of expression.

Transfer of property and liabilities from the Game Management Authority and Victorian Fisheries Authority to Outdoor Recreation Victoria

Section 20 of the Charter provides that a person must not be deprived of their property other than in accordance with law. While the Victorian courts have not determined

whether the right to bring a claim against the State constitutes ‘property’ for the purposes of section 20 of the Charter, the Supreme Court has indicated that the term should be ‘interpreted liberally and beneficially to encompass economic interests’. This could include contractual rights and accrued causes of action. Section 20 requires that powers which authorise the deprivation of property are conferred by legislation or common law, are confined and structured rather than unclear, are accessible to the public, and are formulated precisely.

Additionally, section 24(1) of the Charter provides that a person charged with a criminal offence or a party to a civil proceeding has the right to have the charge or proceeding decided by a competent, independent and impartial court or tribunal after a fair and public hearing. Part of the right to a fair hearing, protected in section 24(1), is the common law right to unimpeded access to the courts.

Clause 53 of the Bill provides that, on commencement day, the Game Management Authority is abolished and all of its rights, property and liabilities are transferred to Outdoor Recreation Victoria. Clause 53 also provides that Outdoor Recreation Victoria is substituted as a party in any proceeding to which the Game Management Authority was party immediately before commencement day, and is substituted as a party to any contract or arrangement entered into by or on behalf of the Game Management Authority. Clause 62 provides for the same transfer of rights, property and liabilities from the Victorian Fisheries Authority to Outdoor Recreation Victoria, and the same substitution of Outdoor Recreation Victoria for Victorian Fisheries Authority in any proceeding, contract or arrangement.

Right to property

The transfer of property, rights and liabilities from both the Game Management Authority and the Victorian Fisheries Authority to Outdoor Recreation Victoria is relevant to the property rights of natural persons who hold an interest in the liability transferred. However, this transfer of liabilities will not limit the property rights of persons holding the interest as they are not being deprived of their interest in the liability. Rather, the liability is transferred from one statutory entity to another without altering the substantive content of that right.

Insofar as a cause of action in relation to any potential liability held by the Game Management Authority or the Victorian Fisheries Authority may be considered ‘property’ within the meaning of section 20 of the Charter, clauses 53 and 62 may engage this right. However, in my opinion, these new provisions do not effect a deprivation of property as they do not extinguish any cause of action which a person may have against the Game Management Authority or the Victorian Fisheries Authority. Rather, liability is transferred to Outdoor Recreation Victoria.

Right to a fair hearing

For the same reasons outlined in the paragraph above, a person would not be prevented from bringing an action concerning matters in relation to the Game Management Authority or the Victorian Fisheries Authority because that person could commence the action against Outdoor Recreation Victoria, which would also be substituted for either Authority in any existing proceedings. Accordingly, in my view, clauses 53 and 62 would not limit section 24(1) of the Charter.

Transfer of staff from the Game Management Authority and Victorian Fisheries Authority to Outdoor Recreation Victoria

Section 11 of the Charter provides that a person must not be made to perform forced work or compulsory labour. The right to privacy in section 13(a) of the Charter is broad and encompasses rights to physical and psychological integrity, and individual identity. It has been interpreted to extend to matters relating to the right to seek employment, and may be interfered with where employment restrictions impact sufficiently on the personal relationships of the individual and otherwise upon the person’s capacity to experience a private life.

The Bill provides that a person who, immediately before the commencement day, was employed by the Game Management Authority (clause 58) and the Victorian Fisheries Authority (clause 67) is taken to be an employee of Outdoor Recreation Victoria on the same terms and conditions and with the same accrued entitlements as applied before the commencement day. The transfer of staff occasioned by these amendments is relevant to the Charter rights to freedom from forced work (section 11) and the right to privacy (section 13(a)). However, for the reasons below, I consider that neither right is limited by these clauses.

Freedom from forced work

While clauses 58 and 67 effecting the transfer of staff will automatically alter a person’s employer without their consent, the person’s ongoing employment is of their own volition. Accordingly, the right to freedom from forced work is not limited by clauses 58 and 67.

Right to privacy

While the right to privacy has been interpreted as being relevant to matters of employment, it would generally only be considered limited by restrictions on employment that have consequential effects on an individual’s capacity to experience a private life. Given an employee is not denied the capacity to seek alternative employment on similar terms, in my view, clauses 58 and 67 do not constitute an interference with private life of sufficient gravity so as to limit the right to privacy. Further, the proposed transfer will not result in any material detriment to a staff member’s employment terms, conditions or entitlements, so I am satisfied that the right to privacy is not limited by clauses 58 and 67.

The Hon. Steve Dimopoulos MP

Minister for Outdoor Recreation

 Steve DIMOPOULOS (Oakleigh – Minister for Environment, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister for Outdoor Recreation) (10:21): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I ask that my second-reading speech be incorporated into Hansard.

Incorporated speech as follows:

The Outdoor Recreation Victoria Bill 2026 delivers the government’s vision to enable and strengthen outdoor recreation in Victoria by consolidating the Victorian Fisheries Authority (VFA) and the Game Management Authority (GMA) into a new statutory authority, Outdoor Recreation Victoria (ORV), with an expanded scope.

