Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Amendment Bill 2010. The issue of food standards in Australia is obviously a significant concern, and we understand that the government is currently undertaking a process of review of food labelling in Australia under the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act. We are waiting for the report of the inquiry that the government has commissioned which is due to be handed to the ministerial council, as I understand it, in December of this year and then on to COAG next year.

The issue of labelling under the Food Standards Australia New Zealand process is of significant concern in regional communities. There is a large concern amongst growers in particular that identification of product and its providence be accurately provided. In fact, last week I was talking to a group of fishermen in Northern Queensland who are very concerned about how their products are managed and labelled through the restaurant process. We recognise and acknowledge the labelling that has been provided for all fresh vegetables, fish, fruit and nuts and those sorts of things through the supermarkets and I think that is recognised by the producers as having had a positive impact on their products. We look forward to a continuation of the process through the mechanisms the government currently has in place and the fruition of those through the ministerial council and COAG process into next year.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Food Standards Australia New Zealand Amendment Bill 2010 seeks the recognition by Food Standards Australia New Zealand of the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, APVMA, residue risk assessment and the promulgation of the resulting maximum residue limits in the Australian New Zealand Food Standards Code, the food code.

At present we have two bodies and what this is going to do is reduce duplication. There is the compliance cost that currently exists, in particular, for primary producers and so this is a very sensible reform which will assist our primary producers. These reforms stem from a Howard government initiative designed to reduce red tape on business. The Productivity Commission undertook an inquiry into chemicals and plastic regulations. Following the release of their report, the recommendation was adopted by COAG on 3 July 2008.

The coalition supports this bill. We know that it will be welcomed by primary producers. It will also be welcomed by groups such as the National Farmers Federation, by pastoralists and by graziers’ organisations. The question we have is why it has taken two years to actually get to this point and to get legislation to the parliament. Indeed, the Productivity Commission indicated that this can be done quickly, and COAG agreed, yet I place on record the coalition’s concern that it has taken two years to get to this point. We have no reasons as to why this has happened but, in the interim, primary producers have continued to bear costs.

This is a bill that was introduced in the dying days of the last parliament and referred to a Senate committee, which enabled stakeholders an opportunity to put forward their concerns relating to public health and safety. As it now stands, stakeholders support the legislative change to remove the various inconsistencies between the two regulatory bodies. The coalition supports this bill.

David Feeney (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I just make the point on the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Amendment Bill 2010 that implementation of the reform has been delayed due to the need to resolve a number of complex legal issues relating to the respective roles of Food Standards Australia New Zealand and the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority while ensuring that the integrity of the regulatory systems both for food and for agricultural and veterinary chemicals is maintained. Without further ado, I thank senators for their contribution to the debate on this bill and I commend the bill to the Senate.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.