Greens demand Prime Minister act as South Australian algae bloom nears ‘disaster', fisheries shut down
The naturally-occurring but harmful algal bloom has plagued the state's beaches for months, killing marine life and plunging the seafood industry into crisis.
Reports have emerged of dead fish, rays and sharks washing up along the metropolitan coastline – including North Haven between the river mouth and marina breakwater, Tennyson Beach, north of Grange jetty, and south of Christies Beach Surf Life Saving Club.
Several mussel farming sites around the Port Lincoln area have also been shut after shellfish toxins were detected in the area.
Greens senator Sarah Hanson Young has says the bloom is a 'national disaster' and therefore required a 'national response'.
While algal blooms are not covered under natural or national disaster declarations, which are activated to better co-ordinate assistance between state and Commonwealth governments, work is ongoing to discern whether the event qualifies under other federal arrangements.
She called on the Prime Minister and federal Environment Minister Murray Watt to visit Adelaide and 'take some action'.
'If this was happening in Bondi, or on the North Shore in Sydney, the Prime Minister would have already been on the beach, talking to concerned locals and the affected industries,' Senator Hanson-Young said on Wednesday.
'But today, we've had virtually nothing from the federal government.'
Following a meeting between Senator Watt and the state government, the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water's Head of International Environment, Reef and Oceans has been sent to the state.
Senator Watt said the government was 'deeply concerned by the widespread marine species mortalities caused by this extreme event,' and said he had been kept up to date by the Malinauskas government.
'While the science has made clear that there is no quick fix for the bloom, by having senior federal representatives on the ground we are supporting the SA government's efforts with manpower, and ramping up our ongoing monitoring efforts,' he said.
'We will give careful consideration to any request for assistance we receive from the state government.'
South Australia's flagship fisheries patrol vessel Southern Ranger has been deployed to inspect the bloom and help authorities understand its impact.
Senator Hanson-Young, the Greens' environment and water spokeswoman, said this should have been happening 'weeks and weeks ago' – pointing out SA's fishing and tourism industries were being 'smashed'.
'Our environment is dying, and our community is alarmed,' she said.
'This is the climate crisis unfolding before our very eyes, and South Australia can't handle it on our own.'
Senator Hanson-Young said she would be moving for a federal inquiry into the crisis when parliament resumes.
In their latest update on Wednesday, the SA Department of Environment and Water said the algae – known as Karenia mikimotoi – had been detected in the Port River.
Elevated levels were found by authorities along the metropolitan coastline, while 'very high' levels were at the Garden Island and Outer Harbor boat ramps.
It was first detected on the Fleurieu Peninsula in March.
'State government agencies are taking weekly water samples at 17 sites across West Lakes, the Port River, the Patawalonga River and the end of four jetties at Largs Bay, Grange, Glenelg and Port Noarlunga,' the department said in their update.
The South Australian opposition has already called for a royal commission to explore the origin and consequences of the algae and what could have been done to manage the situation, the ABC reports.
Authorities believe a marine heatwave in September last year could have contributed to the bloom.
Flooding in the Murray River over 2022 and 2023 washing extra nutrients into the sea, or an unprecedented cold-water upwelling over the summer of 2023-24, may also have contributed.
The last large event of this type of algae recorded in SA was at Coffin Bay in 2014.
