PDA

View Full Version : letter from Oppostion office on closures



stevedemon
16-08-2006, 06:40 PM
Hi all here is an e-mail that I received from Mr lawrence Springborgs office today concerning the moreton bay closures lets read an weep but lets send the message home just thought you guys and Girls might like to see that it has been mention in parliament




9 August 2006

Moreton Bay fishing ban feared

The Queensland Coalition fear recreational fishing will be banned in half of Moreton Bay if the Beattie Labor Government is re-elected at the next State Election.

Conservation groups have launched a campaign to have “at least 30 – 50% of Moreton Bay within reserves (protected areas closed to all extractive activities)”.

In State Parliament this week, Shadow Fisheries Minister Mike Horan asked the Environment Minister Desley Boyle to give a guarantee the Beattie Labor Government would not close half of Moreton Bay to fishers.

“The Minister refused to give that guarantee, saying only that the State Government would start a review of the marine park in 2007 to be completed by 2008,” Mr Horan said.

“With Labor currently trying to elicit preferences from extreme green elements ahead of the next State Election, this is a dangerous time for recreational fishers who are rightly suspicious of what Labor’s plans are for the future of Moreton Bay.

“Locking up half of Moreton Bay would anger a lot of people, with a 2001 State Government recreational fishing survey finding almost half a million South-East Queenslanders went fishing at least once a year.

“The Beattie Labor Government has a track record of introducing fishing closures with only token consultation, and has a track record of shutting down fishing in Moreton Bay, with bans in four key areas introduced in 2003 allegedly to protect sharks.

“Farmers, timber workers and horse riders have borne the burnt of Labor’s environmental extremism in the past, but now it seems it is the mums, dads and kids who just want to go fishing in Moreton Bay who will be affected.”

Media Contact – Scott Whitby 07 3406 7430 or 0402 109 549



Cheers ;D ;D
Steve 8-) 8-)

imported_admin
16-08-2006, 08:51 PM
That sounds great, except it tells us nothing about their stand on the issue.

Have sent them an E-mail, will let you know if I get a reply.

stevedemon
16-08-2006, 09:02 PM
Hi ausfish
i have sent a e-mail to the opposition asking for clarification as to there stand on the closures as well as Health, Water and as to whom will lead have also informed them that this will be posted on fishing sites along with the letter above and that it did not tell us what is going to happen now we wait :-/ :-/ :-/ will post as soon as i have received mail


Might be and idea for as many people to hit them with letters then we will get the answers we are looking for ;D :-? ::) :-/ ;D >:( maybe :-? :-?
Cheers ;D ;D
Steve #8-) 8-)

marlinqld
17-08-2006, 06:15 AM
Taht is straight out of the text book for pollies in election mode.

Says alot but says nothing on their policy and stance. Typical pollie gobbledygook. I feell the same about the pollies that attended the recent meeting on this issue at Cleveland. Concerned? Probably not. Wanting to score election points for the up coming election they knew was going to happen? Probably. :-/ :(

Excuse me for being so cynical about pollies, but have they really given us reason to think otherwise of their motives over the years? :-?

let me see them continue their oppositon to the closures AFTER the election on a continuing basis, then they might, just MIGHT win over a few constituents. :P

Mike

CHRIS_aka_GWH
20-08-2006, 01:16 PM
have we recieved an opposition reply ?

stevedemon
20-08-2006, 04:29 PM
Hi all
still waiting will post as soon as i receive

I have also sent a letter to Desley Boyles office received back basic thanks for your reply on Beattie Government stand on the Moreton Bay issue and only telling that Government will not denie access to Moreton Bay to all Fisho's but nothing more on the closures will propably be the same as the Terminal issue no terminal but concrete marina with big high rises in the same area to do just as much damage and a lot of restrictions for all fisho's as the logs in the broadwater is a gethering ground for species of fish before headin up the rivers be years before they return but this was kept secret from the fisho's anyway wil keep you informed if any thing arrives

cheers ;D ;D
steve 8-) 8-)

Camo
21-08-2006, 04:28 PM
C'mon guys give Lawrence a go. It's hard to make policy on the run. If only we had a competent opposition to vote for. I fear labor will be here for another term. Look forward to more of the same.

Camo

hicksy
21-08-2006, 07:00 PM
That sounds great, except it tells us nothing about their stand on the issue.

Have sent them an E-mail, will let you know if I get a reply.





Any replies yet?

stevedemon
21-08-2006, 09:15 PM
Hi all
Due to the elections being so close as i have been speaking to one of the

Standing Liberal Canidate for the Springwood area Peter Collins.

Over the weekend the Coalition party have been meeting and parts of there talks were on the Closures of Moreton bay.

