Thursday, 4 June 2026

 Georgie PURCELL (Northern Victoria) (12:14): (1343) My question is for the Minister for Outdoor Recreation. In 2018 an independent review found the Game Management Authority was a compromised regulator that was disproportionately targeting wildlife rescuers instead of enforcing hunting laws. In 2023, at a public hearing for the parliamentary inquiry into duck shooting, the GMA CEO told the committee:

We do not set the laws, but we apply the laws. We think we apply them very fairly.

In 2024, when the GMA fined and banned me for rescuing wounded birds, Minister Dimopoulos said, ‘MPs aren’t above the law either.’ Yesterday, covert audio taken this year revealed a senior GMA compliance officer advising duck shooters how to illegally take unlicensed children shooting, breaching firearm laws. He also claimed the government’s laws were designed to ‘make the protesters look like the fool’ and that they ‘won’t be looking for illegal behaviour by shooters’. Do you support these claims made by your agency?

 Enver ERDOGAN (Northern Metropolitan – Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, Minister for Environment, Minister for Outdoor Recreation) (12:15): I thank Ms Purcell for her question and her passion in relation to these matters. I know that these matters are quite sensitive topics. I know that the protection of wildlife is a key responsibility of the GMA. I know overall from the reports I have that the agency is reporting that they have a very strong enforcement program, which is focused on making sure there is compliance for hunting offences. When I put those allegations to the agency, the agency was very clear that 93.5 per cent of its enforcement has been related to hunting offences and only 6.5 has been in relation to public safety offences. As a government our focus is on ensuring that strong, responsible regulation protects Victoria’s native wildlife, safeguards ecosystems and ensures long-term sustainability for future generations. GMA officers are trained professionals, and I expect every officer to carry out that important regulatory role in protecting public safety in the most balanced and fair way possible, like all regulators. We have the GMA and we have the VFA, and soon they will be merged. I think that is another opportunity to combine their expertise to provide a higher level of service, a higher level of compliance and more work in relation to public education, which is the key to ensuring long-term compliance and the long-term success of these agencies. In relation to the allegations you have put, they are very serious, and I know that the GMA is aware of them. My office has been in contact with the GMA, but ultimately I am not going to comment on individual actions because I think that is a matter for the agency and their employer–employee relationship, which I respect.

 Georgie PURCELL (Northern Victoria) (12:16): Minister, it is important to note that statistic includes bag checks and licence checks, which are not compliance measures. Regardless, last night an ABC Stateline story detailed that the GMA is going to extreme efforts to put surveillance on rescuers. One rescuer had his image posted on the GMA’s Facebook page with his name and his location, and the comments underneath, which included death threats to drown him, were left unmoderated. The GMA only deleted them weeks later when they got a media inquiry from the ABC about it. It is important to note that these are the same people that will get even greater discretionary powers when ORV is established. By comparison, they have never posted a photo of a single shooter or any personal details about them. What are you going to do about the regulator doxxing members of the public on a government Facebook page?

 Enver ERDOGAN (Northern Metropolitan – Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, Minister for Environment, Minister for Outdoor Recreation) (12:17): I thank Ms Purcell for her supplementary question. I did put those allegations to the GMA – my office did – and they completely reject those. In relation to that specific example you gave, I think it is important to set the record straight that that information about that individual was released via a court process, and therefore it was already in the public domain. I think as minister, across all my agencies and all my portfolios I do expect the GMA to actively moderate their social media platforms. We as members of Parliament see it all the time: comments that are false, misleading, defamatory, discriminatory, offensive or otherwise inappropriate. That is across the board. My office has to moderate my own Facebook page for that same reason, as I know many members of Parliament in this place have expressed similarly. I think in relation to that specific allegation about a photo, that photo was available via the public domain in the courts, and that was a decision of the courts. I have noticed it has been publicised in a number of publications, including newspapers. I was looking the other day, and I think one of the regional advertisers has published it. I think the GMA have been very clear that at no stage did they ever publish someone’s photo and that they made sure that their face was blurred.