Wednesday, 3 May 2023

Production of documents

Duck hunting

Debate resumed.

Melina BATH (Eastern Victoria) (12:49): Post question time I am pleased to continue my contribution. I was speaking before question time about the GMA’s – the Game Management Authority’s – report that it has presented to the Minister for Outdoor Recreation. Indeed it covers off on and it goes to Mr Bourman’s point about the scientific evidence and the scientists who undertake this analysis and that it has multiple layers of assessments. It has an eastern Australian waterbird survey (EAWS) by Professor Richard Kingsford, it has an interim harvest model output report assessed by both Professor Marcel Klaassen and Professor Kingsford, it looks at BOM and it looks at other areas and jurisdictions including New South Wales and South Australia.

It also looks at hunting fraternities; they come and present. Environmental and animal welfare organisations are also able to make submissions. The GMA has stated that it has taken a precautionary approach. Unfortunately what has happened is this government has taken that precautionary approach and then multiplied it to a reduction of season which is out of line and unreasonable based on this high degree of analysis through the GMA. I know my friends in the hunter conservationists feel that this overprecautionary approach from GMA was in itself unacceptable. I appreciate that fact, but the government has gone out on a frolic and taken off even more weeks to diminish the season, and this is unacceptable. I think what we on this side feel is most unacceptable is that there has been a code of silence on this issue. The government has not justified why it has done this. The GMA offered in writing a full in-person briefing from its staff and board to the Minister for Outdoor Recreation and/or the Minister for Environment and Climate Action and/or the Minister for Agriculture. We also see that Brian Hine, the chairperson, has resigned – I believe in frustration over this – prior to the expiry of his contract.

We see the BOM, the EAWS, the New South Wales quotas and the interim model all saying that there is high rainfall, that there are favourable climatic conditions for waterbird breeding. Indeed the report goes into great detail on that. What it also highlights, which I think is really disingenuous of the government, is that in September last year the GMA provided a waterfowl wounding reduction action plan that was a collaboration of welfare organisations and hunting organisations. They presented that to the government, and it is still tardily sitting on somebody’s desk not being assessed. We would like to see that information and why that is happening. We have spoken about the high regulation of this industry and pastime, and we see legislation, regulation, variations on wetlands being opened, compliance and authorised officers and Victoria Police coming during the season.

Just on the point of compliance, we see that the GMA a few days ago put up on its website some details around compliance. It was stated on that website – this has since been removed and has gone into the ether – 795 game licences checked and 652 hunter bags checked, with one bag which was over the limit. There were 197 protesters, and they were checking around the 173 wetlands available. Now, 800 checked, one game bird over the limit. We also know that of 197 protesters two were booked for dangerous behaviour, so it is not all one way as they would have us believe. We do expect compliance. All citizens should comply. If there is any recalcitrance, it will not be among the law-abiding hunters that I meet with who work so very diligently to improve the wetlands, improve a whole vast array of wetlands and game reserves, including Heart Morass, including Connewarre and including the Shepparton state game reserves. There is a lot more to be said about this that needs to be explained and expanded for the Victorian community.

Georgie PURCELL (Northern Victoria) (12:54): I rise to speak in support of this important documents motion today. I must say it is not often Mr Bourman and I vote the same way when it comes to decisions relating to the duck-shooting season, but I too want access to the documents relating to this shameful and disgraceful decision to proceed with a season this year. While we do not know all the details, what we do know is that the government made a decision that flies in the face of community sentiment, public safety and animal protection.

Mr Bourman states that duck shooting in Victoria is tightly regulated by the government, and that is where our disagreement will start on this. A 2017 independent review of the Game Management Authority by Pegasus Economics recommended that the GMA should be disbanded. Despite growing taxpayer subsidies, the GMA is incapable of monitoring hundreds if not thousands of sites where shooting occurs and has been historically criticised for being neither impartial nor independent. Recommendations by the Game Management Authority informed by the interim harvest model are untried and untested. It has never once recommended cancelling a season despite years of drought prior to this, bushfire and subsequently very low bird numbers. The Pegasus report found non-compliance within the shooting fraternity to be commonplace and widespread. Throughout eastern Australia, waterbird abundance and breeding pairs have consistently shown significant decline. Researchers actually estimate numbers to have fallen by as much as 90 per cent in the last four decades, but this is not being taken into consideration when making a decision on a duck-shooting season.

