Rfl Referred To Icac

[BOB_SMITH]

First of all thanks to Joe for holding the fort and keeping faith in TFP. We have been active although quitely, but again it is hard to get out publicly through the media.

The Marine Parks, Water quality,GNS and RFL issues have been the items of importance and now it seems that the media has cottoned on to the problems.

I have spoken to Ken and there is no problem with me coming back into the chats.

The first being that TFP has requested that ICAC investigate the RFL set up and Trusts. All we want is an open investigation into the RFL and lay it out on the table.

We have the support of Steve Starling on this and are working with him.

Hence the following press release and as the dedicated Joe has done is promote the RFL survey.

Some of you might think it is a biased question set up but if these questions are not asked and this information told, then you as the paying angler will be misled.

There is unrest all over NSW with how this resource is managed. If you want it changed then there are people prepared to do the hard yards if they get the support. Whatever your fishing beliefs or recreations are there is a need to get a fair go and have fair access to the outdoors of Australia.

From what I have seen there are too many splinter groups who won't give ground.

That's exactly what the decision makers want. I don't care if you are a catch and release or catch and kill or lure/bait/fly fisho I intend to go down the centre line and get every one a fair go including local commercial fishers who have a local business rather than the export mob. I get sick and tired of having 70% of our seafood exported and being innundated with crap imported stuff and then we suffer restrictions because of purported over-fishing/anti-fishing agendas.

I am prepared to debate openly anyone who has interesting ideas as long as it is genuine and good for all.

Any way this was the press release and I will keep it shorter in future

Press Release

The Fishing Party supports the calling for an ICAC inquiry into the implimentation of the NSW Recreational Fishing License and will provide relevant evidence to any inquiry.

The Party has called for an independent trust audit on many occassions only to be dismissed and now those reasons for denial are becoming more evident.

Robert Smith, the party chairman, said an official request for the investigation will be delivered from the party to ICAC underlining the many discrepancies in the whole structure of this hideous tax, not just the 24 commercial license buy-back scam. Anglers are even paying interest on this scam.

Just 40% of over 1 million users pay a fee to supposedly enhance the fishing while the Government reaps the tax rewards and reduces their own budgets and public servants. Is this the way of refinancing the NSW Access Economics F (f for failed economic management failure)?

The NSW Government has breached the public trust and must answer openly on the license trusts expenditure, which is somewhat disguised by their internal audits. The Fishing community wants to see the finer details of expenditure and whether or not there is an abuse of funds.

Mr Smith said that the party is so disgusted by this discriminitive tax that it has also implemented a 3 month state wide Fishing and License survey to actually find out if anglers are happy with paying this fee when knowing all these hidden facts. The survey will be available in electronic form and hard copy from the party website www.thefishingparty.info or at participating tackle stores and possibly the fishing media and through fishing clubs. The survey will be available from Wednesday 21st July until Friday 21st October and results will be made public shortly after.

Participants wanting to take part in this survey and for further information can contact Robert Smith on 0265560338, 0408434591 or email to rsm35254@bigpond.com, sinali@bigpond.com

Bob Smith

Somebody said the glass was half full, others said it was half empty, the smart engineer said the glass was twice the size it should be. I just said fill it up.

Edited July 22, 2005 by BOB_SMITH

[Grantm]

Bob

Nice to have your input on these issues, and it will be interesting to see where this one goes.

[Guest Jocool]

Welcome to the site Bob. Glad you could make it. I'm sure you will get a few ideas and some support on here as most Fishraiders are passionate about their fishing.

Go to it boys...Tell Bob what you all think in regards to the management of OUR fishery.

[Guest bluecod]

Onya Joe

Bob,

for starters I've a few concerns regarding the RFL and license buyout

Has the money been spent where it should have been allocated to [in accordance with the intention of the RFL] ?

Are RFL funds replacing operational capital that would otherwise have been treasury funded?

How transparent is the implementation of the RF Advisory Trust ie. elected members/terms of membership/rotation etc. and are their recommendations being fully implemented or just ignored by the buearacracy?

How can Fisheries justify transferring licenses to fishermen who have previously had their licenses bought out?

Why was the investigation for the Recreational fishing zone for the Sydney area inappropriately labelled" , particularly the Hawkesbury Region - I think the papers were labelled something unrelated to Sydney. I would also like to see an independent audit of the number of submissions from recreational fishermen and an audit of all submissions to determine whether they were bona fide or just a signature on a random poll down at the fish markets?

Were Club submission into the above regarded as one submission or did they take into account the number of members of the club?

Will Fisheries publish a detailed annual account of the RFL income/expenditure statements ? - especially one that balances.

That'll do for now!

[BOB_SMITH]

Onya Joe 

Bob,

for starters I've a few concerns regarding the RFL and license buyout

Has the money been spent where it should have been allocated to [in accordance with the intention of the RFL] ?