ORV will continue the strong regulatory responsibilities for game hunting and fisheries currently managed by the VFA and GMA, while expanding their functions to play a critical role in promoting broader participation in outdoor recreation, supporting sector development and promoting and supporting access to public land for outdoor recreation. Additionally, ORV will continue the role that VFA currently plays in supporting commercial fisheries and aquaculture.

The establishment of ORV was announced in December 2025 in the government’s response to the Silver Review and aligns to the 2024 Economic Growth Statement commitment to consolidate regulators. However, it is not driven by efficiencies – rather, it is about increasing opportunities for Victorians and improving the services that support them.

We have heard from Victorians that they want more opportunity to get out and about in nature, and this government is committed to making that happen. Whether it’s fishing, four-wheel driving, camping, hunting, bushwalking or any other outdoor activity, Victoria has some of the best parkland, waterways and natural resources in the country. ORV will help more locals and visitors experience the full range of outdoor opportunities in Victoria by working across government to create a digital hub that brings together outdoor recreation information in one place – giving people a single jumping off point for all the information they need about outdoor recreation in our State.

The Premier has made clear her support for Victorians getting out into the great outdoors. The Outdoor Recreation Portfolio is central to making sure Victorians can enjoy the great outdoors with free and low-cost activities.

ORV will also play a critical role promoting access to public land for outdoor recreation by working directly with the outdoor recreation community, public land and waterway managers and key government departments to overcome barriers to public access. In this capacity it will advise the Minister for Outdoor Recreation on opportunities to make it easier for Victorians to access the incredible outdoor recreation activities available on public land in Victoria.

Alongside the extensive physical and mental health benefits outdoor recreation activities provide, they are also key economic drivers for our state and in particular for our regional communities. In 2019 recreational fishing and boating contributed $5.82 billion to the Victorian economy and supported 56,000 jobs, while game hunting contributed $356 million and supported 3,138 jobs. We expect these numbers to be significantly higher today. Alongside that, the visitor contribution from nature-based tourism is increasing year on year and was estimated at $5.3 billion last year. The important role ORV will have in growing participation in outdoor recreation, and supporting sector development, will help foster regional economic development and provide growth and employment opportunities for communities transitioning away from native timber harvest.

In recognition of Traditional Owners’ unique connection to Country, ORV will engage with First Peoples and Traditional owners in a culturally respectful and inclusive way that supports Treaty and self-determination. In doing so ORV will embed Traditional Owner knowledge and expertise in its strategic and operational planning. This will be achieved through the requirements of this Bill, which supports representation of First Peoples’ cultural knowledge and community leadership on its Board, and by fostering strong partnerships with Traditional Owners across Victoria.

The VFA and GMA have achieved a huge amount since their establishments in 2016 and 2013 respectively.

The VFA has increased fish stocking to 10 million fish per year, expanded hatchery infrastructure at Arcadia and Snobs Creek, and delivered more than $60 million in investment to maintain, enhance or develop new recreational boating infrastructure through Better

Boating Victoria. Meanwhile, the GMA has supported the implementation of adaptive harvest management framework for Victorian game duck hunting, expanded compliance operations and strengthened partnerships with Victoria Police.

ORV is about taking the work the VFA and GMA have done and building upon it, with expanded objectives and functions and a strengthened governance framework. As I will stress later, all staff from the VFA and GMA, including authorised officers, will transition across to ORV on day 1 enabling ORV to maintain regulatory continuity across game hunting and fishing.

Stakeholders, particularly hunters and fishers, have been overwhelmingly supportive of the proposal to establish ORV, rightly seeing it as a statement of government’s intent to enable the outdoor recreation sector to thrive in Victoria. VRFish, the State’s recreational fishing peak body, welcomed ORV and the ways it will make it easier for more Victorians to enjoy our great outdoors. Similarly, Sporting Shooters Association of Australia’s Victorian division has expressed its support, highlighting the benefits ORV’s ability to support growth, education and participation will bring to Victorians, along with the positive impact to regional communities.

Provisions of the Bill

Speaker, I now turn to the provisions of the Bill.

Commencement will be by proclamation, but my intention is for Outdoor Recreation Victoria to begin operation on 1 July 2026, subject to passage of this Bill.

Objectives and Functions

This Bill takes the combined objectives and functions of the VFA and GMA as its starting point. Importantly, this means that, amongst other things, it will retain the strong regulatory role for recreational fishing, commercial fishing and aquaculture and game hunting through its provision of information and education, as well as its monitoring, compliance and enforcement functions. To that end ORV will have the identical regulatory footprint of the VFA and GMA. It will also retain a strong focus on research and maintaining operational plans, including relating to the humane treatment of animals that are hunted or fished.

ORV is more than simply a merger of the VFA and GMA. ORV’s objectives and functions have been expanded in three key non-regulatory areas.

