Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion relating to the discharge of bills from the Notice Paper, as circulated in the chamber.

Leave not granted.

Pursuant to contingent notice standing in my name as Leader of the Nationals in the Senate, I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent me moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter—namely, a motion to give precedence to a motion relating to the discharge of bills from the Notice Paper.

As if the car tax that was exposed yesterday wasn't enough, we now have the fresh food tax. What the coalition is seeking to do today is to have the farmers tax removed from the Notice Paper of Senate debate to give confidence to the 85,000 farmers across this country that this government will not seek to make them pay for the biosecurity arrangements of importers—their competitors. It is absolutely outrageous and really goes to the heart of the Labor Party's attack on rural and regional Australia.

Our farmers are producing the cleanest, greenest product in the world. Our biosecurity arrangements need to be tough and they need to be secure, but you shouldn't be expecting our farmers to be the ones to pay for that, because—guess what—you tax the farmers but they are price takers. You have to pass that tax through. That means that, in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, fresh groceries are going to go through the roof for everyday Australians. You're seeing in the UK over this week that farmers right across the UK have taken to the streets of London against their own Labor government installing taxes and increased impost on the agriculture sector there. The agriculture sector here in Australia has made it very clear that they do not want this biosecurity tax, this fresh food tax from Labor. Thanks to the tough stance that they have taken, it's sat on the Notice Paper for 320 days. We haven't dealt with it. Thanks to the National Farmers Federation and their president, David Jochinke, for being so tough, for actually standing up for our primary producers, because what we have seen under Labor is that Australians are now seeing food at the grocery store go up by 12 per cent during the cost-of-living crisis.

So what do they do? They think it's just not high enough for everyday Australians to pay for their fresh food; let's put a tax on farmers. But that's not all they've done to our agricultural sector. They've torn up the agriculture visa, making it harder for our farmers to find a workforce. They've banned the live sheep export trade, putting men and women—shearers—out of work in WA, and they've also cut and delayed regional infrastructure and water projects. The 82 per cent renewable target by 2030 is seeing farmland carpeted with solar panels, wind towers, and transmission lines—tearing up private property rights. The deceitful changes to superannuation, which I'm sure will be slammed through this chamber before we break, that will see farmers taxed on unrealised gains—as if they're going to sell the family farm to pay their tax bill—are absolutely appalling. There is radical industrial relations law. They're signing up to the Global Methane Pledge. Thank you very much, if you're a beef producer! There are potential cultural heritage laws which put private property rights at risk across this country and the onerous scope 3 compulsory emissions, and I could go on.

They talk a big game about supporting rural and regional Australians, the nine million of us who don't live in capital cities. They say that as they're in front of the cameras, as they're standing up in Merimbula even this morning. But look at people's actions. This government's actions are an assault on rural and regional Australians, on what we do. You can't find a doctor in the regions, for love nor money.

They've torn up projects that were supposed to assist us with road safety and productivity gains with freight. They are attacking our farmers. They've instigated a car and ute tax, which will mean rural and regional Australians pay more for the cars we don't just buy because we love them—which we do—but because we need them to do our work and to travel the hundreds of kilometres just to get to footy training on a Thursday night, let alone earn a living. Labor's assault on the regions has to stop and we need to discharge this bill.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government will be opposing this suspension. We'll oppose it because we don't accept that the opposition should be able to rearrange the program every morning, as has become custom in this place.

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Rennick, a point of order?

Gerard Rennick (Queensland, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was up before Senator Gallagher. I want to make sure I get a chance to speak to this.

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government takes precedence, Senator Rennick. I'll come to you.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sorry, Senator Rennick, I won't be taking the full five minutes. I'm not going to be lectured by Senator McKenzie around biosecurity. When we came to government, Biosecurity, like other areas of the Public Service, was underfunded and unable to do the job it needed to do.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why are you taxing farmers to pay for it?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is what happened under the former government.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So pay for it. You're happy to pay for everything else, shovelling hundreds of millions of dollars out the door.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Don't pretend otherwise. You ignored the risks of biosecurity that have massive economic impact on farmers.

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Emergency Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order, Acting Deputy President. Senator McKenzie was heard in silence, and it would be appreciated if she would do Senator Gallagher the same courtesy.

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKenzie, I will remind you that interjecting during debate is disorderly.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The coalition had left our biosecurity system underfunded and insecure, and we heard that from farmers around the country.

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKenzie, again, I remind you that interjections are disorderly.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Their shameful legacy on biosecurity was ignoring demands from farmers for sustainable biosecurity funding. They did absolutely nothing to make importers pay their fair share, for almost a decade. We have worked on trying to find the balance, to find that sustainable biosecurity funding model going forward. We accept that this bill will not be part of that solution.

