Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) Share this | Hansard source

I know, but you actually did a little better in terms of avoiding equine influenza than elsewhere with the eradication programs that then had to be conducted and which were concluded after we came to government in 2007. That set the context for why it was necessary to have a look at the entire biosecurity system in Australia, which resulted in the Beale review, to which this budget has continued to respond.

The 2011-12 budget provides for a smarter approach to the management of biosecurity risks and reaffirms this government's commitment to reforming Australia's biosecurity system. It includes $425.4 million over four years for border operations at our airports and mail centres, including $205.6 million for the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service; $15 million—there is a point in every one of these; I will skip the decimals—for continuing eradication programs for nationally significant agricultural and environmental animal and plant pests and diseases; and $4.2 million for improved information and communications technology systems across the biosecurity system. (Extension of time granted) It also includes $19 million for staged investment for post-entry quarantine arrangements with funding for urgent capital works.

The way to reform our biosecurity system is to focus on further developing a risk management approach, progressing risk based intervention initiatives across the organisation, drafting new legislation to facilitate reforms, developing a sustainable funding model for biosecurity and continuing to build a partnership approach to industry. We have the answer to the member for Calare's question regarding the Export Certification Reform Package. An independent review of the export certification fees and charges has been conducted by Ernst and Young as per the agreement that was made last term. The minister has undertaken to publish the review on the DAFF website. It finds that AQIS fees and charges are consistent with government cost recovery guidelines. Hopefully that provides some information in direct response to that.

If I can then go to questions raised by the member for Murray. First of all, in terms of page 64 of the papers and the profile of biosecurity funding. I want to refer to a couple of issues. The first is that a number of biosecurity programs have for many years now been budgeted as four-year programs. At the end of the four years they get announced again, as has continued to happen. But as you go across the forward estimates and get closer to the expiry, you see the profile going down. That has always been the case in biosecurity funding. It is the nature of so much of it happening through four-year programs.

There is an added issue on the figures that the member for Murray referred to, and it goes to some comments I made in the opening statement. That is, for some of the quarantine facilities that were previously leased, and that the government is now looking at entering back into a permanent situation of purchasing these properties, the dollars for those purchases currently under contract negotiation do not appear in the budget papers. There would be an obvious impact in the contract negotiations if midway through figures of what we thought we might end up paying on behalf of the Commonwealth at the conclusion of those negotiations suddenly appeared. Those two principles combined tell the story that had raised the concerns of the member for Murray.

The member for Murray also asked about the drought pilot, as did the member for Braddon. Both are in electorates which had experienced exceptional circumstances declarations and have alternately dealt with the devastation of lack of water and then the devastation of too much water at different points. One of the challenges of the drought reform pilot was to change from crisis management to risk management; that is, instead of waiting for the devastation before the Commonwealth would step in in any way, the Commonwealth would actually play a role in the preparation period so that farmers were better prepared to be able to deal with the inevitable crises that come on our continent, given the nature of our climate.

This would also avoid some of the division that has constantly been there within communities where assistance was very much driven by the extent to which an individual producer was in debt. It was thought it was worth looking to see if there were another way other than exceptional circumstances to be able to conduct this. At the time the decision for the pilot to be in Western Australia was taken for two reasons: first of all, the Western Australian agriculture minister, Terry Redman, a member of the National Party, came to us and suggested that a pilot of the new policy be conducted there in Western Australia. All ministers had been involved in the discussions about the new approach, but it was Western Australia that actually suggested that the pilot happen there. The second reason for doing it in Western Australia was that it eliminated the capacity of a fear campaign for people who were at that point in drought, because at the time no new areas were being designated for exceptional circumstances assistance. It created a situation where it was easier to pilot something gently with the communities there. (Extension of time granted). The government does not prejudge the outcome of the pilot, but we have now extended the pilot for another year. Extending the pilot in this way will ensure that farmers currently receiving assistance continue to do so while the review is under way and the government considers the next steps on national reforms to drought assistance. The extension of the pilot will also allow more time to properly test the measures and therefore assist the government in its consideration of drought reform. Reform of drought policy nationally will be considered in the light of the independent review of the pilot which is currently underway and discussions with state and territory agriculture ministers. The government intends to settle its new approach in the context of the 2012-13 budget. Hopefully that provides some of the information that was being sought by the member for Murray.

See this speech in context