Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Transport) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

That the Senate take note of the document.

The audit report Export certification: Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, which was tabled today, provides additional weight to the call by Labor, and by the New South Wales Farmers Association, for a thorough overhaul of Australia’s quarantine arrangements and the organisations responsible for managing them.

This particular audit report examines the performance of the Australian Quarantine Inspection Service as the body responsible for certifying that our exports meet the health and quarantine requirements of importing countries. This is a most important function. Australia exports $32 billion worth of meat, dairy, fish, horticulture, grain, live animals and organic products each year. Around $21 billion worth of these exports require a certification by AQIS that they meet the health and quarantine requirements of importing countries.

Over many years Australia has developed a well-earned reputation as a reliable source of high-quality, safe food and fibre products. Importing countries have relied on the Australian Quarantine Inspection Service to guarantee that quality. AQIS is held in high esteem in the international marketplace and considerable value is put on the AQIS stamp. AQIS has earned its high reputation but it cannot be allowed to rest on its laurels.

In the report tabled today the Auditor has identified a number of areas of concern about the way AQIS performs this important task of certifying our agricultural exports. I urge the government to read this report closely and to action any of the areas of concern raised by the Australian National Audit Office. The areas of concern fall into three broad categories: to improve guidance to industry, to assure audit quality and reliability, and to improve management reporting and performance information. I want to deal briefly with each of these areas.

The Audit Office gave AQIS a tick for the fact that current export control orders are less prescriptive and better focused on industry needs than in the past and agreed that this had simplified and assisted compliance with regulatory requirements. However, it also found that AQIS guidance programs for industry and staff were in some cases out of date or only available in draft form. This is just not good enough. Industry and staff have a right to expect that information provided by AQIS is accurate and up to date. The Audit Office also found that the guidance material that is up to date and available is not being broadly communicated. Presumably, this means that in some cases staff and industry are unaware of its existence. The auditor recommends that AQIS review and improve the availability of export and licensing information. This is a sound recommendation and ought to be taken up immediately.

In terms of assuring audit quality and reliability, it is of real concern that the auditor raised as a central issue AQIS’s management of industry compliance in terms of the consistency and quality of its assessments and decisions. The Audit Office found that, while AQIS has some systems to facilitate audit quality and reliability, the extent to which they were used varied between export programs. This, according to the auditor, ‘limits management assurance on audit quality and reliability’.

It is interesting that the report finds that the exception is the meat export program, where there are good quality-assurance measures in place. If there are good procedures in place within the meat program, there is no reason why good procedures cannot be put in place to guarantee the quality and reliability of other programs. Once again, the issues raised by the auditor should be addressed as a matter of some urgency; in particular, the recommendation that all assurance arrangements should be strengthened by capturing and assessing data on the extent and cause of variations between the quality assurance procedures used in the different programs.

On the question of better management reporting and performance information, most of the systems AQIS uses to determine whether required standards are being met are regionally based or are managed by third parties. There is no overall system for capturing and routinely reporting data on the quality control audits, result, compliance or corrective action. This means that senior management are not getting the information they need to map and respond to trends or patterns in noncompliance or associated risks.

Clearly better data collection and information management systems are needed. Also needed, according to the auditor, is a system of key performance indicators, which would enable senior management and industry to determine how well AQIS is doing its job, particularly in the area of ensuring compliance with regulations and industry requirements. Such indicators would help in alerting management to areas of the organisation where performance could be improved.

A large proportion of Australia’s $32 billion agriculture export market relies for its continuing existence on our reputation for delivering high-quality, safe products. In most cases it is AQIS that provides the guarantee of that quality. I urge the government to closely examine this important report and to respond to its recommendations as a matter of some urgency. This is a very important sector of Australia’s export market.

The opposition and farmer organisations have been rasing serious concerns about the operation of Australia’s quarantine arrangements for some time. We are not saying that the system has completely broken down. Clearly, in many areas, the system serves the country well, but there is room for improvement in many others. This report provides further evidence that it is time for a thorough review of our quarantine arrangements to ensure that we have the best organisational structures and systems in place to meet our needs now and into the future.

Question agreed to.