Meryl Swanson (Paterson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, I present the committee's report entitled Inquiry into PFAS remediation in and around Defence bases—second progress report.

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

by leave—I present the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade's second report in its ongoing review of Defence's national PFAS Investigation and Management Program. The subcommittee's report is subtitled Second progress report. It reviews the government response to the joint committee's report on management of PFAS contamination in and around Defence bases from the last parliament. The report presented today also evaluates the government's response in the light of more recent evidence. It looks for progress since the JSCFADT made its nine recommendations for change in 2018. Those recommendations called for a better coordinated and resourced national response; for more support to PFAS affected communities, including compensation for financial loss; and for a national commitment to phase out the use of PFAS firefighting foams.

The Department of Defence established its national PFAS program in 2016. RAAF Base Williamtown was one of the first bases identified for PFAS remediation, and it is in my electorate. I know the harm that the use of PFAS foams in firefighting has caused the people living in regional communities like mine. PFAS chemicals are persistent in the environment and cumulative in living organisms, including humans. Australia has issued guidelines for safe exposure levels in water and food, but there is uncertainty about its long-term health effects. That is agreed. People living with high PFAS blood levels have a restricted quality of life. They cannot eat the produce they grow—their eggs or fruit. They cannot water their livestock with groundwater, let alone drink the water themselves. They worry about loss of livelihood, about devaluation of their land and about their future health and that of their children. Work is being done, and some good results are being achieved in clearing PFAS from soils and waters using some very impressive technology. But for many residents evidence of this is either not experienced or is coming too slowly. The government's response indicates that all that can be done is being done. One recommendation for review of health advice was agreed. The response otherwise considered that current arrangements adequately address or can address most of the issues raised by the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade.

PFAS is a complex problem, and some progress has been made. Australia recently upgraded the PFAS National Environmental Management Plan to assist jurisdictions to manage PFAS consistently. National standards are being finalised that will eventually underpin Australia's ratification of the Stockholm convention to phase out PFAS chemicals used in firefighting foams. Meanwhile, people are still living with the legacy impacts of PFAS daily—the mental stress that breaks up families and communities, often without support. And, while some states in Australia have banned the use of fluorine based foams, some defence bases continue to use them, exposing local communities and firefighters to ongoing contamination.

The report tabled today makes 10 recommendations to reform both high-level and in-practice processes under the national PFAS program. The subcommittee believes the government and its agencies should be more accountable to the public and those people whose communities are impacted by PFAS. This means engaging people in the remediation process that impacts their lives, delivering factual and up-to-date information on that process and providing a national contact point for advice. It means delivering mental health supports to all affected and funding better research to understand those impacts, and it requires driving through legislation and international agreements that will phase out PFAS firefighting foams permanently.

Many of these recommendations build on observations made in the subcommittee's first report, tabled in December of last year. The PFAS subcommittee will continue to monitor progress. This includes the outcomes of new research being funded to destroy PFAS contaminants and even to reduce PFAS in blood.

I wish to thank all participants in the inquiry so far for their valuable evidence. I also wish to thank the committee secretary, Lynley Ducker, and Loes Slattery and Mrs Dorota Cooley. Thanks to everyone who continues to address this important matter. I commend the committee's report to the House.

See this speech in context