Good governance is reliant on transparency. It is time that the vast majority of Victorians are listened to over a vocal minority and that the data that is used to endanger countless native waterbirds is made available to the public and to members of this place. We also believe the government ignored the science, just like Mr Bourman does, that shows duck shooting is not only unbearably cruel but unsustainable and decimating our environment. We want to know how this unjustifiable decision was reached, and that is why I commend this motion to the house today.

Sitting suspended 12:57 pm until 2:02 pm.

Ryan BATCHELOR (Southern Metropolitan) (14:02): I am very happy to speak to Mr Bourman’s motion on the production of documents in relation to matters relating to the 2023 duck-hunting season. It gives me the opportunity, I suppose, to talk a little bit not just about the motion that Mr Bourman has moved in relation to the seeking of these documents but also, more broadly, about the issue of duck hunting – a topic on which in coming to the Parliament it is fair to say I knew not a lot but now, as chair of the new select committee that has been established on these arrangements, I am learning more and more by the day, as are other members of the committee. I think it is safe to say that it is very clear from the work the committee has done so far – in terms of the submissions we have received and the people we have spoken with out in the community on the field visit we made last week at the opening of the season – that there is obviously a range of very deeply held views in relation to the recreational hunting of native birds here in Victoria, whether they be ducks or stubble quail, and those views are being very well expressed to our committee.

As of last week, when we last spoke about these matters, there had been more than 1700 submissions to our inquiry. I am reliably informed by the committee secretariat that that number has now nudged up a little in the intervening week. With five days to go until submissions close we have now clocked – at the moment – just over 3000. We are anticipating a few more to come through in the last few days for the committee’s deliberations. I am sure all members of the committee are diligently working their way through those submissions, which have come with a range of viewpoints, obviously some very strongly in favour and some very strongly against, mainly from individuals at this point it is fair to say. Many of the organisations with an interest in this area are yet to lodge their submissions, but we hope that they do so by the close of submissions on 8 May.

Last week the committee took a field trip to Lake Connewarre, just out of Geelong, nestled between Barwon Heads and Leopold, and observed the opening of the 2023 duck-hunting season, the season for which Mr Bourman’s documents motion seeks to elicit further details. It was great to see all members of the committee there present. We got to witness firsthand the way that the Game Management Authority and Victoria Police go about their task of regulating game hunters here in Victoria, with the checking of licences before they entered the wetlands, the monitoring of the time frames for the commencement of hunting and then also the way that, once the hunters came off the wetlands, the Game Management Authority and the police went about their business of both checking the bags that the hunters were bringing off and making sure that the birds that were shot by the hunters were shot in accordance with the regulations, and also there were some firearms inspections undertaken by Victoria Police.

Obviously it was a slightly different set of circumstances for most of those hunters on that Wednesday. When they walked out of the wetlands, they probably were not expecting to see quite the crowd that was in the car park at Baenschs Lane and the attendant camera crews and reporters who were there following us around on the day. I think it was a really interesting opportunity for members of the committee to speak with representatives from Field and Game in Victoria and with representatives of the local duck rescue, who had been out that morning hunting and also observing and then after 10 o’clock attempting to rescue birds that had been part of the morning’s hunt.

I think what I hope we will see through the inquiry is a very thoughtful consideration of the range of views that people have out there in the community. As I have said, there are a lot of people who have got a very strong view on this topic and who are making submissions to our inquiry. The first tranche of those submissions is now on the Parliament’s website, so if other members are interested in the topic and would like to sit there and read through some of those views, they are available. I note that a couple of members of the press wrote a pretty good summary, I think, yesterday of some of those submissions that have been received so far.

