Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I also rise to speak on the Biosecurity Bill 2014 and the associated quarantine bills. We have heard many speakers today from both sides talk about the importance of keeping agriculture in Australia disease-free and why that is so important across a whole range of different industries and sectors. We have also talked a lot about the need to maintain our clean and green image; that is very important in terms of our future agricultural production. Indeed, those from this side of the House who have spoken have talked about the importance of the need for bipartisanship when it comes to these matters and the strong importance of biosecurity. As the shadow minister and member for Hunter said, one of the most important aspects that a government faces is how it manages biosecurity. While we have raised some of our concerns and criticisms, we have stressed from this side the need for bipartisanship in terms of being able to work together to make sure we have a biosecurity framework in place that is beneficial for our entire community.

This bill will effectively modernise the legislative framework and provide for the effective management of a broader range of biosecurity risks. It will also reduce the regulatory complexity for both industry and government. These changes are important to ensure we have that very strong and robust agricultural sector. The three quarantine bills will ensure there is an appropriate legal structure to support the recovery of costs associated with indirect services under the biosecurity bill. These changes to our biosecurity framework are vitally important and it is for this reason that Labor first introduced an upgraded and modernised biosecurity bill in 2012.

As many speakers from this side have said, this bill before the parliament is essentially identical to and reflects Labor's initial bill. However—unfortunately and regrettably—the Abbott government has not continued to support a very important part of that original bill, the independent Inspector-General of Biosecurity. They have decided to give those powers to the minister instead. We raised the point that this was the wrong decision and called upon the current minister to reflect upon that, because we do feel that this position should be in place.

The primary objective of this bill is to manage biosecurity risk. This requires powers to identify, assess and manage biosecurity risks in relation to goods, conveyances and onshore pests and disease incursions. We certainly have heard of some of the incursions and devastation that they can bring. The overview of the bill is broadly divided into three distinct sections: firstly, operational chapters that support day-to-day biosecurity business; secondly, stand-alone chapters that support specialised biosecurity situations; and thirdly, general administrative chapters that support other necessary functions and powers.

Managing biosecurity is vitally important as it relates to the management of pests and disease entering Australia that could potentially cause harm to animals, plants, human health and the environment. That could have a damaging effect upon our economy as well. All of that could be quite devastating. That is why we keep reiterating the importance of managing biosecurity effectively. Essentially, this Biosecurity Bill will help sustain the integrity of our national environment and increase the productivity of Australia's agricultural, fishery and forestry industries, whilst protecting the health of Australians.

This bill is necessary for the ongoing challenges that a nation like Australia faces. As we have heard, the maintenance of a pest-free agricultural industry is so important, and that can only be achieved by making sure that we adhere to this very strong, modern, robust biosecurity framework. These issues are also very important in areas like mine—the north coast of New South Wales—where we have a very large variety of agricultural sectors that are always calling for a strong biosecurity framework. Very important industries like bananas, sugar and dairy—to name just a few of those—need to be protected by having in place a very strong framework. That is vitally important.

Our unique position in the world as a relatively pest-free environment—and I say 'relatively' pest and disease free—is indeed the envy of the world, and we must work hard to keep that. Our general health and wellbeing, the environment we live in and our native flora and fauna are all beneficiaries of successive and successful policies in this area. This hard-fought position has allowed our agricultural industry to leverage-off a very clean and green status, as we have heard many people talk about. This is giving Australian products a much needed advantage in an ever-competitive world, which is very important when we talk about the many free-trade agreements in place. We need to be focusing on that clean and green status. Quite rightly, our agricultural image to the world is not just clean and green but also of very high quality.

We have to maintain that for future growth to make sure that there is confidence in our agricultural sector and confidence in our very high standards of agricultural export industries. This is very important for a whole variety of reasons, particularly when we look to regional and rural economies and how much they depend upon maintaining strong agricultural sectors and jobs in these areas. It is also very important as demand increases, with many growing economies around the world looking to us and our food production and sourcing that. There is a variety of very important reasons why we have to maintain that.

It is also important to note that whilst the Commonwealth manages Australia's biosecurity at the border, biosecurity issues within the Australian territory, by and large, are managed by the states. The Biosecurity Bill would provide the Commonwealth with necessary powers if a biosecurity incursion crossed borders and different state approaches were hindering an effective response. There may be conditions when a nationwide approach is called upon, so it is certainly good to have that in place.

Australia's biosecurity management is regulated by the Quarantine Act 1908, and this bill replaces that. The need for a modernised, effective regulatory framework has never been more imperative in today's changing world; we need to manage our changing circumstances. We are seeing much larger passenger movement occur daily between continents, with the movement of millions of people, and where increased trades in goods are assisted by better, faster transport systems. With that change in circumstances we have to approach it differently, and we have to look at the challenges that are in front of us now in policing our biosecurity threats.

Whilst the Quarantine Act may have been effective in the past, in certain areas, it has been amended more than 50 times in reaction to changing circumstances and has become quite complex. Unfortunately, all of these minor changes have led to the creation of a highly complex set of legislation, which brings with it the inevitable difficulties of interpretation, and overlaps as well, which can create some difficulties. This calls for the modernisation of the bill.

