Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The committee is considering the Biosecurity Bill 2014 and four related bills. The question is that Australian Greens amendment (15) on sheet 7676 be agreed to.

Question negatived.

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

I indicate to the chamber that there will be some amendments that I will not be proceeding with. I am reading the sense of the chamber that I am going to go down in a screaming heap on a number of my amendments. However, there are a number of broader issues that I still want to canvass and ask the government some questions on and to get certain things on the record for implementation of the bill and also for interpretation of the bill. So I indicate that I will be withdrawing some of our amendments, because I have canvassed the broader issues that some of them relate to and some of them are dependent on other amendments that have already gone down.

The CHAIRMAN: It may be easiest if we continue through the running sheet and, as we approach those particular amendments, you indicate them then.

I provided the information to the chamber so that people know where I am going with this debate.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

I move amendment (16) on sheet 7676:

(16) Page 46 (after line 4), after Chapter 1, insert:

Chapter 1A—Environmental Biosecurity Strategy and Action Plan

33A Environmental Biosecurity Strategy and Action Plan

(1) The Agriculture Minister and the Environment Minister must take all reasonable steps to ensure an Environmental Biosecurity Strategy and Action Plan is developed, and prepared in written form, as soon as practicable after the commencement of this Act.

(2) The Plan must include:

  (a) how Australia will meet obligations relating to biosecurity risk under the Biodiversity Convention; and

  (b) how Australia will meet obligations relating to biosecurity risk under Australia's Biodiversity Conservation Strategy, as in force from time to time; and

  (c) how Australia will meet any other obligations relating to biosecurity risk that the Agriculture Minister, or the Environment Minister, considers relevant.

(3) The Agriculture Minister or the Environment Minister must consult the following when developing and preparing the Plan:

  (a) Indigenous groups;

  (b) industry groups;

  (c) State and Territory governments;

  (d) local governments;

  (e) public sector entities;

  (f) conservation organisations;

  (g) any other interested groups;

  (h) the general community.

33B Variation of Environmental Biosecurity Strategy and Action Plan

(1) The Agriculture Minister and the Environment Minister may vary an Environmental Biosecurity Strategy and Action Plan.

(2) However, the Agriculture Minister and the Environment Minister must not vary an Environmental Biosecurity Strategy and Action Plan unless the persons and groups mentioned in subsection 33A(3) have been consulted.

33C Environment Biosecurity Strategy and Action Plan must be published

     The Environment Biosecurity Strategy and Action Plan must be published on:

  (a) the Agriculture Department's website; or

  (b) the Environment Department's website.

33D Review of Environmental Biosecurity Strategy and Action Plan

     The Agriculture Minister and the Environment Minister must cause a review of the Environmental Biosecurity Strategy and Action plan to take place:

  (a) within 5 years after the Plan is first developed; and

  (b) once every subsequent 5-year period.

33E Reporting requirements

(1) As soon as practicable after 30 June in each year, the Agriculture Minister and the Environment Minister must prepare a joint report on the implementation and operation of the Environmental Biosecurity Strategy and Action Plan during the previous 12 months.

(2) The report must be included in the annual report of:

  (a) the Agriculture Department; and

  (b) the Environment Department.

This amendment relates to an environmental biosecurity strategy and action plan, specifically to the Minister for Agriculture and the Minister for the Environment taking all reasonable steps to ensure that an environmental biosecurity strategy and action plan is developed and prepared in written form as soon as practicable after the commencement of this act. This is important because it is an essential component and complement to biosecurity laws.

