Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Aged Care for an explanation as to why an answer has not been provided to question on notice No. 86, asked during the 2021-22 supplementary budget estimates hearings of the Community Affairs Legislation Committee. The question related to health based guidance for PFAS chemicals.

Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't have any specific advice in relation to that, but I do commit to coming back to you as quickly as possible in relation to that answer. I was aware that you were going to ask for this information and I had sought advice from the minister's office. I'll go back and see what I can resolve for you as quickly as possible.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the explanation.

I thank you for that, Senator Colbeck. Yes, we did contact your office to give you a heads-up that this was coming, and we have tried to do so multiple times. This issue is very important. PFAS chemicals are getting increasing focus around the world for their impact on health, on agriculture and on soil contamination right across airports and other sites in the country. Sadly, they're making their way into our rivers and into our waterways. The PFAS group of chemicals represent over 4,000 chemicals. We've been using them historically in a wide range of applications, but unfortunately they have many harmful effects and their use in products such as firefighting foam has led them to enter the water supply and our food stream. They're a major environmental problem that's been recognised all around the world. They don't break down naturally, and they can be potentially highly toxic to a range of animals, habitat and ecosystems. I know many countries have discontinued their use.

What interests me is that while Commonwealth advice states that PFAS has not been proven to cause specific illnesses in humans, other nations are now increasingly disagreeing. Notably, the United States EPA has stated that there is evidence that exposure to PFAS can lead to adverse health outcomes in humans, and the US EPA only last month started a water monitoring program testing for PFAS around the nation. They've also released an epidemiological study of 69,000 people related to PFAS contamination that has shown kidney disease and testicular cancer. In Michigan PFAS was found in beef after cattle were fed crops grown with fertiliser made from contaminated wastewater biosolids. Farms in Maine and New Mexico, including dairy operations, were forced to close after high levels of PFAS were found.

We're not immune to this kind of contamination. Just in my home state, in Launceston—and this is particularly why I am actually pursuing this line of questioning with the minister—we have publicly acknowledged PFAS contamination from Launceston Airport in farmlands and in rivers, including rivers that go through the town that are used for fishing, that are used for recreation, and we still haven't got any answers from the minister.

We've also seen Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden signal their intention to ban the manufacture of PFAS, and they have provided guidance for PFAS in drinking water which is very different to the Australian guidance—hence my questions to the minister. I note that there was one thing that the Greens asked the minister to provide—a new epidemiological study—and that has just been released by ANU, which is a positive.

Just very briefly, the questions that we put to the minister: How often are the health based guidance values for PFAS fact sheets, as available on the pfas.gov.au website, updated? And when was the last time it was updated? No answer. The last update about PFAS in the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines was in 2018—four years ago—yet we see continued evidence growing about the health impacts of PFAS—not good enough. When is the next update on PFAS envisaged? No answer. Why has there been no update since 2018? No answer. What priority areas have been identified for PFAS health research by the Australian government since 2018? No answer. How much money has the Australian government invested in PFAS health research since 2018? No answer. How has the Australian government adapted its health advice considering the recent changes to guidance in the EU and the US? No answer. Of course, we have asked these questions previously at estimates—no answer on the night. So we put questions on notice, and still, way beyond the due date, we've received no answers from the minister.

May I say, to conclude, that I understand Senator Colbeck has been under a lot of pressure lately. Yes, it's a very serious thing when this chamber, when the opposition, calls for the resignation of a minister. It's something I've only seen less than a handful of times in my 10 years in this place, and I remember a day when it was actually an extremely serious thing for all of us to call for the resignation of a minister. But we have seen repeated failures by Senator Colbeck in his department. I was gobsmacked when I learnt that he didn't appear before the Senate committee to provide not only information to the committee at a crucial time but information that could have been of comfort to senior Australians who were really doing it tough during COVID, many of them alone, many of them anxious, many of them suffering and, sadly, too many of them dying from this virus. And the minister goes to the cricket! Perhaps that's why he hasn't been able to put a rocket under the department to get answers for us today, even after we have repeatedly reached out and asked for those answers. It's simply not acceptable. I hope the minister can get a hurry on, because, as is plainly obvious, we have very limited parliamentary time this year to get the answers to these critical questions.

Question agreed to.