Don Randall (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that dung beetles:

(a ) provide an important service to Australia's agricultural sector; and

(b ) act as a biological solution that assists in fly control and enhances livestock health;

(2) the work of dung beetles acts to enhance and improve the nutrients in soil, leading to natural fertilisation and reducing nutrient runoff;

(3) greater recognition by industry of the beetles' importance may lead to further widespread adoption;

(4) investigation and research into the introduction of two new species of beetles from France and Spain may provide opportunities to expand the beneficial impacts of dung beetles by increased activity during the spring months, and this could bridge the existing activity gap prior to the activity of native beetles in the summer months; and

(5) agricultural research and development organisations could provide important support in researching the benefits and quarantine implications associated with importing these two new species.

I rise to speak on a matter of great importance and significance to this country's agricultural sector and the economy generally—dung beetles. I have made a number of speeches in this House over a number of years on this topic, and it is important to do so again because there has been a considerable amount of inaction since those speeches. The dung beetle is a magnificent insect that provides an important service to our agricultural industry. Dung beetles, as the name suggests, bury dung deposited on open farm and fringe urban areas. The results of this activity have proved time and again why the dung beetle is such an important part of our ecosystem. Their importance could be so much more, as I will explain as I go.

Approximately half a million tonnes of cow dung is dropped by cattle each year. Dung beetles take this dung and bury it deep in the ground, the results of which are improved nutrient levels of soil; reduced soil compaction; deeper topsoil, to a depth of over 300 millimetres; a habitat and food supply for earthworms; aeration of soil; increased rain infiltration and storage; increased soil penetration of plant root systems, which then reduces the effect of soil salinity and acidity; reduced run-off into rivers and dams of fertilisers and soil agents; storage of carbon dioxide in the ground, thereby reducing emissions—in other words, it ticks the box on climate change; and removal of breeding grounds for flies within 24 to 72 hours, thereby drastically reducing fly populations by up to 99 per cent. I repeat: a 99 per cent reduction in fly populations. This list goes on. These wonderful insects are an ecological, environmental and agricultural bonanza.

Another benefit of the dung beetle activity is the recycling of phosphorus from animal dung back into the soil. For those who do not know, Australia is the most phosphorus-deficient continent in the world. As you know, we import a huge amount of phosphate rock from such places as Christmas Island, Nauru and elsewhere. This is at great financial cost to Australia and a significant environmental cost to the rest of the world. As with most resources, this supply of phosphate is not infinite. By breeding dung beetles, we can harness their ability to bury phosphate into the soil, thereby ruling out the need to import so much of this fertiliser.

As my interest in the dung beetle has grown, I have had the pleasure of making the acquaintance of Mr John Feehan, who some of you may know as the Dung Beetle Expert. John is a retired CSIRO scientist—an entomologist—who was directly involved in the CSIRO's world-first dung-beetle-breeding program for 31 years. Nowadays John is based in Canberra, from which he operates the company called Soilcam, a company that can claim to have the largest and most efficient redistribution of dung beetles to be found anywhere in our universe. During a conversation with John last week, he informed me that the bush fly has just arrived in Canberra a whole two months after it normally does. The reason for this late arrival is solely attributed to John and his extraordinary work with dung beetles in this area.

The reason I stand here today to talk about dung beetles is not just to outline their outstanding contribution to Australia's agricultural industry; it is to raise the profile of the dung beetle and to express to my fellow parliamentarians the need for funding to further distribute dung beetle species across Australia. My colleague here the member for Forrest, Nola Marino, knows only too well the importance of dung beetles to her electorate of Forrest, and I thank her for her support on this matter today. For the member for Forrest, bush flies are a significant problem affecting not only the agricultural industry in her electorate but also the tourism industry in the South West of Western Australia—and, I say, elsewhere in Australia; it is certainly not confined to that part of Australia.

Whilst we have dung beetle species to combat bush flies in those summer months, it is in the spring months that we see a shortfall in the dung beetles in Western Australia. We know that there are a whole range of dung beetle species which would satisfy that early spring need for an alternative beetle to take up its life cycle and activity in that time frame.