We believe that biosecurity strategy and action plans that identify the priorities, targets and actions necessary to achieve national environmental goals are absolutely essential and must complement this process. The guiding principles for the implementation of article 8(h) of the Convention on Biological Diversity emphasise their importance and identify important elements. The proposed biosecurity strategy would encompass and build on existing strategies and address other invasive species categories, such as invertebrates, fungi and pathogens, and prioritise gaps. It is important to note that invertebrates, fungi and pathogens are often left off people's thinking, and we know how important they are. The development and implementation of these plans should manifest a partnership approach and meaningfully involve the community and the environmental sectors. The community has been arguing very strongly to have in place this strategy and an action plan, which is basically an implementation plan. We think these are important amendments, and those have been our reasons for wanting these amendments. I suspect that the government does not support this amendment, but I would like to hear from the government what it intends to do about putting in place a strategy and action plan/implementation plan.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am advised by my ministerial colleague that the government will not be supporting your proposed amendment to develop and publish an environmental biosecurity strategy and action plan. It is difficult to isolate environmental biosecurity risks within the overall system, because the system operates to manage all biosecurity risks. Dealing with environmental biosecurity as a separate issue or function may actually act to the detriment of the system as a whole.

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

That is where I thought the government would go on this amendment, but I did ask a question about what the government does intend to do. I would like a little bit more detail around that. I am not trying to detain the chamber, but I do want an indication of where the government is going with this process.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I understand we will be responding to that in the government's response to the biosecurity report.

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

With all due respect, that does not answer the question and neither does the report. I am seeking to know whether the government has this on its agenda, what process of strategy development and implementation planning it is going to be undertaking and, importantly, whether it is going to involve the community. I mean community in the broad sense of the word: industry and the broader community, including environmental organisations.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is on the agenda.

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

It would be useful to have time frames and an idea of the process. Is the process going to be consultative and is it going to happen in the near future rather than in the distant future?

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am advised that we will be responding within the next three to four months.

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

When the minister says responding, does he mean responding to the actual report?

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes; responding to that report and addressing those issues.

Question negatived.

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

I indicate that I will move Australian Greens amendments (40) and (41) on sheet 7676 together. Obviously, I am seeking leave to do so. These amendments relate to injunctions by interested persons.

The CHAIRMAN: Can I take it that you will not be proceeding with all the amendments prior to that on the running sheet?

Most of those relate to matters that we have traversed and on which I have gone down in a screaming heap. I am prioritising the issues for debate in the chamber.

The CHAIRMAN: Leave to move the amendments together is granted.

I move Australian Greens amendments (40 and (41) on sheet 7676 together:

(40) Clause 528, page 519 (after line 14), at the end of subsection (2), add:

  ; (c) an interested person (other than an unincorporated organisation); or

(d) a person acting on behalf of an unincorporated organisation that is an interested person.

(41) Clause 528, page 519 (after line 22), at the end of the clause, add:

Meaning of interested person—individuals

(5) For the purposes of an application for an injunction relating to conduct or proposed conduct, an individual is an interested person if the individual is an Australian citizen or ordinarily resident in Australia, and:

  (a) the individual's interests have been, are, or would be affected by the conduct or proposed conduct; or

  (b) the individual engaged in a series of activities for protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment, or research into biosecurity, at any time in the 2 years immediately before:

     (i) the conduct; or

     (ii) in the case of proposed conduct—making the application for the injunction.

Meaning of interested person—organisations

(6) For the purposes of an application for an injunction relating to conduct or proposed conduct, an organisation (whether incorporated or not) is an interested person if it was incorporated, or otherwise established, in Australia, and one or more of the following conditions are met:

  (a) the organisation's interests have been, are, or would be affected by the conduct or proposed conduct;

  (b) if the application relates to conduct—at any time during the 2 years immediately before the conduct:

     (i) the organisation's objects or purposes included the protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment, or research into biosecurity; and

     (ii) the organisation engaged in a series of activities related to the protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment, or research into biosecurity;

  (c) if the application relates to proposed conduct—at any time during the 2 years immediately before the making of the application:

     (i) the organisation's objects or purposes included the protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment, or research into biosecurity; and

     (ii) the organisation engaged in a series of activities related to the protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment, or research into biosecurity.

