Gavan O'Connor (Corio, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries) Share this | Hansard source

The opposition will support the National Cattle Disease Eradication Account Amendment Bill 2006, but with some reservations, which I will outline to the chamber. The bill amends the National Cattle Disease Eradication Account Act to enable the funds currently held in the National Cattle Disease Eradication Account—an account held and operated by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry—to be transferred to the Cattle Disease Contingency Fund, an account held by Cattle Disease Contingency Fund Pty Ltd. The owners of this new company are the Cattle Council of Australia, the Australian Lot Feeders Association and Animal Health Australia. Since 2002, cattle industry levy moneys have been paid into this account.

The National Cattle Disease Eradication Account was set up in 1991 to hold and distribute funds for programs aimed at eliminating brucellosis and tuberculosis from the Australian cattle and buffalo populations. That was a successful initiative of the then Labor government. It is pleasing to see that the original objectives of that scheme, which at the time met with some opposition from some industry operators and farmers, have been fulfilled and we have managed to eradicate those diseases from our herds. The current balance in the account is approximately $13.5 million. The Cattle Disease Contingency Fund Pty Ltd, as trustee, is permitted to use the funds in the Cattle Disease Contingency Fund for a number of specific purposes, including prevention and control of endemic or exotic cattle diseases, research and other animal health activities likely to benefit the Australian cattle industry.

I note that the proposal has received support from industry groups and Labor will not be opposing it, but I point out on the floor of the Main Committee our concerns with what would seem to be the privatisation of many of the functions of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. This has the potential at the end of the day to reduce Commonwealth scrutiny over these matters and accountability for the use of the funds. I have observed this trend over the 10 years this government has been in office—accountability mechanisms have not been as stringent as we would expect. Many bodies are at arm’s length from this parliament, which makes it increasingly difficult for the parliament to exercise scrutiny over their funds.

This money was collected from levy payers for a specific purpose, and now, with the agreement of industry groups, it is about to be used for other closely related purposes. As I said, we are not going to oppose the legislation, but we do point out that this is part of a trend that has occurred over the past 10 years of these sorts of bodies being put at arm’s length from the parliament to reduce the scrutiny of them and the accountability for their funds. We can see how, when ministers put firewalls around particular issues, all of this can go wrong. The AWB is a classic example of this. We certainly do not want a situation where funds that belong to producers in this industry are misused in any shape or form. I certainly hope that the minister has his eye on this whole accountability issue.

From an opposition’s point of view, we have found it very difficult at times to get appropriate information on the activities of many of these bodies through the estimates committee process of the Senate. As members would know, that is a very important way in which oppositions and industry groups get to scrutinise some of these proposals and how they are operating. It provides a forum for industry groups when they have complaints about these sorts of matters.

We know that in the beef industry and livestock industries generally there is a lot of concern among producers on these issues. In the past this has led to the formation of different organisations to represent producers. There has been significant controversy over the live export trade and aspects of that industry. I note that the Lot Feeders Association will be a party to the company that is being set up under this legislation. As you would know, Mr Deputy Speaker Causley, as somebody who has been intimately involved with the beef industry in your electorate and in your past political life and the one in this parliament, the legislation deals with a very significant industry that is most important to Australia’s economic fortunes and the futures of regional communities throughout Australia. Each year Australia produces just over two million tonnes of beef. That is an estimate provided by the ABS in 2005-06. The gross value of Australian cattle and calf production, including live cattle exports, is approximately $7.4 billion. That is ABARE’s figure for 2005-06.

There were in excess of 74,000 properties with cattle, according to a June 2005 estimate, holding 27.78 million cattle and calves and 12.9 million beef cows and heifers. Domestic expenditure on beef is estimated to be in the region of $6.4 billion and, as members would know, it is a significant export earner for Australia. In 2005-06 we exported 65 per cent of our beef production, with a total value of approximately $4.5 billion.

I have given a thumbnail sketch of the industry, but it is a big player in economic terms in regional Australia and as far as the national economy is concerned. We must do whatever we can to protect it, to protect its integrity and to ensure that the diseases that ravage livestock are contained and do not have an adverse economic impact on the industry. A lot of research is done in many places on a whole range of pests and diseases that affect production in this industry.

We could speak at quite considerable length about those exotic pests and diseases, but there are two that have caused devastation in other economies and had enormous adverse economic impacts. I refer here to the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in the United Kingdom. I was recently in the United Kingdom—I think perhaps I might have been there at the time you, Mr Deputy Speaker, were there—speaking to various rural groups about the impacts of foot-and-mouth disease and how we might better prepare for the prospect of a disease outbreak. Foot-and-mouth disease had a devastating effect on British beef exports and on the domestic industry in that country.

