Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the Prime Minister aware that Biosecurity Australia’s decision to allow the importation of Filipino bananas will cost 6,000 Australians their jobs and the economy $350 million a year? Does the Prime Minister agree with Biosecurity’s proposition that 22 million cartons of bananas will flow in but not one single insect egg or microspore of bacteria will? Further, is the Prime Minister aware that in the last seven years Biosecurity has said yes to every single application and that such neoliberalism has now cost Australia, with equine flu and similar AQIS initiatives, over $2,000 million? Finally, could the Prime Minister advise, if the agency’s policy is simply never to say no, could the Karumba Progress Association—or possibly a flock of galahs—tender for the Biosecurity contract?

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Kennedy for his question. I also thank him for his advocacy on behalf of banana farmers. I know he takes seriously the challenges faced by that industry. Those challenges include continuing matters which must be dealt with in the area of quarantine. As the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry indicated to the House most recently, the government is seized of the challenges which are presented to the industry at present. As a result, various determinations have been made by Biosecurity Australia.

Australia’s Director of Animal and Plant Quarantine has made a biosecurity policy determination for the importation of bananas from the Philippines. Biosecurity Australia advised stakeholders on 3 March 2009 the policy determination had been made. Australia’s Director of Animal and Plant Quarantine has made a policy determination in establishing a quarantine policy for the importation of bananas from the Philippines. This decision is in line with the final import risk analysis report issued last November. I again draw honourable members’ attention to the fact that this regime was established a long time ago, under the previous government.

Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We never let bananas in.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He who interjects most volubly, the Leader of the National Party, as the minister for agriculture reminded us yesterday, is the pioneer and perfecter of the scheme which is now being deployed. The Philippines will be required to demonstrate to Australia’s satisfaction that the risk management measures can be achieved under commercial conditions on an ongoing basis, with the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service involved in ensuring compliance on the ground.

For the information of the honourable member, my advice is that the required quarantine measures include the following: first, potential exports only from areas that demonstrate low pest prevalence; second, registration of export blocks; third, inspection to detect the presence of any diseases; fourth, ongoing inspections of blocks and fruit, including by Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service inspectors; fifth, disinfection and fungicide spraying; sixth, mandatory preclearance arrangements with the presence and involvement of AQIS inspectors in the Philippines in applying quarantine conditions in the field, including in packing houses; seventh, auditing and verification by AQIS of systems and processes used by the Philippines to certify any exports; and, eighth, detailed data and documentation to be provided by the Philippines for consideration by Australia prior to any exports to verify and validate quarantine measures, underpinned by laboratory and field experiments in commercial trials. In answer to the honourable member’s question, these are the specific quarantine measures which will be applied to the decision and policy determination which has been made by Biosecurity Australia.

I also note to the House the response which was conveyed yesterday by the minister for agriculture in terms of the response from the government of the Philippines on this question. It has described our banana quarantine policy as very stringent, expensive and trade restrictive and claims it will delay any exports. The Philippine agriculture undersecretary is quoted as saying:

If the conditions are that strict, no industry can profit through exports.

The reaction from the government of the Philippines to this stipulation and the conditions attached to it has been direct and critical of the government of Australia.

I also say in response to the honourable member’s question: I take very seriously the future of the banana industry in the country. It is a significant employer not just in the honourable member’s electorate but also in parts of northern New South Wales and South-East Queensland. My father began life after the war as a banana farmer. I, therefore, through family upbringing and through relatives involved in the industry, know something of the challenges which are involved here. I would ask the honourable member to pay particular heed to the conditionalities attached to this importation determination and to the stringency associated with them.

I am prepared, because I know the honourable member takes seriously the representation of industries in his electorate, to maintain a continued dialogue with him on this process as it unfolds. I accept absolutely the bona fides of the honourable member in raising these matters in this place, and I look forward to a continued discussion with him as these conditionalities are applied to the determination which has been made to Biosecurity Australia. This is an important industry for Australia’s future which warrants the highest consideration on the part of our quarantine authorities and therefore, given the honourable member’s obvious and legitimate interest in this industry, the basis for continued dialogue and discussion with me. I thank the honourable member.