Another industry which the dung beetle can provide a significant benefit to is the horticultural industry. The fact that dung beetles have the ability to transport dung to areas where it is not originally deposited illustrates the dung beetle's potential to assist in the renovation of horticultural soils. Research of this kind is explored in Bernard Doube's and Tim Marshall's guide to dung beetles, entitled Dung Down Under. In this book they identify the horticultural root zones, such as those found in vineyards and orchards, that are highly compacted and nutrient poor and suffer poor aeration. While the addition of mulch has improved the nutrient quality of soil at the surface, it also encourages roots to head upwards, towards the nutrient, where they can be exposed. The addition of dung beetles to horticultural soils encourages roots to follow the path of the dung beetles to find soil that is aerated and nutrients that have been buried with the dung.

Such an experiment was conducted by the authors at a winery in Eden Valley in South Australia. After the addition of dung from a dairy farm to the vineyard's soil, it was proven that dung beetles not only increased the moisture content of the soil but also reduced its compaction. Furthermore, and just as importantly, the study found that the addition of dung beetles has no negative effect on the quality of grapes or wine. In fact, it has a positive effect. In my electorate of Canning, there are many orchards, not just vineyards, that could benefit and be strengthened by the presence of dung beetles.

There are two new species of dung beetle which originate in France and Spain that are suited to a slightly cooler climate, much like that of Western Australia's spring. As an aside, for the benefit of the House I would like to note that the risk of importing dung beetles is little to none. There is no risk of an uncontrolled pest as dung beetles require dung for both food and breeding purposes. Therefore, if there is no dung they perish. In addition, strict quarantine conditions ensure no foreign diseases are accidentally introduced to Australia. Any suggestion to the contrary is just a misleading red herring. To that point, I sat down with the previous agricultural minister in the former Labor government, Tony Burke, the member for Watson, and begged him to take this issue on board. Of course, the distraction was quarantine et cetera—there needed to be $1 million spent by the previous government on this area. They could have done that, as could state governments and our government now.

There is one problem, however. The limited availability of affordable programs for Western Australia does not allow for research, rearing or distribution of these two new species in our state. I know the Department of Agriculture and Food in Western Australia, DAFWA, released the French beetle Onthophagus vacca at a number of sites in Kojonup in August this year with the help of the CSIRO. This release occurred after two years of research by DAFWA, but even this does not guarantee the beetle colony will survive. In fact, past releases have been unsuccessful. However, I do note that DAFWA's climate matching technology is more advanced this time. When they did it last time, they wasted their money. The dung beetles died because they did not release them in the right time frame. Western Australia needs to get its act together in terms of releasing dung beetles. They will be just wasting their money if they do not do it scientifically. In addition to large-scale state managed projects, I would hope that Western Australia could receive funding for smaller scale projects.

A constituent and an entomologist of Canning, Mr John Allen, has approached me on this very topic. He has a small-scale dung beetle project at Coodanup Community College and he is unable to expand due to a lack of funding. He tells me $1 million would be enough. I say to the state agricultural minister, Mr Ken Baston: 'You've got skin in the game in terms of agriculture. You've been a station owner. You talk a lot about wanting to do things for the agricultural economy. How about coming up with $1 million for Mr John Allen and his associates to breed dung beetles specifically designed for the right time and seasons in Western Australia?' I say to Barnaby Joyce: 'Do the same thing. How about providing the minimal amount of money at a federal level?' We talk about $1 million, probably not much more, to expand this incredible program that will benefit all those involved all around Australia in terms of making this a marvellous, low-cost agricultural initiative that will tick all the boxes on the environment, agriculture and a sustainable economy. I commend this motion to the House.

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I congratulate the member for Canning for bringing this matter before the House today. I suspect there would be many people out there who may have seen this motion and thought it a little unusual for us to be talking in the parliament about dung beetles. That is to be expected because we have a rather dry and witty sense of humour in this country. I can understand why people would be raising the question: 'Really? Dung beetles? Is that all you have to talk about in the national parliament?' I understand that. Those of us, including all of those currently in this chamber, who have an interest in and a passion for agricultural issues will fully appreciate the relevance and importance of this debate. On that basis, I congratulate the member for Canning. I join with him in his suggestion that maybe both the federal and the state governments could do more in funding terms to ensure that we further progress this very important area of research.

I take the opportunity to congratulate the CSIRO and others, who have already been very much in this field and who, unlike most in the general community, have a very, very solid understanding of the critical nature of that work and the very good things that it can do in relation to, for example, improving our soil quality in the agriculture sector, improving nutrient levels and indeed delaying nutrient run-off from our agricultural land and all the negative impacts that can have.