Karenia mikimotoi is not known to cause long-term harmful effects in humans but exposure to discoloured or foamy water can cause short-term skin or eye irritation and respiratory symptoms.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
24 minutes ago
- Perth Now
‘Important': Albo's China jaunt defended
A senior Labor minister has hit back at the opposition for criticising Anthony Albanese's lengthy state visit to China, saying the relationship with Australia's biggest trading partner had 'broken down' on the Coalition's watch. The Prime Minister spent much of the last week touting Australia's tourism, trade and research offerings in Shanghai, Beijing and Chengdu as part of a five-day business and diplomatic blitz. But the Opposition has argued the trip did not produce any tangible outcomes, despite several agreements being signed. Attorney-General Michelle Rowland said on Sunday she found the 'criticism quite extraordinary considering that since we came to government we have removed some $20 billion of trade impediments with China'. China imposed trade restrictions during a trade war with the Morrison-Coalition government. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has met with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Prime Minister's Office / Handout / NewsWire Credit: NewsWire 'We now have in everything from wine to lobster, not to mention the fact that China is our single biggest trading partner,' Ms Rowland told Sky News. 'Our resources sector relies on that relationship.' She noted that Mr Albanese's visit was 'at the invitation … of China'. 'He went with a significant business delegation,' Ms Rowland. 'This is about creating jobs and extra trade opportunities for Australia, and it's important that we maintain this vital relationship.' The business community, represented by the Business Council of Australia (BCA), has praised the trip. The BCA was central to many of Mr Albanese's engagements in China, including high-level talks with Chinese officials and business leaders. With Mr Albanese meeting with Xi Jinping while a face-to-face with Donald Trump elusive, Ms Rowland was asked how she thought the China trip would go down in Washington. 'Our relationship with China is obviously important, as is our relationship with the United States,' she said. Chinese President Xi Jinping sat down with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese in Beijing. Prime Minister's Office / Handout / NewsWire Credit: NewsWire The hour-long face-to-face took place in the ornate East Hall of the Great Hall of the People. Prime Minister's Office / Handout / NewsWire Credit: NewsWire 'But here, there are different purposes. 'We will engage in the national interest wherever we can with China. 'We will always act in the national interest, and often we will disagree. 'But this is important from the perspective of our trade and of stabilising that relationship, which, quite frankly, had broken down under successive Liberal governments. 'And it's important that we have a government now that's acting in our national interest, in the interest of jobs and trade and certainty.' Ms Rowland, who sits on the National Security Committee, also downplayed concerns around the Trump administration's demand to hike Australian defence spending and its commitment to AUKUS – a $360bn submarine pact with the US and UK underpinning Canberra's defence strategy for the first half of the 21st century. While Mr Albanese was in China, the man leading the US review of AUKUS hinted Australia would need to guarantee support for the US if a conflict broke out in the Indo-Pacific over Taiwan. It came after the Financial Times reported Mr Colby asked Australia and Japan what they would do to defend the democratically self-governed island from China. Attorney-General Michelle Rowland says Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's visit to China was 'acting in the national interest'. Nikki Short / NewsWire Credit: News Corp Australia Ms Rowland said she was 'not going to engage in hypotheticals' but that the Albanese government did 'not support a unilateral change' on Taiwan. 'What I will note, in going to a related issue about defence spending, that we recognise the US has called for this of a number of its allies,' she said. 'But again, I would point out that we are spending some $10bn over the forwards and nearly $60bn over the next decade on defence spending. 'We will act always in the national interest, and we will ensure that our capabilities are up to scratch.' She refused to comment on National Security deliberations on the US' AUKUS review, but said that 'there is nothing unusual about a new administration having a review of these relationships'. 'But again, we view AUKUS as fundamental to our relationship with the United States, and we are confident in its execution,' Ms Rowland said.
ABC News
24 minutes ago
- ABC News
Malaysian fugitive Jho Low allegedly using fake Australian passport while living in China
A high-profile Malaysian corruption suspect is allegedly living in China under a Greek name with a forged Australian passport, according to the investigative media outlet Brazen. Jho Low, a financier accused of being the mastermind of Malaysia's largest corruption case, is reportedly living in an upscale Shanghai neighbourhood with a forged Australian passport under the name Constantinos Acilles Veis. Malaysia's former prime minister Najib Razak has been detained since 2022 after being found guilty of corruption and money laundering relating to the sovereign wealth fund he established, 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB). Mr Low is alleged to have helped Mr Najib develop an elaborate, international scheme that defrauded Malaysian taxpayers out of about $US4.5 billion ($6.8 billion), according to Malaysian and US investigators. The businessman, who has maintained his innocence, previously held citizenship in Cyprus and the Caribbean island country of St Kitts and Nevis — both of which have been revoked. Brazen is an investigative reporting outlet founded by Bradley Hope and Tom Wright, former correspondents for the Wall Street Journal who played a major role in exposing the 1MDB scandal. In response to Brazen's reporting, Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said he was unaware of any official confirmation that Mr Low was residing in China. "I have no information, we are yet to receive anything. Let me check. I've read [the media reports]. I need to verify with the home minister," Mr Anwar said as quoted by the state news agency Bernama. The US Department of Justice settled with Mr Low in 2019 to recoup around $US1 billion stolen from 1MDB, but American authorities said he was still wanted for his role in the affair. Malaysian and Singaporean authorities have also said they are continuing to pursue Mr Low. The superyacht Equanimity, which the US government said Mr Low had purchased using funds stolen from 1MDB, was seized by Indonesian authorities in 2018. The vessel was later sold for $US126 million ($193 million), and the proceeds were returned to the Malaysian government. The ABC has contacted the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) and the Australian Federal Police for comment. Australia expelled an Israeli diplomat in 2010 after it emerged that faked Australian passports were used by Israel's spy agency, Mossad, to assassinate a top Hamas leader in Dubai. Australia rolled out the R Series passport in 2023, the elaborate design of which DFAT said made forgeries more difficult.