These amendments are about injunctions by interested persons and relate to issues around third-party review and injunction rights. They provide third-party rights for review of decisions to seek injunctions to restrain unlawful activity equivalent to those available under the EPBC Act for decisions and activities relating to imports of live specimens. Appeal rights under the Biosecurity Bill are lopsided and provide only for import applicants. Providing appeal rights to people acting in the public interest equivalent to the existing rights under the EPBC Act should improve the quality of decision making and increase accountability. We think it is particularly important that others are able to seek these injunctions and take these actions. As I articulated, we are looking for the equivalent activity that is available under the EPBC Act. Unfortunately, this bill does not provide for that. As I said, the appeal rights are lopsided. We think these are important amendments that deal with very significant issues.

Question negatived.

I move Greens amendment (45) on sheet 7676:

(45) Page 556 (after line 15), at the end of Chapter 10, add:

Part 6—Biosecurity Advisory Council

Division 1—Biosecurity Advisory Council establishment and functions

566A Establishment of Biosecurity Advisory Council

     The Biosecurity Advisory Council is established by this section.

566B Functions of Biosecurity Advisory Council

     The Biosecurity Advisory Council has the following functions:

  (a) to promote a coordinated strategic response to biosecurity issues;

  (b) to promote the shared responsibility in minimising all levels of biosecurity risk;

  (c) to provide a forum for discussing significant biosecurity issues in relation to meeting Australia's ALOP;

  (d) to provide policy advice on biosecurity issues to the Agriculture Minister, the Director of Biosecurity or to State or Territory governments;

  (e) to liaise with the Director of Biosecurity and the Inspector-General of Biosecurity;

  (f) if requested to do so, to provide advice on any matters relating to biosecurity to the Agriculture Minister;

  (g) to engage in public consultation in relation to the performance of any of the above functions;

  (h) any other functions conferred on the Council by this Act or another law of the Commonwealth.

566C Directions by Agriculture Minister

(1) The Agriculture Minister may, by legislative instrument, give directions to the Biosecurity Advisory Council in relation to the performance of its functions.

(2) A direction under subsection (1) must be of a general nature only.

(3) The Biosecurity Advisory Council must comply with a direction under subsection (1).

Division 2—Membership of the Biosecurity Advisory Council

566D Membership of the Biosecurity Advisory Council

     The Biosecurity Advisory Council consists of the following members:

  (a) a Chair;

  (b) 9 other members.

566E Appointment of Biosecurity Advisory Council members

(1) Each member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council is to be appointed by the Agriculture Minister by written instrument.

Note: For reappointment, see section 33AA of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901.

(2) In making appointments, the Agriculture Minister must ensure that he or she is satisfied that:

  (a) each member has a broad understanding of biosecurity issues; and

  (b) the members of the Council have, between them, expertise, skills or knowledge in the following fields:

     (i) livestock-based industries;

     (ii) cultivated plant-based industries;

     (iii) marine-based industries;

     (iv) import transport and port-related industries;

     (v) environmental conservation;

     (vi) marine ecology;

     (vii) terrestrial ecology;

     (viii) risk assessment;

     (ix) economics;

     (x) community engagement; and

  (c) each member is willing to engage with stakeholders relevant to their area of expertise, skill or knowledge.

(3) Before appointing a member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council, the Agriculture Minister must consult:

  (a) if the member is the Chair—the Environment Minister and each State or Territory; and

  (b) otherwise—the Environment Minister.

(4) A member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council may hold office on either a full-time or a part-time basis.

566F Term of appointment for Biosecurity Advisory Council members

     A member of the Biosecurity Advisory holds office for the period specified in the instrument of appointment. The period must not exceed 5 years.

Note: For reappointment, see section 33AA of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901.

