Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (Senator Carr) to a question without notice asked by Senator Back today, relating to Australian Biosecurity CRC.

It is a shame that this so-called expert committee that advised the minister was so inexpert in the quality of its advice, but I was not surprised when I learnt that the CRC’s application was in fact not peer reviewed but reviewed—

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Would the senators standing in the aisles please quickly move out of the chamber.

Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was making the point that the so-called expert advisory committee which advised the minister did not in fact have a single member competent in infectious diseases, quarantine, biosecurity, veterinary medicine or environmental or wildlife issues associated with disease emergence. It is little surprise, then, that that committee firstly advised the minister that AQIS had nothing to do with this biosecurity CRC when it is simply a service of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Secondly, it advised the minister that Customs was not associated with the bid when Customs is not involved at all in research into infectious diseases. The committee completely failed to comprehend the concept of one health approach to infectious diseases, recognising the interspecies relationship between wildlife—animals and birds—and humans.

This is a critically important question. We have deaths of humans and animals. We have the circumstance in Australia, as do our neighbours to the north, in Malaysia and now in Bangladesh, of deaths as a result of bat-borne diseases—through other animal species to humans—and, we believe, possibly directly from bats to humans in Bangladesh. I cannot emphasise sufficiently the importance of this. I am surprised that it is not being taken with the seriousness it should. Only last week we had the death of the second of my veterinary colleagues from the hendra virus in the last 13 months.

The minister was quite right when he drew attention to the CSIRO Australian Animal Health Laboratory in Geelong. It is world’s best practice. It is the envy of the rest of the world. It is an institution that is approached by countries asking if they can be involved in antiterrorism biosecurity research. What is interesting is that half of the hendra virus and Nipah virus work at the Animal Health Laboratory in Victoria and the work being done in the field—I repeat: in the field—by the Queensland DPI is at least 50 per cent funded by the Australian Biosecurity CRC for Emerging Infectious Disease. Given the fact the minister is continually only talking about the relationship with CSIRO and the AAHL, I ask him: will he guarantee continued funding for work into these viruses when the CRC ceases to be funded?

The Australian Biosecurity CRC for Emerging Infectious Disease brings together a host of Australian, international, Bangladeshi, American, British, state, CSIRO, government agricultural and other research organisations. You just do not dismantle the sort of network that has been developed since the early part of this decade without impacts on the excellence of the outcome. I certainly will be interested to learn whether or not the minister thinks that CSIRO will be expanded sufficiently to pick up the very, very necessary work that is undertaken.

In defence of the committee and its advice to the minister, I will make the observation that this advice came down and the decision was taken to discontinue this CRC before the swine flu pandemic hit Australia in the middle of this year. It also, therefore, of course, occurred before there was a transfer of that particular flu virus from humans to swine in New South Wales. Thirdly, it occurred before the recent hendra outbreak. I concede that the advisory committee was not aware of those circumstances, but surely those three are an example that the minister should take the responsibility that is allowed him under the CRC guidelines. He is responsible for this particular activity and should see the committee as advisory only and have its recommendation assessed independently.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to contribute to this take note of answers debate and the motion moved by Senator Back. Before I go any further, I would like to clarify a few things. As part of my role on the Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport, I, along with my colleagues Senator O’Brien and Senator Back, visited the Australian Animal Health Laboratory in Geelong about five or six weeks ago. It was an opportune visit for us and an experience that certainly enabled us to take away with us a knowledge of the great work that is being done down there by the good folk. We were welcomed. The only thing I must say—and I think it is important that we clarify this—is that it is a bit concerning that, when we have a lot of rural and regional affairs inquiries we are swamped by the number of coalition senators who cannot wait to get their heads in there and have something to say about agriculture, because they are the gatekeepers of all intelligence on the farms, it seems. Or they think they are.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear? Well, listen to this. Why weren’t any of you down there except Senator Back? Where were the rest of them? They could not be bothered. Were they too busy? Are they not interested in biosecurity or Australian animal health? It is absolutely disgraceful. And you stand up there and lecture us.

The good work being done down at the Animal Health Laboratory in Geelong should not go underestimated. It was opportune, because at the time we were there—and I think Senator Back would recall this, as would Senator O’Brien—there was a sample being analysed that was taken from a horse from Queensland. It was a suspected hendra virus case. We were only there for about four hours. It is a shame that we can turn it into a political argument. This shocking disease is something that we should not politicise. That it claims the lives of vets and horse workers is concerning.

It is completely wrong to think that the biosecurity CRC is the only way that the government addresses critical national biosecurity issues. Research into the hendra virus has for years been primarily the responsibility of the CSIRO, the nation’s premier public research agency—and no-one would argue with that—as the CSIRO does conduct most of the hendra related research in Australia. It does this through the Australian Animal Health Laboratory, as we were saying, which also attracts competitive grants, which Senator Back did mention, from other research agencies, including the US National Institutes of Health. I would reiterate Senator Back’s comments that it is world’s best practice down there. That is something that we should be very, very proud of. Not only the Americans but also the Brits hold highly favourable views of it. This facility is world class. There is no argument about that. It has the highest possible security rating, allowing top-level research on highly infectious diseases.