Of course, there have been some estimates of the impact that it might have here in Australia. In a publication by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry there was a review of the new technologies and the potential impact of new technologies on Australia’s foot-and-mouth disease planning and policies. In that report, the estimates of the effect of even a small-scale outbreak were the immediate closure of many of Australia’s major export markets for livestock and livestock products and an estimated minimum loss to the national economy of between $2 billion and $3 billion in GDP rising to between $8 billion and $13 billion 12 months after the outbreak. This is an enormous impact that would occur if we in Australia had an outbreak similar to the one experienced in the United Kingdom.

The United States, with the BSE outbreak and the failure of the systems there to be able to effectively trace where that outbreak occurred, has been excluded from the Japanese market, and of course Australia has been fortunate enough to be able to partially fill that gap and increase its exports into that market. That has strengthened the export market for Australian beef and provided in some very difficult times extra income and a certain bottom under the international prices received for Australian meat exports.

I note here in the chamber the presence of the honourable member for Grey, who has an intimate knowledge of the beef industry and knows how important it is to South Australia and many producers in his state. I think that honourable members from both sides of the House—it does not matter what their political complexion is—understand very clearly how important these industries are to regional communities. They are important not only in the production end but in the value adding up the chain where jobs are provided in the meat and livestock industries. They are critical jobs to regional areas. If we do not have them, the communities dry up even faster in an economic sense. So it is very important that we keep on top of exotic pests and diseases. Past Labor governments have certainly turned their minds to this and to the substance of this bill, which concerns two diseases, tuberculosis and brucellosis, and their eradication in our herds. But, as we know, you have success on that front and other potentially more devastating diseases are waiting in the wings.

I hope that these funds will be spent wisely and I note the involvement of key industry groups in that process. I have confidence that those groups will spend this money wisely, but I urge them to keep in mind that these moneys were raised for one purpose and are now going to be used for a different one and there is a heavy responsibility not only to growers but also to the taxpayers of Australia and to this parliament. The taxpayers of Australia support the meat industry in a variety of ways, and I think it is important that we have proper accountability for allocated funds.

While I am on the issue of exotic pests and diseases, it disturbed me greatly when I heard on AM this morning Professor Max Whitten and Dr Jim Cullen, two eminent scientific specialists in Australia in pests and diseases, speculating about the impact of the shortage of scientists appropriately trained in the quarantine area. We have had plenty of debates about this in this place. I will be followed in this debate by the member for Lingiari, and the comments I make are particularly pertinent to his electorate. There has been a massive increase in illegal fishing incursions to our north. Failed government policy has seen an extraordinary number of incursions, with some of these illegal fishers setting up base camps on Australian soil. They have been apprehended with animals on board their vessels and in their camps. Anybody who knows anything about the Northern Territory cattle industry would know that it is not just about cattle but about feral pigs and other animals. If a disease like foot and mouth were introduced and took hold, it would decimate a very important industry in the Northern Territory and would certainly affect the whole Australian meat industry.

So here we have two eminent scientists commenting on the shortage of scientists, particularly in the area of exotic pest and disease analysis and prevention. They made some scathing comments about the situation today compared with 10 years ago. They are reported to have said that, 10 years ago, there were three times more technical scientific specialists than there are today and that the system today is overloaded with administrative staff. These eminent people were commenting on a deficiency in an organisation which is at the front line in our fight against exotic pests and diseases, including foot and mouth, BSC and a range of other diseases that affect the livestock industry. A very sombre warning has been sounded and I congratulate these scientists for coming out into the open on this matter. I have been saying for many years that, unless you get the infrastructure right, you cannot get on top of these problems when they occur.

The opposition have been arguing—and we are supported by the New South Wales farmers on this—that we ought to have a thorough inquiry, review and overhaul of Australia’s quarantine arrangements. We are in a new era of global trade. We are in an era of bioterror. We are in an era of massive illegal fishing and there are difficulties in defending our coastline. We are in an era where many of our critical rural industries face the prospect of significant outbreaks of exotic pests and diseases. For many of those industries it is not a question of if; it is a question of when. When these incidents occur, you have to minimise the damage. There must be research into not only the exotic pests and diseases but how we should respond.

I note that in the chamber with me today is the member for Lingiari. I have made some comment on the Northern Territory cattle industry and the importance of getting on top of the exotic pest and disease situation. Productivity in the cattle industry in his electorate is dependent on the ability of producers to keep on top of particular exotic pests, which have the potential to decimate that industry.

In conclusion, the opposition will be supporting the legislation, but we sound a note of concern and warning about the lack of accountability for funds that has occurred in some organisations over the life of this government when bodies at arm’s length to government have been set up. The entities that are involved in this new company are reputable ones, but I just sound a note of caution to the parliament that there are what we thought were quite reputable organisations now under the pump for a massive misuse of funds. We must be eternally vigilant in this regard. Our responsibility as members of this parliament is to ensure that accountancy and transparency arrangements are there so that the Australian taxpayer, producers and the general community are able to scrutinise these funds.

See this speech in context