I have been in formed that the Coalition party does not believe that Closures or Lockouts are the answer, this is also the asnwer and stand from the member of Cleveland/Redlands Bay member
that these issue along with many other issues are on hand.

however guy's I will not paint anyone into a corner, although this is the answer from the Liberal Party canidate that there will be no closures to the Bay due to the facts that I have known Peter collins for a number of years, but have only just got to no the man over the past 2 yrs and his work in pushing for more Health, public housing interests within the Logan City area and the facts that he is always trying to push for the little persons and at the some time pushing for business within the area.
I have come to respect the man and his policies, when speaking to people in the area, he is very well respected for honesty, ;D(Yer i no honesty in a polication) :o ::) :-/ , but when you have known people for a will they intend to tell you what you need to know and not what you want to here.

anyway in comes down to the facts in the end that the Coalition does not believe that closures or lockouts are the answer.

I have also ask Peter Collins to go back to the party and ask that if they win the election will they place on there standing committee Fisher-persons whether from a group or singular as well as from the different industrys with fishing to be part of any thing to do with environmental issue so as we have a representive on the board, this is being taken back to the party for discussion. have also ask Desley Boyle office the same question but the same response recieved

As Follows

We acknowledge your email to the Hon Desley Boyle MP, Minister for the Environment, Local Government & Planning and Women.



Your correspondence is important to us and is being dealt with appropriately.



Thank you for taking the time to write to the Minister.



Administration Office

Minister for Environment, Local Government & Planning and Women


this was todays answer after a week of waiting
still waiting for a response from Lawrence Springborgs office although they have been busy electing members for the different areas
As i recieve more info will post it for you all sorry it is not more


Cheers ;D ;D
Steve 8-) 8-)

Loco_Pez
21-08-2006, 09:31 PM
With a state election now imminent I thought I would pass on to all of you the responses I have received from the relevant state ministers in regard to my letter of concern regarding marine park issues.

Firstly, Tim Mulherin, Labor Minister for Primary Industries & Fisheries, replied with a letter which included the following statements:


“. . . I would like to assure you that the Queensland Government certainly recognises the importance of recreational fishing to the many thousands of Queenslanders and visitors who enjoy our marine and freshwater fisheries each year . . . The challenging objective (?) is achieved primarily through applying the framework of ecologically sustainable development (ESD) and precautionary principle.
ESD promotes the use, conservation and enhancement of our fisheries resources and habitats in such a way that the ecological processes upon which they depend are maintained, and improved in the future.
The precautionary principle means that where there is a threat of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of scientific certainty may not be used as a reason to postpone intervention. . . ”

That last paragraph is the killer. My interpretation is that the Government believe they can nominate areas for protection merely because there is the merest suggestion of a threat without having any scientific support for this argument. So, for example, if some environmental or anti-fishing group were to say, without any scientific evidence, that they thought an area or species was threatened then a Labor government may decide to make this a fishing exclusion zone using their “precautionary principle”.

This is in stark contrast to the Government’s position on the Gold Coast cruise ship terminal. All of the research suggests that there is at the very least a possibility of a threat to the ecology of the terminal area. You would expect then that the Government would cancel their plans for the terminal by adopting their “precautionary principle”. However this is not the case. The precautionary principle only seems to apply when it suits which is hypocritical in my book.

The response I have received from the opposition is more encouraging, although one would expect that from a party trying to get into power. I quote the following from the Shadow Minister for Primary Industries & Fisheries, Mike Horan.


“The coalition believes very strongly in the rights to fish for recreational fishers. Like you, we do understand the need to conserve fishing.
This can be done by using actual science and working closely with recreational fishing groups which have the experience and local knowledge to advise on other systems, such as bag limits, fish size and short term closures during breeding times.
The coalition has a very strong view on recreational fishing for family, social and economic reasons and that will be the thrust of our policy.”

From my viewpoint the Labor Governement are offering no guarantees to recreational anglers that they will not expand existing marine exclusion areas or add new exclusion areas regardless of whether there is sound scientific support for such a decision.

I think most anglers share the opinion that they would not object to exclusion zones if it was proven that they would have a significant benefit to fish species or habitats but they don’t want to be kicked out of their favourite fishing spots just because some group, extreme green or otherwise, have some anti-fishing agenda. If Labor agree to the demands of theses groups just to gain preferences at election time it smells even worse.

Hope this is of interest.

Loco Pez
I am a member of EcoFishers and have no affiliation with any political party in any way.

Loco_Pez
21-08-2006, 09:38 PM
Further to my post above, this is the reply I got from my local memeber, Alex Douglas, (Coalition) Member for Gaven


. . . I clearly stated that no marine park / sanctuary should be declared unless there is strong scientific evidence for it. It must not be anecdoctal and there must be input from commercial and recreational fishing groups / representatives. As such this may have come to your attention because of my concern about the Beattie Labor governments intentions in the Gold Coast Seaway/ Spit and Broadwater. Locally, it is my position that the type of dreging to bare coffee rock base that they propose for their CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL will destroy a major part of the aquatic food chain. Recreational fisherman will be one of the major victims of their "great business initiative" .cheers Alex Douglas

That's more like it ! Clear and with no ambiguity. It must stick in Labor's craw that Labor did deals on the Moreton Marine Park to get Green preferences for the Gaven by-election only to be defeated by Douglas who strongly opposes this issue.

LP