Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I do not think I characterised it necessarily as being skewed. I acknowledge we do do all that. The point is that the resources brought to bear in dealing with environmental biosecurity quite plainly are not as comprehensive as those resources that are brought to bear for industry biosecurity issues for the very nature that often with incursions that affect industry there are resources that the industry itself obviously brings to bear. There is plenty of evidence to show that environmental biosecurity incursions have not had the same level of resources and it is not just about resources; it is also about ensuring that the minister and the Department of the Environment are there as decision makers under the powers I described in the amendment. We believe that would ensure that the environment is given adequate attention in this process.

As I said, it was not a criticism at all of the level of effort that we put into biosecurity to protect industry, to protect agriculture and to protect horticulture. Everybody agrees that we need to be putting in those resources. In fact, in many cases we have argued that more resources need to be put in. This is about the fact that we make sure that the environment gets as much attention and if necessary as many resources but also that it is right up there in terms of the decision making. I do not want anyone saying that we are critical of the fact that resources are spent on agricultural biosecurity.

Progress reported.