It was the former Labor government that introduced the Biosecurity Bill 2012 to upgrade and modernise the legislation underpinning our biosecurity framework and to support the implementation of a risk based biosecurity intervention framework. This bill was introduced to parliament in November 2012 together with the Inspector-General of Biosecurity Bill, which was also in the 2012.

These bills were in response to the Nairn and Beale reviews and provided for the framework that replaced the previous Quarantine Act. Both bills were jointly referred to the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee but subsequently lapsed. The reintroduction of the bill provides the strong framework that will enable the management of the risks in a very modern and responsive manner to enhance our capacity to manage those risks into the future.

I am concerned that the Abbott government has sat on this bill since coming into government and that there was no action sooner. The majority of the work on this bill was under undertaken by Labor in government. It is quite incredible that it has been almost two years that we have been waiting for these important Labor reforms to be adopted by the current government. The concern is that we may have been missing opportunities worldwide; we may have been missing opportunities to redefine and re-evaluate our framework. I suppose it is a reflection of the chaos and debacle that we have seen, but it has taken a long time to get here.

I do have concerns that sometimes the Abbott government has not been properly focusing on those challenges and opportunities facing the agricultural sector. We certainly see this reflected in the long awaited white paper, which has been promised but we have not seen. In fact, prior to the election the now Prime Minister and then opposition leader promised that his government would deliver the white paper within 12 months of office. I will quote from The Coalition's Policy for a Competitive Agricultural Sector from August 2013, which says:

The White Paper will be conducted by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet and will report within 12 months. Our White Paper will also provide a clear, well-defined and transparent strategic approach to ensure the agriculture sector remains a significant contributor to the Australian economy and local communities.

We have seen that that has not happened—another broken promise. It is a broken promise that could potentially have quite serious consequences.

The fact is the agricultural sector deserves to know when the Abbott government will be delivering upon this white paper. We know that the Prime Minister's website is stating that it is set now for completion in 2015, but there is no specific date. So we have some real concerns about that. What the sector needs is to have clear policy, strategic guidance and direction from the Abbott government at a time of great change and of many challenges for them. But they are not getting that. So it is a concern, and another broken promise. Certainly, many on this side of the House have reiterated how we need to have that white paper there and how there have been massive delays. It is really disappointing for those sectors in relation to agriculture, fisheries and forestry—they are all looking for that guidance.

Of course, adding to this frustration are delays caused by many of the cuts the Abbott government has made to the biosecurity budget—including the cuts to the CSIRO, which, of course, limits their research capacity. There are a number of concerns about many of the unfair budget cuts that have occurred within the agricultural sector and the impacts of that generally, right across the area. We look at the cuts to Landcare as well—over $480 million to Landcare. Also, there were $80 million in cuts to Cooperative Research Centres; over $146 million to the CSIRO, which would cost about 500 jobs; $11 million to the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation; and the more than $6 million from the scrapping of the National Water Commission. So we have had all of these cuts and have not seen the white paper. There is a lot of concern within the agricultural community about this government's inaction when it comes to those areas and its severe funding cuts.

I did find the previous speakers very interesting—like the member for Hinkler, who outlined some of the very serious concerns within his electorate. Yet, at the same time, he and other members of the National Party sit by whilst the agriculture minister brings about all these massive cuts to that area. They are a party to those massive cuts that are really harming so many of our regional and rural communities. In fact, their minister, the member of the National Party, is the one who is making those cuts, and they are assisting him. They come in here and talk about all of the challenges that they face, when they should be going back to their communities and talking about how they, as the National Party as part of the government, are the ones making these decisions that are harming regional and rural communities—and harming them quite severely.

We also had the Abbott government promising to make agriculture one of the five pillars of the economy. But, as I have said, we are yet to see their plan for how they will achieve this. That is particularly disappointing, as I have said, because we do want to see this in place. The government should be focusing on the growing opportunities for the agricultural sector. That is what they should be focusing on, not their own infighting. There is so much to be done in this field. There are so many areas that have to be delivered upon, because there are so many opportunities for agriculture sectors domestically and internationally in relation to the free trade agreements, in relation to growing rural and regional economies, and in relation to employment growth. But we need a government that is going to be focusing on that. And it does not, obviously, appear to be happening. It is disappointing for all of those sectors, because this should be one of the government's highest priorities. I said at the beginning that, without a doubt, making sure we have that robust sector should be right at the top of their list in terms of the action that they take. With all the chaos and disunity, it does not seem to have been there. Our clean, green and safe image is the agricultural sector's greatest advantage. It really keeps our competitive edge there. That is why this bill is of such incredibly critical importance.

As I have said, we have raised some of our concerns about this bill, particularly the parts in relation to the need for the Inspector-General of Biosecurity—and I would ask that the minister certainly take that into consideration. But as others on this side have stressed—and, indeed, the shadow minister, the member for Hunter, has said—we support this bill. We believe it is important to have a bipartisan support when it comes to any of the opportunities for our agricultural sector. But we would like the minister and the government to take onboard some of the concerns that we have had, because we just cannot be missing some of those worldwide opportunities that are there. We need to have that in place, and we do support it, because we do have to have a very strong and robust biosecurity framework.

See this speech in context