566G Acting Biosecurity Advisory Council members

Acting Chair

(1) The Agriculture Minister may appoint a person to act as the Chair of the Biosecurity Advisory Council:

  (a) during a vacancy in the office of the Chair of the Biosecurity Advisory Council (whether or not an appointment has previously been made to the office); or

  (b) during any period, or during all periods, when the Chair of the Biosecurity Advisory Council:

     (i) as absent from duty or Australia; or

     (ii) is, for any reason, unable to perform the duties of the office.

Acting member (other than the Chair)

(2) The Agriculture Minister may appoint a person to act as a member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council (other than the Chair of the Biosecurity Advisory Council):

  (a) during a vacancy in the office of a member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council (other than the Chair of the Biosecurity Advisory Council), whether or not an appointment has previously been made to the office; or

  (b) during any period, or during all periods, when a member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council (other than the Chair of the Biosecurity Advisory Council):

     (i) as absent from duty or Australia; or

     (ii) is, for any reason, unable to perform the duties of the office.

Eligibility

(3) A person is not eligible for appointment to act as:

  (a) the Chair of the Biosecurity Advisory Council; or

  (b) a member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council (other than the Chair);

unless the Agriculture Minister is satisfied that the person meets the requirements of subsection 566E(2).

Note: For reappointment, see section 33AA of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901.

Consultation

(4) The Agriculture Minister must consult the Environment Minister before appointing a person to act as a member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council.

566H Remuneration

(1) A member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council is to be paid such remuneration as the Agriculture Minister determines in writing.

(2) A member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council is to be paid such allowances as the Minister determines in writing.

(3) This section has effect subject to the Remuneration Tribunal Act 1973.

(4) Payments under this section are to be funded out of money appropriated by the Parliament for the purposes of this section.

566J Resignation

(1) A member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council may resign his or her appointment by giving the Agriculture Minister a written resignation.

(2) The resignation takes effect on the day that it is received by the Agriculture Minister or, if a later day is specified in the resignation, on that later day.

566K Termination of appointment

     The Agriculture Minister may at any time terminate the appointment of a member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council.

566L Other terms and conditions

     A member of the Biosecurity Advisory Council holds office on the terms and conditions (if any) in relation to matters not covered by this Act that are determined by the Agriculture Minister.

Division 3—Other matters

566M Persons assisting the Biosecurity Advisory Council

     The Biosecurity Advisory Council may be assisted by persons engaged under the Public Service Act 1999 and made available for the purpose by the Agriculture Secretary.

566N Commonwealth bodies to provide information to assist Biosecurity Advisory Council

(1) The Chair of the Biosecurity Advisory Council may request a Commonwealth body to provide information relevant to the Council's functions.

(2) A Commonwealth body must comply with a request under subsection (1) unless it is not practicable for the body to do so.

(3) Subsection (2) does not apply if providing the information would contravene another law of the Commonwealth.

This amendment relates to the biosecurity advisory council. It is an issue that both industry and environment groups are particularly interested in. We believe that there is a need for greater ability for the government to seek advice from a process that is outside government and that the government should be putting in place a process that enables them to seek advice from those that are outside the system, from people with a range of expertise in biosecurity issues, from an industry perspective, an expert perspective and an environmental perspective. If the government are not prepared to support this amendment, what are they prepared to do?

The functions of the biosecurity advisory council would include: to promote a coordinated strategic response to biosecurity issues; to promote the shared responsibility in minimising all levels of biosecurity risk; to provide a forum for discussing significant biosecurity issues in relation to meeting Australia's ALOP; to provide policy advice on biosecurity issues to the minister for agriculture and the states and territories; to liaise with the Inspector-General of Biosecurity, which the government has now very significantly put in place; if requested to do so, to provide advice on matters of biosecurity to the minister for agriculture; to engage in public consultation; and any other functions conferred on the council by this act and another law of the Commonwealth.