I did not hear everything that the member for Canning said, unfortunately, as I was caught up in meetings. I do not know whether he mentioned flies.

Honourable Member:

An honourable member interjecting—

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He did mention flies? I recognise the fact that he has done that. Most of his speech was devoted to flies. Few Australians probably understand the importance of dung beetles, but I think most Australians understand the great Australian fly and what an inconvenience it is to all Australians, whether it be around the barbecue or working the land. Dung beetles play a very, very important role in removing that product, which becomes a breeding ground for flies and which attracts flies. This is very, very important work. If we could do more to have people connect dung beetles with the fly infestation problem that we encounter in this country, we would probably have more debate about dung beetles and more people discussing the importance of properly investing in research and development in this area. I acknowledge what the member for Canning was saying about new potential breeds from other countries, and I know that France was one of them—breeds which are active at different times of the year or, therefore, during different seasons, which would of course expand the scope and effectiveness of dung beetles. Again, I would join with the member for Canning in working on a bipartisan basis to overcome any quarantine issues or biosecurity issues that might be associated with the introduction of those new species.

I recall listening to probably an ABC Rural report some time ago about the work of our CSIRO scientists, who were painstakingly taking dung beetles to the southern parts of Western Australia to conduct further experiments on the effectiveness of these breeds. It is slow and arduous work—if I remember well, it was going to take between 10 and 20 years for the scientists to be able to show without doubt that the introduction of these species was having a very positive impact on the fly population in that part of Australia. It is painstaking and very slow work, work for which you have to wait a long time for a return. That is one of the reasons that I pay so much credit to those who are working in this very important area.

I have said in this place many times before—and it is not designed to be a partisan comment, although it probably will be taken as one—that in my view we lack a coherent strategic plan for Australian agriculture. We do have a white paper on its way, and we are assured that it is going to be comprehensive. I suppose Minister Joyce would argue that that will form Australia's strategic plan in agriculture. I am a bit sceptical and not confident that that will be the case. I am not confident, because even the terms of reference for the white paper are not sufficiently broad, in my view, to pick up all of the issues that we need to tackle in terms of our agricultural future or the issues that arise if we really are going to fully capitalise on those opportunities in Asia—the phenomenon I prefer to call the 'dining boom'. It will stretch all the way from our productivity and the efficient use of our limited natural resources right through to how we make decisions about where those resources should be allocated—where the niche markets are, where the return is going to be, what products use water most efficiently and so on. Here today in this debate we see another aspect. It is may be a relatively small aspect but it is a debate that gives you an idea of how comprehensive those challenges will be. These are things which, going back to where I began, are never at the forefront of the public debate in this country—but should be. There are many more I could name.

I will take a few minutes to talk about messaging in rural Australia and how we promote conversations in rural Australia about these important issues. The medium we rely upon most to activate these discussions in rural and regional Australia is the ABC. It is a very sad period for the ABC because government imposed cuts are now starting to bite very hard on this most important part of the social and economic infrastructure of rural and regional Australia—our local ABC services, in particular ABC Radio. As we speak, in Newcastle, my own region, each and every one of the 33 staff who work at that facility—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker: this motion by my colleague is very important. I suggest the member for Hunter sticks to the subject. A great deal of manure has been discussed so far. I suggest he sticks to the bovine sort and not the other.

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is not a point of order.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have been respectful to the other side in this discussion. I would expect them to be respectful to me. I have made the link between the discussion before the chamber and the importance of facilitating broader community discussion of these issues. There could be nothing of greater importance to facilitating that discussion than the role the ABC plays. Before I was rudely interrupted, I was saying that up to one-third of those who work at the ABC facility in Newcastle are being pulled in to the general manager's office for a discussion. Sadly, as I understand it, one-third of the staff in Newcastle will not have a job at the end of this day. I hope that is not accurate, but that is the very strong speculation. It makes it a very sad day for me. It makes it a very sad day for everyone living in the Hunter region.

