The Plant Industry Forum (PIF) has made a submission to the Australian Senate Inquiry into the Biosecurity Protection Levy (BPL) calling out fundamental policy and design flaws.
The PIF represents 39 plant industry representative groups with a combined annual value to the Australian economy in excess of $43.2 billion.
Producers represented by these groups are also at the frontline of biosecurity management and response efforts, including Varroa Mite, and already contribute hundreds of millions of dollars in existing levies and other direct business costs.
PIFC Chair, Nathan Hancock, said biosecurity is vital to the productivity of plant industries and to the ability to access domestic and international markets.
Mr Hancock said the BPL remained unfair and inequitable, despite recent changes announced by the Federal Government that failed to address the core design faults raised by producers and independent experts.
He said the PIF’s members remained strongly opposed to the proposed BPL’s introduction.
These retrospective policy adjustments include; announcing a new levy gross value of production (GVP) calculation rate instead of the original flat 10 per cent of grower levies rate, and the formation of a Sustainable Biosecurity Funding Advisory Panel to provide actual oversight of spending the $50 million to be raised each year, of which PIF has been invited to participate in.
“The Federal Government’s original failure to consult openly and transparently with the industries and producers who are being made to pay another levy, before the shock announcement of the BPL in last year’s budget, is the core reason why the policy design is flawed and so many producers remain strongly opposed to it being implemented,” Mr Hancock said.
“Our submission to the Senate Inquiry highlights these multiple failures to engage properly with the producers who are being asked to pay this new levy – and the risks this poorly designed policy presents, not only to maintaining strong biosecurity partnerships, but also the existing levies paid by producers to deliver shared benefits for the environment, communities and the economy.”
Mr Hancock said the PIF submission also referred to independent expert analysis that has identified multiple policy design flaws; including by the Productivity Commission, Australian National University and the Office of Impact Analysis.
He said representatives from the Coalition, Greens, independent MPs and minor parties all voted against the bills during recent debate in the Lower House, after assessing the BPL proposal based on merit and supporting the concerns raised by producers about the policy’s failure to achieve fairness and equity, despite recent changes.
“The Office of Impact Analysis only rated the BPL policy design as ‘adequate’, which means this was not best practice. It’s not good enough for new legislation to have such a low rating when it carries so many risks and sensitivities to those who the policy is actually impacting,” Mr Hancock explained.
“The Government has failed in its assessment that agriculture alone is the primary beneficiary of biosecurity. It has failed to justify the nominal amount of $50 million to be collected from industry and has failed to listen to the industry it intends to levy when it says that the BPL is flawed policy and should be discarded and a new approach sought.”
The PIFC submission also highlights;
- The rush to implement the BPL despite strong opposition by producers who are being forced to pay it;
- Uncertainty over how levy funds will actually be spent and transparency of spending, given the bills show the $50 million will be re-directed into consolidated revenue;
- Concerns about the Australian Department of Agriculture’s poor performance record and financial mismanagement;
- Failure to properly acknowledge the views of producers and industries impacted by Varroa Mite and account for emergency response levies/costs; and
- Failure to explain the calculation and collection of the levy and how the costs of collection will be managed.
Background
Plant Industry Forum (PIF) members are signatories to the Emergency Plant Pest Response Deed and contribute directly, through levies and in-kind costs, to biosecurity preparedness and response activities.
Over the past decade, emergency responses have included citrus canker, brown marmorated stink bug, chestnut blight, banana freckle, khapra beetle, giant pine scale, tomato potato psyllid, Torres Strait fruit fly and, more recently, Australia’s largest biosecurity pest incursion Varroa Mite.
In addition, producers also pay hundreds of millions of dollars annually in other direct levies to support investment into research, development and extension (RD&E) programs that fund projects and activities that also strengthen biosecurity, and deliver shared benefits for the community, including environmental sustainability and economic activity for the nation.
The BPL bills are now the subject of an Australian Senate Inquiry and have been tabled in the Upper House for a pending debate and vote to meet the July 1 implementation deadline.
Read the Plant Industry Forum’s submission.
ENDS
Further information:
Plant Industry Forum Support Officer Rachael Oxborrow: 0416 705 193