What we hope to see from here is a range of expert evidence being led by researchers, academics and organisations who are involved, either for or against the recreational hunting of native birds here in Victoria. The committee itself has invited submissions from a wide range of these groups, and we are hopeful that those organisations will provide us with the sorts of information that we need to continue our deliberations and to assess the environmental issues around the recreational hunting of birds – the social impact and the environmental impact but also the economic impact of the activity – and what it provides in terms of economic impact as an activity held in the state of Victoria and other associated matters related to the activity here.

We are also going to spend some time looking, obviously, at how the regulatory framework itself operates and the role that the Game Management Authority plays in the licensing and monitoring of hunters of native birds here in Victoria.

There is also a range of other matters associated with the practice and the controls that are put in place on hunters. There has been particular interest obviously in the issue of bird wounding and how wounded birds are dealt with on game reserves and in wetland environments. For many it is a subject of quite a bit of contention – that is clear from the evidence that we have seen so far about these sorts of practices and how they are dealt with by both the regulator and, at a policy level, by government.

We do hope that over the course of the next few months, as the committee turns from the written submission phase to the public evidence phase, the focus of the committee’s activities and the focus of the information and the evidence that is before us – and we do acknowledge that there is a lot of passion in this debate – is a debate grounded in evidence, led by the science and led by facts and that we deal with each other, as I think we have thus far, in a respectful way. Whilst this is a topic on which passions clearly run deep and on which there are a lot of very firmly held views, I am hopeful that we can continue this inquiry into a matter that is of obvious great interest to a great many Victorians in a respectful way and in a way that relies upon the evidence that is presented to us as the basis on which we will form our views about the matters before us. It is very clear that being led by the evidence on this topic is something the government has taken very seriously. I think it is good that these matters are being debated both here today in this motion but also more broadly in front of the committee. I look forward to the next couple of months worth of work and to presenting our report to the Parliament when the inquiry is concluded later this year.

Katherine COPSEY (Southern Metropolitan) (14:12): I rise today to support this motion, as the Greens do in principal support the release of documents to aid in transparency, although I will note for the record that that should not be taken as an agreement with some of the more editorial assertions in this motion. I will just take the opportunity to reiterate the Greens’ record of advocacy on this topic. Bringing about the end to duck hunting has been a pillar of the Greens policy platform for as long as the Greens have been in Parliament. Indeed Sue Pennicuik, former MLC for Southern Metropolitan, mentioned it as a priority in her inaugural speech back in 2006. There is a long history of debate on this topic. In Parliament and in our campaign work the Greens have consistently backed community calls for duck shooting to be banned, and our MPs have also visited wetlands in person to see how barbaric this practice is and to assist volunteer rescue efforts.

This year, as we all know, the government once again announced that the season would proceed, but the community’s calls are having an impact. In February, as has been spoken about at length, the government established a select committee on Victoria’s recreational native bird hunting arrangements and, as you know, I am a member of that committee. I do echo the previous calls that have been made in the debate today urging members of the public to have their say in that inquiry by making a submission prior to 8 May. The committee will be undertaking consideration of all submissions received on this topic, and it has been fantastic to see the level of participation so far. I would urge everybody to have their say before the deadline.

Just last week, along with the other committee members, I too spent the morning at Lake Connewarre in western Victoria. We were there early, and we heard the first gunshots as the season opened. Despite the rules around conduct in shooting seasons, we know that each season we frequently see multiple breaches of the regulations: the killing of protected species, the shooting of birds and their being left to die in painful conditions or indeed the use of hot-shot illegal lead ammunition. More than two-thirds of Victorians – 68 per cent, we know – agree that duck shooting should be banned. The practice has been banned in New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia, and not recently either but decades ago – Western Australia in 1990, New South Wales in 1995 and Queensland in 2005.

Yesterday I joined duck rescuers from the Coalition Against Duck Shooting outside the Premier’s office where they laid out 73 birds, victims so far of the 2023 Victorian duck-shooting season. These victims include eight illegally shot protected and threatened species. They were all collected from the wetlands over the first few days of the duck-shooting season recently approved by the government.