The Animal Health Laboratory’s capacity has been strengthened over the last 18 months with a new $5.5 million diagnostic emergency response laboratory, which was announced in July 2008, and a new research partnership with Deakin, which was announced in August 2008. The management of emerging infectious diseases, such as the hendra virus, in the long term is also being addressed as part of the government’s response to the Beale review of Australia’s quarantine and biosecurity arrangements. The government is now considering its detailed response to the review, including working more closely with state and territory governments, which is very, very important. We have to work with state and territory governments—there is no argument about that—and we have to establish a national biosecurity agreement and establish a national biosecurity commission.

The CSIRO will continue its biosecurity research and estimates that its total annual expenditure on research into bat-borne diseases, including hendra, is approximately $2 million per annum. I must bring to the attention of the Senate that it was actually a Labor government that created the CRCs. By June 2010 the Australian Biosecurity CRC for Emerging Infectious Disease will have received $17½ million of funding over seven years. The CRC applied for an extension of this funding in the 11th round of the program. (Time expired)

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

After a series of questions over two days and an excellent contribution from Senator Back it is very sad to see that those on the other side just do not get it. I have a list of the CRCs before me. There are 55 of them. They are very, very important. We have cotton catchment, dairy products, industry innovation, weeds management, sustainable tourism, smart services and automotive technology, but I would put it to you, Mr Deputy President, that there are five that are fundamentally important to human beings on this planet. They are, of course, the CRCs for Aboriginal Health, Asthma and Airways, and Cancer Therapeutics, the Bushfire CRC and the Australian Biosecurity CRC for Emerging Infectious Disease. The last is the one we are talking about.

We all know of, and we have spoken often about the history of, the hendra virus. The hendra virus is part of the Henipavirus family. We know, because they are ‘zootic’ in nature—that is, they are communicable from animals to humans—

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Zoonotic!

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, zoonotic. It is an area of human health that has been the focus of so much science around the world. Before the move to cancel the CRC on biosecurity in 2010, Australia ran this area. We do not run it because we are the smartest; we run it because we have the best relationship with the smartest in the country. We now have the emergence of the Nipah virus, and the great tragedy in Australia is that we are so vulnerable because we have all of the vectors here. We know with the hendra virus it is about bats, it is about horses and it is about people—that is all we know. We have a vast amount to learn. With the Nipah virus we have a far wider range of vectors. We have everything from ferrets and pigs to horses and cats. Where I come from we have flying foxes in close proximity to all of those animals.

This is not just a small disease that comes through and gives people a cold. Between late 1988 and March of the following year, the Nipah virus was responsible for some 105 deaths. Between 1998 and 1999, it spread from Nipah at the northern end of Malaysia down to the southern end of Asia, and by the time that epidemic came over, 260 people had been affected, of which 105 died. This is an absolutely savage disease and, again, it is part of the Nipah virus family. This is a family that we need to really carefully look at. I note in the almost flippant answer given by the minister today to the very sensible and serious question from Senator Back that he said: ‘Look, one source of advice is all we need. CSIRO are far better equipped.’ That is what he said today. The Australian Biosecurity CRC consulted with the Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, CSIRO, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Consortium of Conservation Medicine of New York, the international Wildlife Trust, the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research Unit of Bangladesh, the Veterinary Laboratories Agency in the United Kingdom, regional and country veterinarians, and infectious diseases physicians. It goes on and on because it was a coalition of individuals that had the intellectual horsepower and the capacity to continue to deal with one of the most significant threats to this country—that is, zoonotic diseases.

We have already heard about swine flu, and I have great concerns that in New South Wales we have seen the virility of the disease as it returns from people back to pigs. We had a group of people who were absolutely dedicated to this, but we just told them: ‘Don’t bother. In 2010 it’s all over.’ I am sure they are not even sitting around at the moment; they are scurrying around trying to find another job. We have a minister who flippantly says: ‘Look, we don’t need all those people. We’ll just use one of them that’s already there, and they’re going to provide us with scientific answers to protect Australians—not only their health but in fact their lives.’ This is a CRC that has far more importance in the current context of biosecurity threats in this country than any other CRC, but the fact is the minister has said, ‘I’ve left it to this independent inquiry,’ which has absolutely no expertise in the matter, and so there is not a lot of probity involved. But I can tell you right now, Mr Deputy President: Australians will not forget the day that this minister ignored the biosecurity future of this country and, in fact, the lives of Australians.

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is unfortunate that the opposition wants to play politics with this issue and to focus on the hendra virus as the reason for it. As Senator Sterle pointed out, he and I and Senator Back visited the high security facility at Geelong run by CSIRO—the premier facility of that sort in the world—where research into and diagnosis of the presence of hendra virus takes place. It does not really matter in a sense what others are doing, because the only place I would want the virus being researched in any way, given its consequences in infecting humans with an over 60 per cent fatality rate, is at that Geelong facility and nowhere else. And I am sure the CRC would have felt the same way.

