Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Hansard source

I will take that interjection. Senator O'Sullivan said, 'It does us.' Well, if Mr Joyce cannot even get support from his own colleagues, then it would be a bad day. I must say, having the support of Senator O'Sullivan and the National Party is not a substitute for good oversight in this bill. I just think that the oversight issue should not be played down, and it should not be treated as a joke. I certainly do not believe that the former Senator Joyce, now Minister Joyce, has the capacity to oversee this properly. We want an independent oversight. Given the performance of Minister Joyce recently in the changes to Hansard, how could we expect Minister Joyce to actually provide proper oversight of an independent manner when he is caught up in 'Hansardgate', and when we see his secretary being removed from his job—a competent, effective public servant being thrown on the scrapheap because he wanted to be honest. So, Mr Joyce having oversight of anything fills me full of real concern for his capacity to do it independently and properly. I would welcome more interjections from the senator on this issue.

The Labor government already had in place the Interim Inspector-General of Biosecurity. We have proposed also to further strengthen confidence and to build sustainability in the live cattle trade by putting in place an inspector-general for live animal welfare and live animal exports. Sadly, that commitment did not survive the transition to the new government, much to the great concern of those who are focused on animal welfare, particularly animal welfare in the live animal export market. The minister, as far as we can see on this side, without any advice has unilaterally made the decision that this statutory officer is not needed. The inspector-general that Labor had in mind would report independently of the minister's view and, indeed, the view of the department.

Again, I come back to this issue where we have seen Minister Joyce go through a process, recently, which is nothing more than the intimidation of the public service by having his secretary sacked because the secretary wanted to be honest. How can you for one minute say that Minister Joyce is the proper person to oversee biosecurity in this country? It is a mistake to not establish this position on a permanent basis. The position will play an important role in ensuring the integrity and transparency of the biosecurity import risk analysis process.

Not only does the inspector-general ensure transparency and integrity in the biosecurity system more broadly, the amendments will also establish a number of powers to ensure transparency in the way the role is carried out. The position of Inspector-General of Biosecurity is a position that was recommended in numerous reviews over the course of the last 17 years, and yet the minister has apparently unilaterally decided that we do not need it. By having a dedicated office to review the performance of functions and the exercise of powers by the director of Biosecurity Australia, all Australians can expect an efficient, modern and robust biosecurity framework.

The minister appears, on the surface, to remain supportive of the Interim Inspector-General of Biosecurity and the continuation of that position for the time being. But if this bill were to pass unamended, it is Labor's understanding that the Interim Inspector-General will cease to exist on 1 July this year. It appears that, while feigning support and being complimentary of the work of the Inspector-General thus far, the minister has, without any fanfare, without any good reason and certainly without evidence just decided to let this position expire on 1 July this year. Why, as we strive, I hope on a bipartisan basis in this place, to capitalise on the growing global food demand and take advantage of our clean, green, safe image and our high-quality food would we now undermine that in any way by taking away a position which, for the last couple of years, has been very effective, as acknowledged by the minister himself? This is the same. We must have full confidence in our biosecurity system. We must be able to allow the citizens of this country to see that there is a statutory officer there acting independently and protecting that system. As I mentioned earlier, and as Mr Beale pointed out, it cannot be perfect, but the independent Inspector-General is a key component in making sure that our biosecurity system is the best it possibly can be.

There has also been a bit of debate recently about the way that investors in the future, typically those who manage big superannuation funds, for example, will be discerning in their investment decisions, taking into account the ethical standards used in particular sectors. There should be no doubt that in the future the growing middle classes of Asia will be looking for food from sources where all those ethical standards have been maintained. One of those measures will be the way in which we manage our natural resources—and the way in which we manage our water and our soils are two key examples. This is why it is so disappointing that this government has still not produced a strategic plan for agriculture in this country but laid down terms of reference for a white paper—now months late—that excluded any consideration of natural resource management and sustainability. The biggest challenge in agriculture for Australia in the future will be the growing challenge of resource sustainability, particularly the challenges posed by climate change. You cannot have a strategic plan for agriculture without having, as part of that strategic plan, an idea about how you are going to tackle those natural resource sustainability issues, particularly climate change.

