Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

It's an absolute delight to follow Senator Polley. It was a thoughtful and accurate speech that she just gave. Seriously, I thank Senator Polley for her very kind words. I also thank her for her continued advocacy for the agriculture sector in her home state of Tasmania. As Senator Polley accurately pointed out, agriculture is a very important industry in Tasmania. Arguably more than any other state, Tasmania prides itself on its clean, green agricultural produce and its strong biosecurity protections. I thank Senator Polley and all her Tasmanian colleagues for their efforts in that regard.

I want to say a few things in summing up this debate. The Biosecurity Amendment (Advanced Compliance Measures) Bill 2023 will amend the Biosecurity Act to enhance the government's regulatory regime and strengthen its ability to gather information to assess and manage biosecurity risk and take non-compliance action against those who jeopardise Australia's biosecurity status by breaking the law.

Senators will be aware that ever since taking office the Albanese government has strengthened our biosecurity protections. We obviously saw about five weeks after our election a lot of alarm about foot-and-mouth disease reaching Bali, which is a very popular tourist destination for Australians. We took very serious and strong action in partnership with the industry to tighten our biosecurity protections. We lifted penalties. We provided vaccines and other support to Indonesia and other neighbouring countries. We tested our preparedness. As a result, I'm very pleased to say that to this day Australia remains free of both foot-and-mouth disease and lumpy skin disease, but we recognise that the challenges we face as a nation in biosecurity continue to escalate and become more complex. That's why we always need to be examining our responses and our preparedness to biosecurity, and this bill is another part of that.

I won't go over in a lot of detail what's contained in this bill because we have done so already, but, in short, this bill will further strengthen and increase the powers and penalties available to our biosecurity officers and the regulatory system as a whole. We have, as I say, already increased the range of some biosecurity penalties, but this bill will take those measures further and put in place quite serious financial penalties for those who do the wrong thing and seek to flout our biosecurity laws. This bill will also increase the powers available to our biosecurity officers to access certain information from people, including from travellers who are arriving in Australian territory on board an international flight or voyage, through the provision of their passport or other travel documents. That's all to increase our ability to really home in on the highest risk travellers and the highest risk products that might be being brought into our country. If they were it would cause great harm to our agriculture industry and also our natural environment.

In summing up, I want to respond to a couple of things that have been raised over the course of this debate. This bill, of course, also complements the Albanese government's sustainable funding model for biosecurity. I note that some speakers—in particular, Senator McKenzie—raised concerns about the way that the government is proposing to fund our biosecurity system. I actually found it quite surprising that Senator McKenzie, or any member of the opposition, would want to have a debate about biosecurity funding as part of the debate on this bill because, on taking office in May last year, we learned that Australia's biosecurity budget was on track to fall by over $100 million per year due to the short-term funding decisions that had been made by the previous government. So even though we all know that Australia is facing increased biosecurity risks, when you look at what the previous government were budgeting for, they were actually budgeting to cut our biosecurity funding by about $100 million per year. That was grossly irresponsible and another train wreck left behind by the former government that we have had to fix.

I'm very pleased that we are in the process of fixing that right now, in particular as a result of the decisions we took in this year 's budget. After lots of lobbying from me and also the agriculture sector—I pay them their due for the efforts that they put in—I was delighted that in this year's budget the Prime Minister and Treasurer and our entire cabinet agreed to provide over $1 billion more for Australia's first financially sustainable biosecurity system. That means that, rather than having the biosecurity budget fall from year to year, it's actually going to be stable into the long term without the need to come back, cap in hand, year after year, seeking money to prop up our biosecurity system, which was the system the opposition left behind when they lost office.

The vast majority of this increased funding comes from two sources: increased government funding at $350 million each year and increased fees and charges on importers at $363 million annually. Already, in the first six weeks following 1 July, when these changes started, our regime of increased fees and charges on importers has raised more than $51 million. We often hear members of the opposition and some in the agriculture sector saying that importers should pay more for biosecurity. The Albanese government is actually making that happen. We're not just talking about it, as the former government did when they talked about bringing in container levies, which they then scrapped when they had the power to do something about it in government. Of course, now that they are in opposition, they are saying again that they are going to do it. They're all talk, no action. The Albanese government is actually delivering the change that the sector has been calling for. There is $51 million more, just in six weeks, coming from importers, because they're finally paying the costs of the biosecurity services that they receive from our department. So it's not just talk; it's real action from the Albanese government to protect our biosecurity system.

I know that Senator McKenzie and other people in the sector have raised this issue about the biosecurity protection levy that we are planning to introduce from 1 July next year. What that actually involves is that we are asking producers to make a modest contribution towards sustainable biosecurity funding. It amounts to about $47 million each year or a mere six per cent of the total funding package. We're not asking farmers and other producers to pay an exorbitant amount. We're asking farmers and producers to contribute a very modest amount towards protecting their own livelihoods through a strong biosecurity system while, at the same time, increasing fees and charges on importers and having taxpayers contribute more to the system—much more than what we're asking producers and farmers to contribute.

I think it is reasonable to ask producers to pay a modest amount to protect their livelihoods through strong biosecurity systems. As I say, the changes that we're introducing will see importers bear 48 per cent of the cost of our biosecurity system, taxpayers bear 44 per cent and producers bear a mere six per cent, with a little bit left over from others contributing as well. I think that is a reasonable split of the contributions towards a biosecurity system and I point out again that the $51 million that we've already raised in six weeks from increased fees and charges on importers—something the sector has been calling for, something farmers have been calling for that the coalition never delivered but a Labor government is delivering—is more than the $47 million we are asking producers to contribute each year. So, as I say, I think that is a reasonable split of responsibility.

I might also very briefly respond to some of the comments from Senator Whish-Wilson, who I know has a genuine concern about environmental biosecurity in particular. I can assure Senator Whish-Wilson and all who are concerned particularly about the growing threat of red imported fire ants that, as a South-East Queenslander, I'm very familiar with this concern. It's something we've been dealing with for a very long time, and I know the Queensland government has been doing a good job trying to eradicate it. I'm very pleased to advise that, at the most recent meeting of federal, state and territory agriculture ministers, all ministers agreed that eradication of red imported fire ants remains a huge national priority. Almost every state and territory has now joined with the Commonwealth in bringing forward the funding that we had previously allocated in future years to have that money spent this year so that we can actually increase the momentum on that eradication program this financial year. Money that had previously been allocated to be spent on fire ants next year and the year after has actually been brought forward by the Commonwealth and a number of states and territories to this financial year. That means we will now be spending up to four times as much this financial year as was originally planned to be spent. I understand that there are some in the community who have concerns about the effort being put in here, but quadrupling the amount of money that was originally going to be spent on this is a real effort and a sign of how seriously we're taking this threat. The other state and territory agriculture ministers and I will need to go through budget processes to seek funding for the future, but we absolutely recognise that this as a real threat that we need to remain committed to.

I appreciate the support from the chamber for this bill. It is another step in the Albanese government's plans to continue strengthening our biosecurity responses. Australia's biosecurity system is recognised as among the best in the world. This bill and our new sustainable funding model will ensure that we maintain our reputation as a supplier of high-quality produce while protecting our farmers, our economy and our environment from biosecurity risks into the future.