It is self-evident from the fact that we were there and they were researching it that research is going on at that facility into that virus and into the transmission of that and other viruses, and we have received some very interesting information about the role that bats potentially play in the transmission of diseases such as hendra but also avian influenza—another matter that was raised with us—and that bats may well be the vector for a range of other diseases. I would want that sort of research to be conducted in a facility where we are virtually guaranteed there can be no escape from the facility of the vectors we are trying to research—it is prevented from entering or spreading in our environment.

In terms of the CRC situation, it was the Howard government that introduced the competitive model for CRCs. It introduced a system where there was effectively a bidding process for funding. That has been continued, and so I am a little bit surprised that the coalition are now criticising the continuation of a process that they initiated and supported.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a special case.

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If we recognised that process, then I am not sure why they are criticising it. If it is suggested, as was interjected by Senator Scullion, who is not in his seat, that it is a special case and the hendra virus should have been kept with that CRC, then that is utterly wrong. The research is continuing. I just demonstrated it. Senator Back nodded his head when I indicated the research is continuing now at the facility it should continue at. If you have a biosecurity CRC that goes into a tender for research without the support of the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service and Australian Customs—the border agency that assesses goods for import and export and the border agency managing biosecurity—then you would have to assume that it would be weakened. And, indeed, it must have been. It failed.

There has been another round where the CRC could have applied for funds, which was the 12th round, but they did not apply. One has to take the view that they were not confident in the strength of their own case if they were not prepared to look at their submission for the 11th round to see what failings they might have had and try to address them. They did not do that. To criticise the government over the CRC application, which failed and was subsequently not pursued by that organisation, is just playing politics, let’s be frank—

Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Back interjecting—

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I really would urge members of the coalition, other than Senator Back because he has availed himself of the opportunity, to have a look at the facility in Geelong. Let me tell you that it may be a little uncomfortable. We all had to go through a process where we had to disrobe and put on their clothes and make sure that we did not carry anything into the secure area that we could not carry out. I had to disinfect my glasses on coming out. They have a very, very secure protocol in terms of managing the possibility of exit of some of the organisms that they deal with there, so important is their role. (Time expired)

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You can tell from the half-hearted attempts by Senator Sterle and Senator O’Brien to defend a very incompetent minister in Minister Carr that not even they believe that he is defendable. The website of the CRC program administered by the government says in its first line, ‘The Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research has overall responsibility for the Cooperative Research Centre’s program.’ Yet, all Senator Carr could do at question time today was try to abrogate his responsibility and blame someone else. It is quite clear that Minister Carr is responsible, not some group that he tried to blame.

The only thing in the defence by Labor senators that made any sense to me was the comment by Senator Sterle, and I quote him roughly, that ‘all wisdom in relation to rural and regional Australia is on this side of the chamber’. I agree with Senator Sterle on that. If you have a look around you will see that on this side of the chamber there are senators who understanding rural and regional Australia, who come from rural and regional Australia, who have made their livings from rural and regional Australia and who understand the issues in rural and regional Australia. Regrettably, all of my colleagues opposite live in capital cities and really have little interest and certainly no knowledge—

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, they don’t. Why don’t you tell the truth?

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thought you were from Hobart, Senator O’Brien. For the rest of your term here perhaps you should upgrade your interest in rural and regional Australia.

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are a mug.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! You will withdraw that comment, Senator O’Brien.

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy President, I appreciate your protection. I did not hear it, but anything that came from Senator O’Brien would not worry anyone, certainly not me. The issue here was clearly explained by my two colleagues who spoke previously in this debate and who clearly have a very intense knowledge of this disease and of the research that is necessary to address it. The issue is that the current government is cutting back funding that is so essential for research into this disease.

As a Queenslander, two of my former constituents are those who have suffered as a result of the Hendra virus, and I feel for and sympathise with their families. There is nothing we can do or say today that will overcome the distress and sadness experienced by the families of those two very highly regarded and wonderful men who succumbed to this disease in the course of their work. What we have to do is ensure that this does not infect nor affect other vets and people working with this program.

I will just give Senator Carr a bit of a clue. In our time in government, the CRC system suggested we should no longer have a reef CRC or a rainforest CRC. Accordingly funding was cut. What did the Howard government do? They had good representatives in Far North Queensland, in North Queensland and along the Queensland coast who were interested in this and who petitioned the Howard government—all Liberal people, I think—to ensure that a completely new research institution was set up to be permanently funded, apart from the CRC program. That is what you do, Senator Carr, if you are interested in this. It might have missed funding in the CRC that you are responsible for, but you set up another organisation, as we did with MTSRF, the new organisation that was set up to investigate and continue the research into the reef and the rainforest.

What we are saying on this side is that everyone is concerned about the disease. There is no question about that. What we are angered about is that the time when this CRC should be increasing its work, at the time when the CSIRO should be increasing its work, the Labor government of Mr Rudd has cut funding to this CRC and at the same time has cut back funding to the CSIRO in the last budget. You cannot argue with me about that. Have a look at the budget papers. This is the concern we have on our side and the government must increase funding for this research.

Question agreed to.