But we are not going to be lectured on biosecurity by the National Party. They cut it, they didn't invest in it and they left our farmers vulnerable. Not only did they do that for farmers; they also trashed our international relationships to the point that our farmers lost all of that business with our biggest trading partner, China. Under this government, $20 billion in trade has resumed. That is how much we value farmers. That is how much we value the relationships, and that is how much we will advocate on their behalf. We won't take lectures from Senator McKenzie on any of that, because they left it in absolute crisis and disarray. Minister Watt came in and had to fix it, and the ERC had to find resources to deliver the security that our farmers deserve and our community deserves.

We will not support this suspension. We do not believe in Senator McKenzie grandstanding in opposition when she was unable to do anything in government. That is the problem here.

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

The Greens support discharging the Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies Bill 2024 from the Notice Paper. I can understand why the Nationals want to have a bit of debate at one minute to midnight, near the end of the 47th Parliament, to show they're doing something for farmers, when most of their focus in this parliament has been on approving new coal projects and gas projects, fighting culture wars and undermining the path to recognition for our First Nations people. But here you are, having a little bit of a debate and raising points in the Senate to show that you're supporting farmers.

I've got a couple of things to say very briefly about this bill. The Greens made it clear to Labor that we didn't support this bill in its current form. We did listen to the concerns raised with us by numerous stakeholders. But I want to be really clear. The funding in this country for biosecurity, which arguably is one of the biggest threats facing our agriculture sector, is through levies that are paid for agriculture producers and goes to a stance or a framework around reacting to biosecurity outbreaks. That funding is there, and, if we get a biosecurity outbreak, it's there to be spent to try and get on top of a biosecurity outbreak. There isn't any funding to try to prevent biosecurity outbreaks. That comes out of general revenue. This bill was designed to add an extra funding stream to help us better futureproof our agricultural sector against enormous biosecurity risks, and I do believe it is something we still need to work on.

I wanted to get this on record today. I spoke to the National Farmers Federation and other stakeholders, and they made it very clear with me that they were prepared to sit down with the government and find a way forward on this and find a new funding stream and a structure that works for them. In good faith, the Greens said to the government that we wouldn't support this, but we do have an expectation the agricultural sector will work with the government of the day to find a way forward so we can get more funding to prevent biosecurity risks. We've recently seen it with the avian flu. There are so many risks facing our country. We've got to do better. I wanted to get that on record today.

We're supporting the discharge of this bill, but we have an expectation that, in good faith, the agricultural sector will work with the government to find a solution to this problem.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So bad is this government that even the Australian Greens have decided to distance themselves from the government's legislation. Senator Whish-Wilson has just confirmed that the Greens will support the discharge of the Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies Bill 2024 from the Notice Paper. Congratulation to Senator Whish-Wilson and the Australian Greens for the wisdom that you have shown in this particular instance.

There's no group in the Australian community that the Labor government has not sought to target and undermine. They've undermined the experience of Australian families with their cost-of-living crisis. They've undermined Australia's mining and resources sector with regulatory uncertainty as a result of duplicative environmental laws. There are workplace relations laws that stifle workplaces rather than enliven them, and, of course, Australia's agricultural sector has been at the forefront of Labor's attempts to undermine and attack the very heart and essence of Australia's prosperity.

Let's be very clear about this. The biosecurity protection levy bill was pushed through the House of Representatives in March 2024, almost a year ago, and has sat on the Senate Notice Paper for no fewer than 320 days. The opposition, in the form of the coalition, opposes it. The Australian Greens have now confirmed that they oppose it, so let's wait to see what the crossbench does. Every crossbench senator is now on notice. Do they support Australia's agricultural sector, or do they want to tax it into oblivion?

This fresh food tax or farming tax—whatever you want to call it—is just another attempt by the Labor government to undermine Australians' agricultural sector. What more evidence do Australia's regional communities need to confirm in their own hearts and minds that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Dr Jim Chalmers are not on their side? No matter what the government might do in the last 24 to 36 hours while rushing out all these new announcements—'terminal to the teller' and all these fancy slogans—the record of this Labor government in terms of supporting agricultural communities at a time of their greatest need is obvious and bad.

Labor has chosen to tear up the agriculture visa. Labor is attempting ill-advised changes to the PALM scheme. Labor is banning live sheep exports, which is sending shivers through the spines of regional communities in my home state of Western Australia; pushing ahead with water buybacks; signing up to a reckless race to 82 per cent renewables; implementing onerous scope 3 compulsory emissions reporting arrangements; making deceitful changes to superannuation; passing radical industrial relations laws that stifle farming communities; signing up to the Global Methane Pledge; potentially passing cultural heritage laws that put farming communities at risk; delaying red imported fire ant eradication funding; and implementing a new tax on trucks and utes.