We think this is a particularly important function. As I said, if the government are not prepared to support this amendment, I would ask them what arrangements they are prepared to put in place that extend the ability for input from such a body of experts in industry, environmental protection or academia and other areas of expertise needed to address biosecurity issues.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government does not support Greens amendment (45), which, as Senator Siewert has outlined, seeks to establish a biosecurity advisory council. The proposed council does not need legislative powers to support its role. It could be established administratively. The department regularly utilises the expertise of consultative committees and groups to provide advice and coordinated approaches to management of biosecurity, including with state and territory governments, scientists, primary producers, farming associations and environmental NGOs, and does not require legislative power to engage or establish these groups.

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

I note the government said that it could be put in place administratively. I make two points there. We want this in the legislation so that it is permanently there, because the current government may be committed to doing something—and I will seek that commitment in a moment—but it does not bind future governments, and that is our concern. I know there is a bit of difference of opinion between the way we see legislation and the way the government sees legislation; we actually believe there are certain things that need to be embedded in legislation and not left to administration—whether it be purely by a process that is set up, or by a regulation or a delegated instrument; those things actually need to be the legislation. That is why we think this should be in legislation—because it is such an important issue. So I will get that on the table: we think this has to be there in legislation and not left just to administration.

I ask the government: are they intending to set up such an advisory committee? And what is their time frame for setting up such an advisory committee? Is it going to be done by regulation? And if so, when do we expect to see those regulations?

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister already has a ministerial advisory council with significant biosecurity expertise. Is the government intending to set something up specifically on the basis that you have proposed—not at the moment. But the government is very happy to have discussions with you, Senator.

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

I thank the minister for that response. We are very keen to progress those discussions, at least—given that you are not going to support this amendment—to get a firmer process, such as one using a delegated instrument or a regulation, by which to put in place an advisory committee.

I accept that invitation to hold further discussions about how we can progress that advisory committee and about how we can put such a committee in place in a way that is not just administrative; in terms of not having any form of protection for its existence. I thank the minister for that commitment.

The CHAIRMAN: The question is that Greens amendment (45) on sheet 7676 be agreed to.

Question negatived.

Greens amendment (46) on sheet 7676 relates to the Eminent Scientists Group. I move:

(46) Page 556, at the end of Chapter 10 (after proposed Part 6), add:

Part 7—Eminent Scientists Group

566P Establishment of Eminent Scientists Group

     The Eminent Scientists Group is established by this section.

566Q Functions of Eminent Scientists Group

(1) The Eminent Scientists Group has the function of reviewing and reporting to the Director of Biosecurity on the following:

  (a) draft BIRA reports prepared by the Director of Biosecurity;

  (b) submissions (if any) received in response to draft BIRA reports;

  (c) whether all relevant matters relating to the likely economic, social and environmental consequences of a disease or pest entering, emerging, establishing itself or spreading in Australian territory or a part of Australian territory have been considered in the draft BIRA reports;

  (d) whether the conclusions of a provisional BIRA report are scientifically reasonable, based on the material presented.

Timing of the report

(2) The Eminent Scientists Group must give the Director of Biosecurity the report on a review under subsection (1) within 60 days of receiving the draft BIRA report.

Directions from Director of Biosecurity

(3) In performing its functions, the Eminent Scientists Group must comply with any directions given to the Group by the Director of Biosecurity.

566R Appointment of Eminent Scientists Group members

(1) A member of the Eminent Scientists Group is to be appointed by the Director of Biosecurity by written instrument.

Note: For reappointment, see section 33AA of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901.

(2) The Director of Biosecurity must, in appointing members to the Eminent Scientists Group, ensure that the composition of the Eminent Scientists Group reflects the diversity of the interests in the matter or matters that the Group will be dealing with.

(3) The Director of Biosecurity may designate a member of the Eminent Scientists Group as the Chair of the Group.

566S Terms and conditions of Eminent Scientists Group members

(1) A member of the Eminent Scientists Group holds office for the period determined by the Director of Biosecurity.

