Additional Comments by Senator Nick Xenophon
1.1
Australia’s biosecurity and quarantine arrangements are of paramount
importance in protecting Australia’s reputation as a clean, green and
disease-free producer of food. While I support the Committee’s intention to
hold a comprehensive inquiry into the Government’s forthcoming legislation, I
am concerned that, in the meantime, important issues are not being addressed
with appropriate urgency by the Government.
1.2
It is vital that biosecurity and quarantine concerns take precedence
over trade agreements. Most recently, we have seen the example of Australia
being required to accept apples from New Zealand under the Closer Economic
Relations agreement, despite the fact that New Zealand apples carry the risk of
fire blight. Although DAFF has set out measures under which these apples can be
accepted into Australia, it has been reported that many consignments have been
turned back because of possible contaminated material[1].
It is very concerning that New Zealand is now also threatening Australia with
an appeal to the World Trade Organisation after the Tasmanian Government’s
decision not to allow the imports[2].
It is unacceptable that a trade agreement would be allowed to jeopardise a
major Australian industry, given the irrevocable harm an outbreak of fire
blight would cause.
1.3
In response to this situation, I introduced the Quarantine Amendment
(Disallowing Permits) Bill 2011, which effectively made Biosecurity Policy
Determinations and permits to import, introduce or bring in an animal, plant,
substance or thing disallowable instruments. Along with the associated measures
in the Bill, this would mean that the decision to allow (or disallow) imports
would be open to much greater scrutiny and transparency than is currently the
case.
1.4
While I note the concerns raised during the inquiry into this Bill, I
still believe that similar measures would be the best way to address these
issues.
1.5
The example of New Zealand apples is indicative of a wider problem,
where imports that could pose a real risk to Australian agriculture have been considered
for approval due to trade agreements. These include the initial decision
relating to beef imports from countries affected with BSE (which has since been
postponed until a Risk Import Analysis is completed), and concerns relating to
the importation of raw pork products into New Zealand and the repercussions
this could have on Australia.
1.6
I also note the Committee’s previous inquiry into the eradication of the
Asian Honey Bee, and the concerns that were raised during this inquiry. This
particular example demonstrates the importance of how Australia’s biosecurity
and quarantine arrangements work once a pest has reached our shores. I believe
the whole-of-Government response to the Asian Honey Bee outbreak was inadequate
and could be symptomatic of deeper problems in dealing with pests and disease.
1.7
I endorse the Committee’s comments in relation to the removal of the fee
rebate for AQIS certification functions, both in the Committee’s interim and
final reports. I strongly encourage the Committee to continually monitor this
transition period, as there are very real concerns about the impact this is
having on small to medium businesses. Further, given the pressure Australian
agriculture and food processors are under with the high Australian dollar, low
commodity prices and other costs pressures, the Government should reinstate the
rebate as a matter of urgency.
1.8
I also note that AQIS’ cost recovery arrangements are set out not only
to recoup the cost of the inspectors themselves, but also associated costs. In
response to a question I placed on notice during Additional Estimates in
February this year, AQIS stated that approximately 66 percent of the fee or
charge accounts for the direct cost of inspectors, while the remaining 34
percent “contributes to the costs of direct program management and
administration, supporting IT systems and supporting corporate activities such
as payroll, finance and accounting services”.[3]
It would be useful to clarify whether these additional items should be included
in the cost recovery process; it is reasonable to assume that this is
appropriate if they directly relate to the program in question, but it would be
preferable for this to be specifically enforced.
1.9
I acknowledge concerns among submitters, as referenced in the
Committee’s report, about the slow pace of implementing the Beale review’s
recommendations. I agree with these concerns, and I strongly encourage the
Committee to consider this as part of any future inquiry into the Government’s
proposed biosecurity legislation.
1.10
While I support the Committee’s intention to hold an inquiry into this
future bill, it is very disappointing to find that the Committee has not seen
fit to make further recommendations, which could have been taken into account
by the Government as part of their consultation process on the upcoming legislation.
1.11
It is time for clear, decisive action to overhaul Australia’s
quarantine and biosecurity processes. Our reputation as a clean, disease-free
environment holds great weight in the international community, and we should
not risk or indeed squander that reputation. All future reforms in this sector
must prioritise this reputation, and the reputations of our growers and
producers. Only in doing this will we secure the economic future of Australia’s
food production.
Recommendation:
That, given the current external pressures facing Australia’s food producers
and processors, the AQIS rebate be reinstated as a matter of urgency.
NICK XENOPHON
Independent
Senator for South Australia
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page