We know already that thousands of waterbirds are under environmental stress with climate change and drought conditions destroying habitat, and continued shooting seasons have exacerbated this threat to waterbird populations. Aerial surveys have confirmed that waterbird abundance in our wetlands is well below average and in long-term decline. To conclude, today the Greens will support this documents motion as we believe the community does deserve transparency, especially around the practice of duck shooting.

Sheena WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (14:16): I rise to speak on the motion from Mr Bourman, and in doing so I will echo the very eloquent words of my colleague Mr Galea and, as a member of the government, keep my comments and contribution today somewhat circumspect. I am also conscious that there is an ongoing inquiry into this very issue. While the government will not oppose this motion, there are a number of points I and my government colleagues would like to make on the issue, and I did have the opportunity to hear from both Mr Galea and Mr Batchelor in their earlier contributions. Firstly, over the past number of years the issue of recreational native bird hunting in Victoria has become increasingly contested. Furthermore, the Andrews Labor government recognises that many people have deeply held, passionate and diverse views around duck hunting. We also acknowledge these concerns extend to the recreational hunting of other birds such as the stubble quail. We respect those views, and we welcome hearing from all sides of the debate.

Taking all this into account, the Victorian Parliament has established a select committee into recreational native bird hunting in Victoria, which many members of this chamber are members of. I myself am a member of that committee, which is very capably chaired by my colleague Mr Batchelor, accompanied by a multipartisan collection of members, including another government member Mr Galea, and Georgie Purcell, Katherine Copsey, Bev McArthur, Melina Bath and Evan Mulholland, and lastly Mr Bourman himself. I know that Mr Bourman and many others in this place hold strong and very sincere beliefs around this issue, and many if not all of us have been in contact with and contacted by passionate constituents who care very deeply one way or another on this issue. The select committee will inquire into, consider and report by the end of August on Victoria’s recreational native bird hunting arrangements.

I will take a moment to say that we certainly appreciate the important work that all members of the select committee are undertaking, including contributions from a member for Eastern Victoria. Importantly, this select committee is holding public hearings to hear from hunting associations, animal welfare groups, traditional owners and regional communities. I too welcome stakeholder input into this process and encourage members of the community from all sides of this debate to get involved and have their say. If you would like to get in contact with me – I know that many folks are listening today as we debate this motion in the chamber – I can point you in the right direction of where to go to make a submission. They are still open. The committee will be accepting submissions until 8 May, so get in quick and have your say. I know that it has been almighty popular already with members of the community.

This is a really important process, and it is even more important that we get it right. The select committee has in its work wide-ranging terms of reference including but not limited to the operation of the annual recreational native bird hunting arrangements, what the arrangements look like in other Australian jurisdictions, their environmental sustainability, the end impact on amenity and their social and economic impact.

As I said, I am a member of that select committee, and as a member I recently visited the Connewarre game reserve near Geelong to tour its grounds with all the other committee members. On the opening day of the season I spoke with environmental experts – in fact internationally renowned environmental experts – and duck rescue volunteers about their role and how the inquiry may affect them and the work that they do. I want to thank the Game Management Authority for hosting me and my colleagues and thank all involved for making the day work, including the good folks from the secretariat of this inquiry. And also, you know, there were of course many folks involved that let their opinions be known.

It was a new experience to me, I must confess. The first day on that early morning heading out to Reedy Lake I got the gumboots out, and they came in handy. It was really something else for me to hear the gunshots in the sky when the clock ran past 8 am. Yes, it was just a very new experience, and I will find some words for it at some point I am sure. We followed that with another visit, which was somewhat more successful, to Baenschs Lane, where we met animal rescue volunteers, and can I just send my thanks to them for being so generous in sharing their insights and knowledge about their understanding of the native bird hunting arrangements in our state. I actually saw some hunters bringing in and declaring their bags for the relevant officials. Thanks for those folks that did brave it, because as you mentioned, Mr Galea, there were cameras and media and a parliamentary group arriving, so that would have been a new experience, I reckon, for them.