(2) A member of the Eminent Scientists Group holds office on the terms and conditions (if any) in relation to matters not otherwise covered by this Act that are determined by the Minister.

(3) A member of the Eminent Scientists Group may resign his or her appointment by giving the Director of Biosecurity a written resignation.

(4) The Director of Biosecurity may at any time terminate the appointment of a member of the Eminent Scientists Group.

As we know, the Eminent Scientists Group is a body for which there is a lot of strong support. We believe that this is an essential component of how we deliver biosecurity, and that the Eminent Scientists Group is a key part of delivering for biosecurity.

The functions of such a group would be to review and report on biosecurity—draft BRIA reports prepared by the department; submissions received on any draft BRIA reports; whether all relevant matters relating to the likely economic, social and environmental consequences of a disease or pest emerging, entering, establishing itself or spreading in an Australian territory or a part of the Australian territory have been considered in such reports; and whether the conclusions of a provisional BRIA are scientifically reasonable based on material presented.

We have articulated in our amendments that the Eminent Scientists Group must give the report on a review under section 1 within 60 days of receiving the draft BRIA report; that the group be appointed; that a member of such a group holds office for a period determined by the department; that a member of the group holds office on terms and conditions—in relation to matters not otherwise covered by this act—that are determined by the minister; that a member of the group must resign his or her appointment by giving a written resignation; and that—obviously—we believe that we need a group of eminent scientists who are able to conduct independent review of the BIRA reports. As I said, we believe this is an essential component of biosecurity risk analysis, and it is concerning to us that this has not been better considered in this legislation. We know that there is a lot of a strong support both in the industry and particularly in environment groups for such a group. Such a group has existed in the past and has provided excellent support, so we ask the government to reconsider this amendment to establish such a group.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government does not support the proposed amendment. The government has outlined its intention to provide for external scientific input into the biosecurity import risk analysis process within supporting regulations and administrative guidance.

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

I understand the government would not be supporting this amendment. I am deeply concerned. Again, it is the same argument as for the advisory group: we do not think it is appropriate to include this in delegated legislation and regulation. It is a key part of the approach that we take to biosecurity risk assessment and, therefore, it should be part of the legislation. The same argument stands: if it is in regulation, it is much easier to get rid of that regulation under a new government. This is long-term legislation. The Quarantine Act was in place for a very long time, and it has taken a long time to amend. You could not get rid of such a scientific group if it was actually in the legislation as easily as you could if it was in regulation. It takes a lot more thought to get that process changed. So our argument stands that the establishment of this particular group, because of its essential role in biosecurity risk assessment, should actually be part of the legislation.

I ask the government: when is the regulatory process going to be undertaken to put this body in place? What is the time frame for that and how soon can we expect to see it?

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government will be seeking to implement its arrangements as soon as practicable after the legislation receives royal assent. I understand Senator Colbeck yesterday gave important assurances.

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

Thank you. 'As soon as practicable'? I have heard that before! Are we talking about the same sort of time frame as mentioned before, within the next three or four months? Also, will there be consultation about the process?

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Eminent Scientists Group already has an integral role. But, in relation to this legislation, there is a 12-month phase-in period.

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

I am not trying to be pedantic here but I am trying, obviously, to get a clearer indication. Does that mean implementation within 12 months or that it will be in place during the phase-in period of this legislation, during the 12 months?

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

During the 12 months, yes.

The CHAIRMAN: The question is that Greens amendment (46) on sheet 7676 be agreed to.

Question negatived.