While we have had 18 months of policy inertia—in other words, 18 months without an agriculture policy in this country—our competitors are on the march. They are already working in Asia with their plans; they are already taking advantage of their natural competitive edge. In the meantime, under the Abbott government and under Minister Joyce, we are simply marking time. It is disappointing when I see what were very good Labor initiatives, like the one before us today, being undermined by a decision like that going to the position of the Inspector-General of Biosecurity, without any real effort to explain the decision, without any real effort to highlight that decision before this place and certainly without any effort whatsoever to justify why the Inspector-General of Biosecurity should be replaced with a minister having the final call. Why replace an independent body with a ministerial decision-making process?

I will invite the minister to highlight that point, to provide the sources of advice for the decision and to share with us what the government sees as the benefits of that decision. I do not think the minister will be able to do that, but I will welcome any attempt to do so. The very fact that the minister has not done so confirms in my mind that this is a very, very bad decision. The fact that the minister has not done so also confirms that the National Party do not seem to have their eye on the key issues in the agricultural portfolio, that they are prepared to put ministerial discretion before independence and that they are prepared to have an independent approach on biosecurity subsumed into ministerial discretion. That is not the way to go in this country.

I finish where I began: this bill and our biosecurity system are as important as anything else we discuss in this place. It does go to our food security and, beyond that, it goes to how wealthy we are likely to be as a country in the coming decades. We cannot grasp that wealth and we cannot make the most of those opportunities without the best biosecurity system in the world. Therefore, a biosecurity without any independent oversight is an inferior biosecurity system. It does not pick up on those recommendations made over the last 17 years, and for some bizarre reason we are told that we should trust Minister Joyce! We are told that Minister Joyce can do the job. In my view, that is something that anyone with any experience of the former Senator Joyce in this place would have absolutely no confidence in. The secretariat under this minister is in chaos. We have now had two secretaries of the department under this minister. This is a minister whom you could not trust to keep biosecurity issues at the forefront if it is simply based on ministerial discretion.

I believe sincerely that all those who participated in the panel of review would say that the bill Labor had before the parliament provided the very best biosecurity system that we could possibly have. I am not convinced that the bill before us now, simply because of the exclusion of an ongoing role for the Inspector-General of Biosecurity, is a bill that provides us with the very best biosecurity regime we could possibly have. There is plenty of time for the minister to reflect on that, there is plenty of time for the government to reflect on that and there is plenty of time for the Prime Minister to reflect on that as he contemplates some of his necessary changes in the coming weeks and months—if he lasts that long. There is an opportunity here for the government either to explain and justify their position or to reinstate Labor's very important initiative. The Inspector-General of Biosecurity might cost some money, but on any cost-benefit analysis it is hard to see how what would be very small savings in the context of a billion-dollar budget is justified, given the risks that would be posed by not ensuring that this bill is as strong as it possibly can be and not ensuring that we have the strongest quarantine and biosecurity systems that this country can possibly have.

So, we have given qualified support. Other than for the inspector-general issue, we support the bill. We must have an independent inspector-general. Biosecurity is so important for the health, the welfare and the economic future of this country. I would not rely on Minister Joyce and his independent discretion to replace an independent biosecurity approach as contemplated by Labor. In my view, the minister must come to the table and must agree to the independent Inspector-General of Biosecurity that we had in our bill. The public must have confidence in biosecurity. In my view, if the public believe that Minister Joyce has the final say on biosecurity, that confidence will be shattered. It will be shattered because this is not only a government of incompetence but a government of chaos, and we need independent biosecurity analysis by the inspector-general in this bill. That is the challenge for the coalition.