Rick Wilson (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Water Resources, I present the committee's report, incorporating a dissenting report, entitled APVMA regulatory reforms: inquiry based on the Auditor-General report no. 56 (2016-17)—Pesticide and veterinary medicine regulatory reform, together with the minutes of proceedings.

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

by leave—On behalf of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Water Resources, I present the committee's report, as previously stated.

Australia's agricultural chemicals and veterinary medicines industry is vitally important to farmers, ag-vet producers and to the wider Australian public.

A well-regulated industry requires a strong regulator.

It is of paramount importance that ag-vet chemicals are adequately regulated to ensure that they are safe and effective.

The committee was concerned by evidence presented both in the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) report and by submitters and by witnesses to this inquiry which suggests that the APVMA has struggled to fully implement the 2014 legislative reforms.

The 2014 reforms were intended to increase the APVMA's efficiency and to reduce the regulatory burden on industry. However, evidence received during this inquiry suggests that those reforms to date have been minimal at best.

The committee heard concerns from industry that the registration process, particularly for new products, is fraught with delays, inconsistencies and a lack of transparency.

The committee heard from ag-vet manufacturers whose products, which were often quickly registered overseas, often met with extensive delays here in Australia.

That said, the committee was pleased to hear that the APVMA has made some progress in using international evidence as part of its assessment process.

However, it is apparent much more work needs to be done in this regard.

Furthermore, stakeholders noted that an increased use of electronic systems would assist in reducing the burden on ag-vet producers.

Several witnesses also pointed out that the registration framework is too inflexible, meaning that low-risk products, like a dog shampoo, and a more serious medication were subject to the same level of assessment.

The committee's report makes four recommendations based on the evidence we have received.

Firstly, the committee recommends that the Auditor-General undertake a further audit of the APVMA in 2019, to assess the APVMA's ongoing implementation of regulatory reforms and its management of the relocation program.

We note that the APVMA has made progress since the time of this audit and in particular has implemented some stronger governance practices.

However, the committee believes that the role of the APVMA is so important that a follow-up audit would be recommended to ensure that the APVMA continues to fully implement its reforms.

Recommendation 2 relates to the establishment of a board of directors for the APVMA.

The committee notes that the government is moving on this front, and supports this.

The committee recommends that if a board is to be established the minister for agriculture should be consulted in relation to the appointment of members to provide additional oversight and further links between the minister and the APVMA.

Recommendation 3: the committee received evidence, from both the APVMA and from industry, suggesting that the authority's current funding model may no longer be appropriate.

The APVMA is almost entirely funded through cost-recovery mechanisms, and for the last three years has run at a $3.5 million annual operational loss.

The committee agrees with Dr Chris Parker, Chief Executive Officer of the APVMA, that this is 'unsustainable'.

We therefore recommend that the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources actively consider different funding models for the APVMA to enable it to fulfil its responsibilities in a timely manner.

The committee's final recommendation is that the APVMA provides to the committee by the first quarter of the 2018-19 financial year the results of the staff survey undertaken in early 2018 and the APVMA's consequential action plan, and updated risk assessment matrix relating to its relocation to Armidale.

The APVMA acknowledges that its relocation will present risks to its ongoing operational efficiency. The committee is therefore interested in ensuring that these risks are accurately identified and managed.

On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank all who have contributed to this inquiry by providing submissions or appearing at hearings.

I would specifically like to thank committee secretary Melanie Brocklehurst, inquiry secretary Joel Bateman and the secretariat staff for their hard work in preparing this important report to the parliament that I table in the House today.

I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context