ORV will have a new role to promote participation in outdoor recreation. Just as the VFA has worked to promote participation in recreational fishing, ORV will seek to do so for outdoor recreation more broadly. Initially this promotion function will focus on recreational fishing, boating and game hunting, as well as the aligned activities of four-wheel driving and bush camping before considering expansion to other activities in the future. In this capacity, ORV will simplify the pathway for people to get the information they need to safely participate in outdoor recreation activities.

Secondly, it will work to optimise the benefits of outdoor recreation in a sustainable manner, and support the development of the outdoor recreation sector, as well as the commercial fishing and aquaculture sectors. Initially, the focus for ORV will be to support the sector through growing participation and realising the corresponding health, cultural, economic and employment benefits that result from increased participation.

Finally, ORV will have both an objective and function to promote and support access to public land for outdoor recreation. We have heard from Victorians about the barriers to access to public land, and ORV’s new scope is explicitly intended to address this. To this end it will work with public land and waterway managers, stakeholders and, where appropriate, private landowners, to explore opportunities to improve public access arrangements and make it easier for Victorians to get outdoors.

Government will provide clear guidance to ORV that these new objectives and functions will be exercised by ORV within the bounds of sustainable capacity. This must be done in a manner aligned with ORV’s regulatory role and through engagement with public land and waterway managers, respecting their authority and regulatory responsibilities over matters within their jurisdiction.

There have also been minor changes to clarify ORV’s advisory functions and to better align those functions to the legislative framework under the Public Administration Act 2004 as well as government policy for statutory authorities.

Governance arrangements

This Bill provides ORV with a significantly strengthened governance framework including an increased focus on the core-governance skills of directors. ORV will be governed by a Board of 5-9 directors, including a Chair and deputy Chair, appointed by the Minister for terms of up to three years. The Board will collectively have knowledge and skills in financial administration, risk management, strategic planning, legal experience or regulatory knowledge or experience, experience in the outdoor recreation sector and knowledge of First Peoples culture, community leadership and perspectives.

The intent is for the Board’s focus to be distinctly on the financial management, governance, strategic planning, organisational culture and risk management of ORV, with ORV’s staff or appointed advisory committees, bringing the subject matter expertise across outdoor recreation interests.

Staff

To enable the transition from VFA and GMA to ORV, the Bill provides for ORV to initially be led by an interim chief executive officer appointed by the Minister, but responsible to and reporting to the Board, for a period of up to 12 months.

The Bill further provides that ORV’s substantive chief executive officer will be employed by the Board, with the Minister’s approval. Both interim, and substantive, chief executives will have the power to employ staff.

Authorised officers

ORV will have the power to appoint authorised officers, as the VFA and GMA currently do, to monitor and enforce the game hunting and fishing regulatory frameworks. The consolidation represents a significant opportunity to leverage the combined pool of authorised officers across fishing and game hunting to improve and optimise ORV’s compliance effort. In particular, ORV will be more equipped to resource surge events like the opening of duck season, which the VFA has historically assisted the GMA with, or peak summer holiday fishing compliance activities.

Land Access Panel

Importantly, the Bill also establishes a Land Access Panel to provide advice and information to government to identify new opportunities for community access across public land and waterways. As part of this advice the panel will report on existing and proposed restrictions and barriers to improving access to public lands and waterways. As Minister for Outdoor Recreation, I will appoint members to this Panel to represent a range of interests relating to outdoor recreation, including Traditional Owners, public land and waterway managers, ORV and external stakeholders. The establishment of this Panel represents this government’s commitment to improving opportunities for Victorians to access public land and waterways for outdoor recreation.

Transitional arrangements

To enable regulatory and operational continuity, the Bill provides for several important transitional matters. Most importantly, and to provide surety to VFA and GMA staff, the Bill will transfer all staff of the VFA and GMA, except their CEOs, to ORV on their existing terms and conditions, and with their existing entitlements.

The Bill also abolishes the VFA and GMA and ends the terms of their boards on commencement. It establishes ORV as successor-in-law to the VFA and GMA, as well as transferring property, rights and liabilities of both entities to ORV and substituting ORV as a party in any proceeding or agreement that either entity is named in.

Critically, the Bill provides for the transition of the appointments of the VFA and GMA’s authorised officers so that ORV is able to acquit its core regulatory responsibility for game hunting, recreational fishing and commercial fishing and aquaculture.

These transitional provisions will enable ORV to hit the ground running from day 1, maintaining the high standard of regulatory responsibility for game hunting and fishing.

Conclusion

I would like to acknowledge the important interfaces between ORV’s regulatory roles relating to game hunting and fishing, its promotional role relating to outdoor recreation, and the public land management roles played by the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action and Parks Victoria.

This Bill represents a key step in reforming the outdoor recreation sector and establishing a new statutory authority with the appropriate scope and remit to not only regulate game hunting and fishing, but to also enable greater support and promotion to grow outdoor recreation in Victoria. This is about maximising the opportunities we have in this State, making it easier for every Victorian to enjoy the outdoors, while supporting regional economic growth and jobs in the process.

I commend the Bill to the house.

 James NEWBURY (Brighton) (10:21): I move:

That the debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.

Ordered that debate be adjourned for two weeks. Debate adjourned until Thursday 16 April.