ABC News
24 minutes ago
- ABC News
Ken Henry wants Australia's media to do a better job
Ken Henry, a former treasury secretary, wants the media to do a better job. He says the media has to hold Australia's political system accountable for its failure to deliver a better future for younger Australians. "Report after report tells the same story," he said last week. "The environment is not being protected. Biodiversity is not being conserved. Nature is in systemic decline. "We have whole industries with business models built on the destruction of the natural world. "We have turned nature against us. Our destruction of the natural environment now poses an existential threat to everything we value. "I am angry at our failures. But we should all be angry at our collective failure to design economic structures, including environmental regulations, that underpin confidence in a better future for our children and grandchildren," he said. Dr Henry made those comments at the National Press Club on Wednesday. But in the Q&A portion of his speech, he singled out the media. He said none of today's politicians will be alive in 100 years, but younger Australians will have to live in a world that today's politicians leave for them. He said that unless the media holds the political system accountable for its obligation to deliver a better future for our children, that obligation won't be observed. "We used to talk about the critical role played by the 'Fourth Estate'," he said. "It's time that we rebuilt it." What did he mean by that? The 'Fourth Estate' refers to the news media. In Australian society, the first three estates of our democratic state are the parliament (legislature), the government (executive), and the courts (judiciary). As the so-called fourth estate, the media, is supposed to monitor the behaviour of those three estates to keep them accountable. Dr Henry's plea last week for Australia's media to remember its crucial democratic role was important to hear. But it won't be an easy task. Why is trust in the mainstream media declining? Why are people increasingly turning to the 'Fifth Estate' for their news and analysis? The Fifth Estate refers to the growing network of alternative and independent news sources, including bloggers, podcasters, and influencers. It's where a large number of journalists who used to work for legacy media outlets are now working. A significant amount of the journalistic output from the Fifth Estate is dedicated to documenting the chronic and systemic failures of our Fourth Estate legacy media to tell the truth about today's world. The phenomenon reflects something bigger and fundamentally broken about the world we're living in. A fortnight ago, the oldest living former Malaysian prime minister, Dr Mahathir bin Mohamad, who recently turned 100, shared his feelings about where he thinks we're all heading: "Something has gone wrong with the world, with human civilisation," he wrote. "For centuries we have been ridding ourselves of barbarism in human society, of injustices, of the oppression of men by men [...] "But can we say we are still civilised now? Over the last three decades especially, we have destroyed most of the ethical values that we had built up. "Now we are seeing an orgy of killing. We are seeing genocide being perpetrated before our own eyes. Worse still, the genocide is actually being promoted and defended [...] "Will we stop? No. We cannot. Because the very people who preached the rights of humanity are the ones to destroy our hard-fought civilisation. "I hide my face. I am ashamed. Civilisation is no more the norm." In his speech last week, Dr Henry lamented that we have whole industries with business models built on the destruction of the natural world. But many of the people running the world's major media companies are deeply financially invested in those destructive industries. Their media outlets (and think-tanks) have spent decades attacking the scientific community and other media to undermine global efforts on climate change. For how many decades have they been attacking the CSIRO? But for the sake of argument, let's assume that Dr Henry gets his wish and the idealised ethos of the Fourth Estate can be resurrected by enough media companies to form a critical mass. Where can a revitalised Fourth Estate seek its "agreed facts" about the world we're living in, to hold our political system to account for the next few decades? Thankfully, in 2025, Australia's independent courts are still an accepted source of facts and truth. We're very lucky to have a legal system that has avoided the corruption of legal systems in other countries. And in recent weeks, the Federal Court has published a few judgements that should help the Fourth Estate to keep its bearings. One of those judgements was Pabai vs Commonwealth of Australia, published on Tuesday. As my ABC colleagues Kirstie Wellauer and Stephanie Boltje wrote, it was the first time an Australian court had ruled on whether the Commonwealth has a legal duty of care to