Of course I would like to take a moment to extend my thanks to Geelong Field and Game for hosting us at the third site visit to their facility at Lake Road at the Connewarre Wetland Centre – I did better then, thank you, Mr Bourman. There, members of the Geelong Field and Game outlined their original vision for the wetland centre, the works undertaken to get it to its current state as a homeland to many duck and other bird species and the volunteering undertaken, the thousands and thousands of hours of volunteering undertaken by many of its members to restore that land. I had an opportunity to meet with some of those members and discuss a little bit about their partnership and work with traditional owners, and I did outline my particular interest in understanding traditional owner impacts. There is of course more to be said on that visit, but it was good to see that Geelong Field and Game site and all the work that they do and to meet some of their members. So thank you to them again.

Of course on 24 February 2023 the settings for the duck season for this year were announced by the Game Management Authority. The season, as I said, opened on Wednesday 26 April – that was a day when many of us in the committee were there – and will continue to run until Tuesday 30 May. The season this year is a modification of the duck season arrangements provided in the regulations, with a shorter season and a reduced daily bag limit of four game ducks per day. That is in place, and we have certainly seen that impact, having talked to some folks in that inquiry. Hunting the blue-winged shoveler and hardhead is also prohibited for the entire season as both species have been declared threatened in Victoria under the arrangements of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988.

I would also like to note that the Andrews Labor government has listened to the stakeholders from all sides and in addition will continue to listen to stakeholders as the work of this inquiry continues on, and of course we will read all of those contributions as best we can, which have come from right across the state. We have met with a wide range of representatives from pro- and anti-hunting stakeholders, including Field and Game Australia, the group known as the Regional Victorians Opposed to Duck Shooting, the RSPCA and the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia (Victoria).

Stakeholder consultation has shown the issue of recreational native bird hunting arrangements in our state has become incredibly contested. In fact I am sure if we were to check Hansard for this chamber, we would note the enormous amount of questions asked and contributions made on the seasonal arrangements for duck hunting. Victorians have also shared their concerns with members of Parliament around the native bird wounding rates, illegal hunting behaviours and the impact of recreational hunting on native bird populations, including those threatened species.

Now that the 2023 duck and stubble quail hunting seasons are officially underway, it is important to reiterate that this government will not tolerate poor or illegal behaviour by hunters or protesters alike. There are examples of what that looks like, but they have been discussed by other members in their contributions today. I will continue that work, and I look forward to playing my part to get the duck-hunting arrangements in our state much clearer.

Jeff BOURMAN (Eastern Victoria) (14:26): I want to thank everyone for their contributions, but before I go into it I am going give a reminder to the Nationals member here, who seems to feel that every time she starts on something that involves me she needs to remind us that we worked with the Labor Party. The coalition put the Greens in front of Labor in nearly every seat, and their shenanigans ended up with the first ever Greens member of Parliament from regional Victoria. It might be handy if they just cool their jets and keep to the relevant stuff, or it will come back to bite them.

Transparency is what this is all about. Yesterday and I think in my contribution today I mentioned that there was a thing on the Game Management Authority website about enforcement outcomes. I did not have a copy of it then. During the lunch break I got a copy of it. Blah, blah, blah, blah – the one that interests me is ‘Fail to immediately kill game which is alive when recovered’. There were two instances. One was when a protester did it. This protester was not worried about the pain and suffering of the animal. This protester picked it up and walked off with it instead of humanely dispatching it. These people are not animal welfare people. These people are needlessly keeping alive a bird that has been wounded and should have been killed outright. They can still take it to whoever they do – the Wildlife Victoria people – and have all of that. But in the interest of a humane world, it should have been done then and there. On the whole – I am not going to go through all of this – protesters were twice as likely to get an enforcement outcome from the government. This was taken down from the Game Management Authority website. Thankfully someone did screenshot it.

Clarity and transparency are important, and I again urge the government not to just send me a letter in a month saying, ‘We can’t do this because we haven’t got enough time’ or to send me something like the wounding reduction plan, which is all redacted. This is their time to come clean. It is fair. Something weird has gone on. We can work through this, but if not, how can we trust them?

Motion agreed to.