Mr O'CONNOR(5.47 p.m.) —The bills before the House, the Ballast Water Research and Development Funding Levy Bill 1997 and the Ballast Water Research and Development Funding Levy Collection Bill 1997 , relate to a very important environmental issue that has arisen because of the spread of exotic aquatic organisms to Australian waters.

Since the mid-1980s, Australia's trade in bulk and manufactured commodities has increased dramatically. Australia has participated in the process of economic globalisation and trade liberalisation. We heard mention of that today on the floor of this parliament in question time when the Acting Prime Minister (Mr Tim Fischer) referred to the important APEC negotiations which the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) is attending at the moment. APEC has been an important vehicle for that substantial increase in trade in both bulk and manufactured commodities. To give you an idea of how that trade has increased, since the mid-1980s exports and imports as a percentage of our gross domestic product have risen from 15 per cent to over 20 per cent. It is a very important increase and it reflects Australia's stronger trading position.

An important part of our export trade and growth is, of course, bulk cargo—coal, iron ore, grains, woodchips and petroleum. The latter three are very important exports and imports through the port of Geelong in my own electorate of Corio. Because of the nature of this bulk trade, a large number of ships arrive in our ports in ballast. It is estimated that 121 million tonnes of ballast water from 5,100 ships is discharged in Australian waters each year. Furthermore, 70 per cent of that ballast originates in Asian ports with half coming from Japan.

The introduction of unwanted marine organisms through ballast discharge is currently having a significant adverse impact on Australia's marine environment. There are two major impacts: one is on Australia's lucrative seafood production and exports and the other is on human health. The growth in Australia's seafood production over the past decade has been substantial. Of course, that growth is most important to coastal regional communities such as those in Tasmania and Victoria and, indeed, around Australia. Many people rely for their employment on processing the catch and exporting it. It is an area of quite lucrative export growth for our primary producers.

To give you an example of the growth in the production of major fisheries products in Australia, in 1987-88 $246 million worth of prawns was produced in Australia. That rose to $334 million worth of product in 1995-96. Production of rock lobsters has increased from $252 million to $375 million, abalone from $96 million to $130 million, scallops from $22 million to $62 million, oysters from $36 million to $51 million, general fish products from $157 to $359 million and tuna from $19 million to around $100 million. Australia has had substantial growth in seafood production. Significant areas of that growth are now threatened by the problems that are associated with the discharge of ballast waters in our ports.

Tasmania, particularly, has been hit by the introduction of two particular marine organisms: brown kelp, which has affected its lucrative abalone industry, and the Northern Pacific sea star which has spread along 200 kilometres of the Tasmanian coastline. I understand it has been detected in Victorian ports as well. The giant sea worm is now posing a problem to us in Port Phillip Bay.

Apart from the marine pollution that comes from the discharge of ballast waters and the threats to our marine environment and aquaculture industries, there are also human health considerations where problems occur in the contamination of the seafood chain. The introduction of new species of toxic red algae has caused considerable problems.

This problem has to be addressed. Australia has been at the forefront of international efforts to recognise the problem and the enormous risks posed to our marine environment and to stimulate not only domestic but international action to overcome the problem.

The previous Labor government played a very active role, as I have just stated, in achieving global recognition of the problem and in putting effective strategies in place to deal with it. In 1990, Australia became the first country to introduce national voluntary controls for the discharge of ballast water. These controls were subsequently adopted by the International Marine Organisation in 1991. In 1995, Australia developed a ballast water management strategy which has become a model for other nations around the world. The bills before us give effect to funding key elements of that strategy, which, as its major aim, seeks innovative and cost-effective measures to combat this very important problem and threat to our coastal marine environments.

This legislation will pose no real financial burden on the Commonwealth. The bills seek to raise $2 million which will be paid into a research fund and will be levied on bulk carriers to the tune of $210 and on other carriers and tankers to the tune of $140. The legislation, as it has been presented to the parliament, has been drafted in consultation with major stakeholders: the shipping industry and research organisations, as well as state and federal governments. This levy will cut out at the $2 million limit and will fund research efforts beyond the year 2000.

These are very important bills because of the considerable problems that have emerged in the past 10 years as a result of the discharge of ballast waters into our ports. A recent study done of Victorian ports, published in May 1996 and entitled Ballast water, hull fouling and exotic marine organism introductions via ships, canvassed the problem in the ports of Melbourne, Geelong, Hastings and Portland. The port of Geelong in my electorate—as you would know Mr Deputy Speaker, as you have a keen interest in matters relating to ports—is Victoria's principal bulk and specialist cargo port. It is the major point for the export of bulk grains. It is also a major point for the import of crude oil and petroleum products, raw materials for aluminium smelting and fertilisers. It is also an export point for petroleum products. From August 1994 to July 1995 there were 342 ship visits and an estimated ballast water discharge of over one million tonnes.

The study of the Geelong ports was interesting. It indicated that ballast water discharged into the port of Geelong came from ships which had come from other domestic ports. That is not to say that those ships did not originate outside Australia. When we go behind the statistics, from August 1994 to July 1995 the port of Geelong received a substantial amount of ballast from ships which had nominated Tasmanian ports, notably Hobart, as their last port of call.

Target species causing problems—species which are known to be established in Hobart but which are not yet thought to have established viable populations in Victoria—are the Northern Pacific sea star and Japanese kelp. With the nature of the trade that is occurring, we understand there is a risk to our port from ships calling in at other ports in Australia, such as Hobart in Tasmania, taking on ballast there, coming to our port and discharging that ballast. Another interesting feature of the statistics was the fact that ships leaving our port also call in at other regional ports, notably Portland. Whilst the problem may have some international origins, the domestic linkages are very important as well.

This legislation, as I indicated, will raise $2 million for innovative research projects to overcome this problem. It is a problem that is going to have an increasingly important impact on regional economic development in Australia. Many communities are placing great store and emphasis on the growth of their aquaculture industries. The particular problems that are being caused by ballast water are substantial and threaten over the longer term significant economic developments and the potential for job growth in regional areas.

As recently as last Friday, I held a seminar in my electorate on the potential for the development of Avalon airport as an air freight centre for the export of perishable foods to Asia. Part of the cargoes that we hope will be leaving Avalon will be fish products and other aquaculture products from Tasmania and perhaps northern Australia. I was privileged to have in my electorate the honourable member for Lyons (Mr Adams), who came and spoke at this seminar that I organised in my electorate. He indicated to us the very strong interest in Tasmania among fish producers and aquaculture producers in using the Avalon facility to export their product into Asian markets, particularly Japan.

We are looking very much at the development of Avalon to secure some job growth and substantial export and economic growth for our region. We hope to draw product from Tasmania in a substantial way. We do not want to see this problem stunting the growth of aquaculture around Port Phillip Bay nor do we want to see a substantial source of supply—notably, Tasmania—being affected in an adverse way, as it is now, by the problem of ballast water discharge.

In conclusion, we on this side of the House are quite proud of the role that previous Labor governments have played in getting industry to recognise the problem and setting the basis on which subsequent action by this government is based. We were a government that encouraged the global recognition of a problem that has to be tackled on a global scale. Some of the procedures and protocols which have been developed by AQIS here in Australia have become models for other countries to follow. We are pleased about that. We are also pleased that this legislation will be able to provide funds to resource innovative research projects that will come to grips with this problem. From our side of the House, we will not be opposing the measures in this bill. We encourage the path that the government has taken. We support the measures in a bipartisan way.