I guess if we don't know the full breakdown of expenses then we are only guessing. My source of info tells me there is an 88% on-cost to the heading expenses. Who gets that? I thought that there was only supposed to be a maximum of 10% for administration. Are we being fooled as to 'what administration' is. I am unnaware that the full extent of borrowing $20 million was relayed to anglers in the proper context at the start or was it after. If you are to get a grant project back out of the monies why do you have to match it with some more of your money or kind. Why is this not matched by the tax collectors.

Are RFL funds replacing operational capital that would otherwise have been treasury funded?

It appears that if the departments budgets keep getting reduced and now that it is being amalgamated 4 into 1 with the DPI budget reduced by $10 Mil this time and $37 Mil last time I think it would be fair to say YES.

How transparent is the implementation of the RF Advisory Trust ie. elected members/terms of membership/rotation etc. and are their recommendations being fully implemented or just ignored by the buearacracy?

There is no transparency at all, that is why it is a secret society. Do you know who is actually on the trusts or any recreational representative committee?. When was the last time that you liased with your/or a representative.? How do your so-called representatives give you feedback? The Chairman Bruce Schumacher is a permanent position to all the committees and I believe scrutinises the candidates, the others are selected by their willingness to co-operate. The legislation states that the only person who can spend the money is the Minister and I guess if he doesn't like what's proposed and there is no brownie points in it then we don't hear about it. As far as I am concerned the pie-chart spending could be fraudulent

How can Fisheries justify transferring licenses to fishermen who have previously had their licenses bought out?

The bureaucracy WAS told this transfer would happen and they did not do anything about it. The untold story here is that you are paying interest (back to the treasury) on this as well. Would this cost be regarded as part of the administration cap???

Why was the investigation for the Recreational fishing zone for the Sydney area inappropriately labelled" , particularly the Hawkesbury Region - I think the papers were labelled something unrelated to Sydney. I would also like to see an independent audit of the number of submissions from recreational fishermen and an audit of all submissions to determine whether they were bona fide or just a signature on a random poll down at the fish markets?

You all should realise by now that the RFA's are strategically placed out along the coast for many reasons but I say political just as the Marine Parks are. I doubt very much whether your submission (no matter how you did it ) had a deciding factor on where they went. Take a real look at them. Botany Bay was targetted for the container terminal and airport extension a long time ago and the known fact of toxic pollution only rubber stamped the decision. If anglers weren't quickly convinced to pay the buyouts then guess what (imagine the compensation Mr Carr would have to find) Guess who is the easiest target to now close off areas to?  If you think Lake Macquarie was pristine then think again, the same deal and it is all probably tied into there being no clauses of no-buybacks included in the deals (my personal view only and an ICAC investigation could prove or disprove it)

I doubt whether anybody would get the chance to see any survey audits.

Were Club submission into the above regarded as one submission or did they take into account the number of members of the club?

one submission

Will Fisheries publish a detailed annual account of the RFL income/expenditure statements ? - especially one that balances.

I asked a number of times for an independent audit and so far nothing has been commissioned. The audits that you see are done by internal departmental managers.

Bluecod you have asked some of the relevent questions that most are now concerned about and that is good. Now you can see why we have requested ICAC to have a look.

I am sure ICAC would appreciate some more requests about how you feel the public trust has been violated.

I have never hidden my concerns about this RFL and I do not envisage backing off

Bob Smith

That'll do for now!

59041[/snapback]

[Guest bluecod]

Thanks Bob for your quick response - let's hope we can gee up some other Raiders to take an active interest

[Whitto]

Now you can see why we have requested ICAC to have a look.

Yes Bob, I can.

[BOB_SMITH]

Crikey

I did not think TFP could scare Mr Carr that much, but then I wonder what great load of excrement about to hit the fan has brought this on!!!

I hope this is a relief for recreationalists.

Bob Smith

[Hooky.]

I hope this is a relief for recreationalists.

Bob Smith 

59573[/snapback]

I doubt it Bob.

A lot of deals, ie marine parks, were done at the last election as far as I'm concerned and probably most of them will go through.

Don't expect that a change of party at the next election will change anything either. It's easy for one party to blame another for the states problems but when they see the benefits of cash rolling in they soon realise it was a good thing economically.

Things like a rec licence is not a bad idea when it comes down to the old user pays system but take the water problems as an example and now that people aren't using water as much, the revenue isn't coming in so the government needs to find a new tax or levy to compensate for the shortfall.

A tackle shop owner told me only yesterday how the selling of RFL's at his shop have slowed down considerably. Given time the cost of a licence will probably increase again to make up for the shortfall or fisheries will be hard at it throwing the book at people for even the smallest of things.

Maybe I just see things differently and it's my own bit of paranoia showing. Either way NSW as a state is in a bad way.