Change to demersal fishing ban compensation after only seven fishers compensated, class action launched

A class action has been launched by commercial fishers impacted by the controversial demersal ban, with only seven fishers compensated nine months into the ban.

After the closure of the commercial fishing zone for demersals between Kalbarri and Augusta at the start of January, the State Government promised $20 million to compensate commercial fishers.

The permanent move was made to preserve stock of iconic WA species such as snapper and dhufish.

Nine months on from the controversial move, only seven commercial fishers have been compensated out of a possible 60.

A spokesperson for the State Government said on Thursday “at this time, seven compulsory fisheries adjustment scheme applications have been settled”.

“Several license holders have requested compensation amounts well above market value of their entitlements, and work is under way to ensure those claims can be validated, and payments are in accordance with taxpayer expectations,” the spokesperson said.

Kalbarri fisher Phil De Grauw disagreed with this, and said the State Government had “come in with a lowball figure”.

More than 20 people have joined the class action lawsuit alongside Mr De Grauw to “get a fair payout”.

The move comes after the State Government stopped working with a barrister that was negotiating the compulsory fisheries adjustment scheme on its behalf.

The State Government spokesperson said they had concluded the “arrangement with a third-party negotiator” that had been operating since the ban came into effect.

“Negotiations will now be progressed by the (Fisheries) Minister (Jackie Jarvis) and the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, and valuation experts will continue to provide relevant technical advice required to support negotiations,” the spokesperson said.

“This change is about progressing the remaining applications and reaching fair outcomes as quickly as possible.”

Mr De Grauw said the compensation was based on the value of the licence, based on a previous buyout, and didn’t take into account boats, equipment and lost potential earnings.