Biosecurity Cost Recovery
Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (11:54): Biosecurity policy is currently undergoing review in many states around the country, and South Australia is the first to declare its intention to charge fees. It is assumed that these fees are intended to aid in meeting the obligations under the Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement (EADRA). This agreement, made between the federal government, state and territory governments and the livestock industry, was introduced to manage the cost and responsibility for an emergency response to an animal disease outbreak. There are currently 10 livestock industries which are party to this EADRA and the costs are shared amongst these industries.
In effect, this means that many livestock organisations are already committed to paying towards the cost of managing a biosecurity risk, and any additional fee could be considered double dipping. Importantly, it is not only livestock producers who benefit from biosecurity, so it is not fair that only livestock producers incur all the costs associated with it.
I acknowledge the great importance of biosecurity but also recognise that the issues that the member for Hammond raises are very important. The government should have no fear of the member for Hammond's motion because it asks the committee to fully investigate and report on the cost recovery model. Unless the government actually has something to fear, it should support this motion.
We have levies upon levies upon levies hitting all manner of people, whether or not they be biosecurity levies. The regular person walking in a street in a regional centre like Port Augusta is getting hit with more and more levies all the time. This government's cost recovery model is turning into a bit of a business model.
It is a very different situation to cost recovery in private enterprise where it is passed on to the consumer versus cost recovery in the public arena where public agencies can just say, 'Look, this is what it costs us to provide the service and so people in the industry have to pay it and it will be your issue to just pass it on, recover it, absorb it somehow or other,' because there is a disconnect between that and the marketplace, the way there is in private enterprise.
I strongly support the member for Hammond's motion. I state again that the government should support it unless it has something to fear with its cost recovery model.
Comment