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

We traversed quite a lot of the issues in the debate, yesterday. I am double-checking that I have discussed all the broader issues that I sought to discuss, that I have sought from the government the assurances that I wanted to seek about how we are going to implement this legislation and about getting it as rigorous as possible. The one area that we have not traversed is the general biosecurity obligation, which is Australian Greens amendment (38)—I beg your pardon, I am going backwards. I move Australian Greens amendment (38) on sheet 7676:

(38) Page 412 (after line 21), after clause 427, insert:

427A Biosecurity industry participant must mitigate risk when carrying out biosecurity activities

(1) A biosecurity industry participant contravenes this subsection if:

  (a) the biosecurity industry participant is authorised to carry out biosecurity activities in accordance with an approved arrangement covering the biosecurity industry participant; and

  (b) the biosecurity industry participant knows, or ought reasonably know, that carrying out the activity is likely to pose a biosecurity risk; and

  (c) the biosecurity industry participant fails to take all reasonable and practical measures to prevent or minimise the risk.

Note 1: See section 427 in relation to when a biosecurity industry participant is authorised to carry out biosecurity activities in accordance with an approved arrangement covering the biosecurity industry participant.

Note 2: The physical elements of an offence against subsection (2) are set out in this subsection.

Fault -based offence

(2) A person commits an offence if the person contravenes subsection (1).

Penalty:   Imprisonment for 5 years or 300 penalty units, or both.

Civil penalty provision

(3) A person is liable to a civil penalty if the person contravenes subsection (1).

Civil penalty:   120 penalty units.

427B Requirement to mitigate risk when carrying out biosecurity activities

(1) A person contravenes this subsection if:

  (a) the person:

     (i) handles or deals with goods that are subject to biosecurity control; or

     (ii) is an operator, person in charge of, or otherwise associated with, a conveyance that is subject to biosecurity control; or

     (iii) is in a biosecurity response zone; or

     (iv) is subject to a determination under subsection 445(1); or

     (v) has been given a direction under paragraph 446(1)(a); or

     (vi) has a human biosecurity control order in force in relation to them; or

     (vii) is subject to a requirement determined under subsection 477(1); or

     (viii) is subject to a direction given under subsection 478(1); or

     (ix) is subject to any other obligation under this Act; and

  (b) the person engages in conduct; and

  (c) the person knows, or ought reasonably know, that the conduct is likely to pose a biosecurity risk; and

  (d) the person fails to take all reasonable and practical measures to prevent or minimise the risk.

Note: The physical elements of an offence against subsection (2) are set out in this subsection.

Fault -based offence

(2) A person commits an offence if the person contravenes subsection (1).

Penalty:   Imprisonment for 5 years or 300 penalty units, or both.

Civil penalty provision

(3) A person is liable to a civil penalty if the person contravenes subsection (1).

Civil penalty:   50 penalty units.

This amendment relates to the general biosecurity obligation that requires all biosecurity participants to exercise a general biosecurity obligation to take all reasonable and practicable measures to prevent and minimise biosecurity risks with provisions similar to those in Queensland's Biosecurity Act 2014, which is one of the most modern of the acts around Australia.

The amendment will create an offence of accepting goods knowing, suspecting or in wilful disregard of whether the goods are illegally imported or derived from illegally imported goods. We think this is important because, no matter how comprehensive biosecurity laws are, there will inevitably be myriad actions and omissions contributing to biosecurity risks that are not addressed.

The bill review expressed and emphasised the importance of biosecurity as a shared responsibility which requires that biosecurity participants not only obey the law but generally take care to observe, report and minimise biosecurity risks, requiring all biosecurity participants to take all reasonable and practical measures to prevent and minimise biosecurity risk. This will help achieve shared responsibility. This type of obligation was included in Queensland's Biosecurity Act 2014 and was proposed by the New South Wales government in its Biosecurity Bill 2014.