The list goes on and on and on, and today this Senate chamber can say to the Australian Labor Party: 'Enough is enough. We're making a stand.' The opposition's motion is supported by the Australian Greens, and now the onus is on the crossbench. Will they stand up to support regional communities, or will they let them wither on the vine?

Gerard Rennick (Queensland, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to also support the removal of the Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies Bill 2024 from the Notice Paper. I can't understand why we don't put a tax on the importers. We've now got the US President wanting to start a trade war, so let's call their bluff. Let's make the importers, the people who are bringing these containers on board, pay.

According to agriculture.gov.au, taxpayers have to pay 44 per cent of this levy. Believe it or not, Australia Post have to pay two per cent as well. Meanwhile, the importers only pay 48 per cent. Our wheat farmers and grain producers already pay through GST and through beer excise, and one of the policies that People First are advocating for is to reduce the beer excise tax from 60c per litre of alcohol down to 20c. This country was built by the beer drinkers and it belongs to them, not the wine drinkers. If wine can get a subsidy, so should beer.

The other thing we need to do to help our agricultural producers in this country is allow the farmers to engage in collective bargaining when it comes to dealing with big wholesale buyers. In the supermarket inquiry, I saw that Coles and Woolworths are leaning very heavily on our horticultural growers—a big shout-out to the guys in the Lockyer Valley and around Bundaberg and to the many producers up in North Queensland. We need to protect our horticulturalists, we need to allow them to engage in collective bargaining and we need much more transparency in the prices that Coles and Woolworths are offering to our farmers. These are two policies that People First will be proposing.

But I'll get back to this bill. We strongly believe that the people who import goods into this country should be the ones who pay for the biosecurity levy. It's not right that the consumers here in Australia have to pay for this. By putting a tax on the taxpayers, it's another impost on the cost of living, through food.

I, for the life of me, can't understand why we'd want to be encouraging foreign farmers and foreign producers to sell their goods into Australia when we have a very viable and competitive agricultural sector here in Australia. I might add that Australia is one of the very few countries in the world that doesn't protect its agricultural and manufacturing industry—it makes my blood boil—and that's if you don't add on the amount of pork that gets dumped in this country from the EU and from Canada. This is the thing. It's all very well to say you believe in free trade, but that doesn't mean you destroy your own producers while other producers in other countries get enormous subsidies—the EU's notorious for this—and then dump. They get enormous subsidies in their own country, and they overproduce and then dump in this country. So I support the disallowance of this bill. I think it's an absolute disgrace that we are trying to impose a tax on the Australian consumer. Let the foreign importers pay for this. I'd also just say that we need to also reduce the excise on beer—it's way out of control—and we need to allow our farmers to engage in collective bargaining with the big retailers like Coles and Woolworths.

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Emergency Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the question be now put.

Question agreed to.

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

The question is that standing orders be suspended.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That General Business Notice of Motion No. 785 relating to the discharge of the Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies Bill 2024 and related bills be called on immediately and be determined without amendment.

Question agreed to.

I move:

That—

(a) the Senate notes that:

(i) the Albanese Government has presided over a period of record-high cost-of-living pressures,

(ii) the Biosecurity Protection Levy proposed by the Albanese Government is a new tax on Australian farmers and would force them to pay for the biosecurity risks of their international competitors to import products into Australia,

(iii) Australian farmers already contribute significantly to biosecurity measures through their existing industry-led agricultural levies and by measures that they undertake on their properties,

(iv) under the Albanese Government the price of food has risen by 12% and this new tax on agriculture would ultimately lead to higher grocery prices, and

(v) since being received by the Senate, the Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies Bill 2024 and related bills have been left on the Notice Paper without any debate for more than 320 days;

(b) the Senate calls on the Albanese Government to abandon its plan to impose additional biosecurity levies and charges on Australian agriculture; and

(c) the government business order of the day relating to the Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies Bill 2024 and related bills be discharged from the Notice Paper.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I ask that subsection (a) and (b) be put together? I'd like those subsections to be put together and then (c) put separately.

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

Yes.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Could I also please ask that sections (a) and (b) be put separately to (c)?

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

Yes, you can. The question is that parts (a) and (b) of general business notice of motion No. 785 moved by Senator McKenzie be agreed to.

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

I'll now deal with part (c) of the motion.

Question agreed to.