protect its citizens from the impacts of climate change, and whether cultural loss from climate change should be compensated. Federal Court judge Michael Wigney found the Commonwealth does not owe a duty of care to Torres Strait Islander peoples to protect them from the impacts of climate change or fund adaptation measures. He also ruled that Australia's greenhouse gas emissions targets were matters of "core government policy" that should be decided by the parliament, not the courts. He said he had "considerable sympathy" for the Torres Strait Islander peoples' case, but Australian law, as it stood, provided no real or effective avenue through which they were able to pursue their claims on the matter. "That will remain the case unless and until the law in Australia changes, either by the incremental development or expansion of the common law by appellate courts, or by the enactment of legislation," he wrote. "Until then, the only recourse that those in the position of the applicants and other Torres Strait Islanders have is recourse via the ballot box." But Justice Wigney found some other things. He found that when Australia's government set its emissions reduction targets between 2015 and 2021 — when the federal Coalition was in power — it "failed to engage with or give any real or genuine consideration to what was the best available science" when setting those targets. "The best available science was and is clear," Justice Wigney wrote. "To prevent the worst and most dangerous impacts of climate change, it was and is imperative for every country to take steps to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions so as to ensure that the increase in the global average temperature is held to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels, and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. "Those critical objectives were enshrined in the Paris Agreement, to which Australia is a party. "The evidence in this case indicated that the emissions reduction targets set by the Commonwealth in 2015, 2020 and 2021 were plainly not consistent with those objectives or its international obligations under the Paris Agreement," he found. At the Press Club last week, I asked Dr Henry about that finding. If the media wanted to hold Australia's political system accountable for its obligation to deliver a better future for younger Australians, what hope does it have if Australian governments don't even care about the science? "What has been missing here is a respect for the science, is a respect for the evidence, is a respect for the truth," Henry replied. A second important judgement, published earlier this month, was Wertheim vs Haddad. In that case, Federal Court judge Angus Stewart ruled that a series of lectures delivered by an Islamic preacher, Wissam Haddad, at a Sydney prayer centre in November 2023, must be removed from social media because they contained "fundamentally racist and antisemitic" material. He found the lectures contravened the Racial Discrimination Act. "They make perverse generalisations against Jewish people as a group," he wrote. "Jewish people in Australia in November 2023 and thereafter would experience them to be harassing and intimidating. "That is all the more so because they were made at the time of heightened vulnerability and fragility experienced by Jews in Australia, but they would also have been harassing and intimidating had they been made prior to 7 October, 2023. "That is because of their profound offensiveness and the long history of persecution of Jews associated with the use of such rhetoric. Those effects on Jews in Australia would be profound and serious," he wrote. In his summary of the reasons for judgement, Justice Stewart also had this to say: "The Court has found that the impugned passages in the interview and the sermon say critical and disparaging things about the actions of Israel and in particular the Israel Defense Forces in Gaza and about Zionists, but that the ordinary, reasonable listener would not understand those things to be about Jewish people in general. "That person would understand that not all Jews are Zionists and that disparagement of Zionism constitutes disparagement of a philosophy or ideology and not a race or ethnic group. "Also, political criticism of Israel, however inflammatory or adversarial, is not by its nature criticism of Jews in general or based on Jewish racial or ethnic identity. "The conclusion that it is not antisemitic to criticise Israel is the corollary of the conclusion that to blame Jews for the actions of Israel is antisemitic; the one flows from the other." It was an important passage. It should help Australia's media to think more clearly about one of the most profound conflicts of the 21st century, and to hold Australia's political system to account for its participation in, response to, handling of, and debate about the conflict. Both rulings from the Federal Court have given the mainstream media a solid foundation to work with, for a revitalised Fourth Estate.