We believe that it is important that this general obligation is in place, to ensure that we require all participants in the process to a favourable and to make sure that they do take particular care. This whole bill is about our recognition that biosecurity is so important to our environment and to industry. This amendment will enforce that process. I ask the government why it will not support this amendment, particularly as the subject matter has already been included in the modernising of state and territory biosecurity legislation.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government, as Senator Siewert knows, does not support this proposed amendment. A broad, general obligation on the community with potentially higher penalty levels is problematic to administer. In relation to an additional provision on biosecurity industry participants, an offence on biosecurity industry participants—clause 428 of the bill—makes it an offence for a biosecurity industry participant to fail to carry out biosecurity activities in accordance with their approved arrangement. The primary outcome of these agreements is to manage biosecurity risk, so the government believes that the amendment is not necessary. The bill, through division 8 of part 1 of chapter 3 and clause 431, also imposes obligations on persons in charge of goods and biosecurity industry participants to report biosecurity incidents, with penalties for non-compliance.

Question negatived.

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

by leave—I move Greens amendments (36) and (37) on sheet 7676:

(36) Page 395 (after line 24), at the end of Part 2, add:

411A Publication of approved arrangement

(1) The relevant Director must publish, on the relevant Department's website, a proposed arrangement that is approved under this Part as soon as practicable.

(2) An approval that is published under subsection (1) must include:

  (a) any conditions to which the approved arrangement is subject; and

  (b) the period for which the approved arrangement is to be in force.

(3) The published approval must not include any protected information.

(37) Page 398 (after line 25), at the end of Part 3, add:

416A Publication of variation to approved arrangement

(1) The relevant Director must publish, on the relevant Department's website, the following as soon as practicable:

  (a) any variations to the conditions of an approved arrangement under this Division;

  (b) any variations to approved arrangements.

(2) The published variations must not include any protected information.

I indicate that these will be the last amendments that I will be moving. These amendments relate to the public release of approved arrangements to be published on the departmental website. The problem that a lot of community members are having—and there has been a long history of this—is that biosecurity is in fact characterised by a lack of transparency. We believe that publishing of approved arrangements would allow greater oversight. These amendments have the support of a wide variety of stakeholders. We believe it is important that these arrangements are released. I understand that some arrangements may be commercial-in-confidence. I understand that process, but we think that this should not stop some form of the release of these approved arrangements.

I understand that the government are going to say no to these amendments—they have telegraphed that fairly clearly—but I ask the government what they are prepared to do to increase transparency on this issue. I think it would help a lot in terms of people understanding how they come to decisions and the broader community's understanding of biosecurity.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On this matter at this time, we will need to agree to disagree. The government does not support proposed amendments (36) and (37). As approved arrangements are voluntary agreements between private entities and the government, the information is protected information and may represent confidential, commercial or sensitive information which is not appropriate to publish. Having said that, over the implementation period the government is happy to examine ways of progressing further transparency, but being ever mindful of the importance of commercial confidentiality.

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

I must say that that was the answer that I was expecting. I am still disappointed. Can I seek a commitment from government that they will look at this issue of transparency, that there is a recognition that there is a lack of transparency in understanding these arrangements, and that they will seek to consult? I would like to be included in that process.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government will consult on these issues. I note Senator Siewert's desire to be consulted. In response, I would say that obviously there is no show without Punch.

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

I thank the minister for that. I ask whether that means that they do understand the issues around transparency and the need for greater understanding by the community, particularly key stakeholders, in respect of some of the decisions and arrangements that are made.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, the government does obviously appreciate the desire for maximum transparency, but that has to be balanced with other considerations of commercial confidentiality. That is always the balance. We are aware of the tension and the issues, and we will consult.

Question negatived.

Biosecurity Bill 2014, as amended, agreed to; Biosecurity (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2014, Quarantine Charges (Imposition—General) Amendment Bill 2014, Quarantine Charges (Imposition—Customs) Amendment Bill 2014, Quarantine Charges (Imposition—Excise) Amendment Bill 2014 agreed to.

Biosecurity Bill 2014 reported with amendments; Biosecurity (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2014, Quarantine Charges (Imposition—General) Amendment Bill 2014, Quarantine Charges (Imposition—Customs) Amendment Bill 2014, Quarantine Charges (Imposition—Excise) Amendment Bill 2014 reported without amendments; report adopted.