Ms Hall interjecting—

I hear the member for Shortland agreeing with my point. But it is not just the Hunter region; it is filtering through our rural and regional communities right around this country. It is a very sad day and I appeal to the Prime Minister to rethink this issue. (Time expired)

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I congratulate the member for Canning on this motion. As the only dairy farmer, I think, in Parliament House, I know firsthand what an unsung hero the dung beetle is. I have seen the great benefits of dung beetles not only in reducing fly numbers but in the soil benefits that go with the recycling and burying of the cow manure. The member for Canning talked about the size of the job the dung beetles do—half a million tonnes of dung a day—and they do it very well.

WA has been seasonally plagued with a lot of native bush flies. In the early days, they were basically a plague. The dung beetles have significantly reduced the numbers, quietly beavering away to reduce the number of flies by breaking down the fresh cow manure.

Researchers have noticed a reduction in bush fly numbers following the introduction of dung beetles in the south-west. There have been 10 trials that have been very successful. There has been a real reduction of the bush fly numbers. The dung beetles break down and bury the cow manure in between 10 and 30 hours, and that means fewer flies actually survive. They are absolutely a quiet achiever. You can get the cows out of the paddock in the morning, take them to the dairy and milk them and by the next day the manure in that paddock is gone. We know that the bush fly female lays its eggs in the fresh droppings and the larvae feed within that. The dung beetles bury the droppings and rob the bush flies of their opportunity to reproduce. There are native dung beetle spaces that eat and recycle marsupial dung and there a few native species that can deal with the dung of horses, sheep and cattle, even though they are not in the same volumes.

I want to talk about the practical side of this as well. In the early years on our farm, I spent an awful lot of time harrowing paddocks—actually spreading the manure around to distribute it—so that I did not end up with patches where the grass did not grow and to actually recycle the manure well. The work of the dung beetles reduced that time spent significantly. They were so effective in dealing with the cow manure. They bury very large volumes of manure, with benefits to soil, water and pasture, as well as biologically control the bush fly. The benefits, as we heard, are significant: aeration of the soil; relocation of the nitrogen and phosphorus in the dung to the grass root zone; cultivating and turning over the topsoil to a depth of 300 millimetres, producing an environment in which the microbial activity thrives; providing habitat and a food supply for earthworms; reducing internal parasite loads in pastures through the rapid burial of the dung; increasing rainwater penetration and improving ground water retention full; and reducing bush fly populations of up to 99 per cent, according CSIRO research in Western Australia—and what a great job CSIRO has done.

I have seen these little Trojans—I call them—at work on our farm in Harvey. They just go non-stop until the manure is gone. Of course, I respect the position put by the member for Canning; there is a gap. And we certainly need to make sure that we have a full 12-month coverage of the dung beetle so that it is a constant cycle—no time when those flies can breed. I am glad that we have seen a lot of investigation and research of species to cover that spring gap. This this has a wider benefit, not just in dairy and beef properties but in horticulture, orchards. We do see two dung beetle species out of France and Spain that may well be able to fill the gap. That is really important so that we have the 12-month process. I also note the comments about DAFF and Western Australia and the extensive work done by CSIRO.

I congratulate the member for Canning for his constant and persistent approach to this. We underestimate the value of the dung beetle in a very practical sense. I think this is one of those 'quiet achievers'. If you want to give a 'quiet achiever' award in the agricultural sector, it would go to the dung beetle because of the amount of work that is done by these little fellows. I watch them. Every time I drive down into the paddock on the motorbike, I see the fresh cow manure. When I come back 24 hours later, it is gone. I just think: help what an enormous environmental and agricultural benefit that is. I think this is a great motion by the member for Canning.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to congratulate the member for Canning on bringing this motion to the House. It is a motion of great significance. The member for Forrest, if I am ever in Western Australia, she may take me for a tour of her farm so as I can watch the dung beetles at work. I think that would be quite inspiring. Dung beetles do play a very important role in our environment, particularly within the farming environment.

I would like to also associate myself with the statement made by all speakers in this debate and the member for Hunter, too, where he pointed out the important role that the ABC plays in rural areas and in getting messages out to people. My heart goes out to the people in the ABC at Newcastle that are facing cuts at the moment.

The dung beetle is an interesting little creature. It works to improve pasture production. It leads to a greater capacity on the land. It reduces the need for fertiliser, and it has this recycling process that actually creates nutrients within the soil. It improves parasite control—I just mention the common fly—and it works to reduce the impact of the bush fly in agricultural areas. By recycling the dung, it then leads to a situation where there are fewer bush flies, and it has a very big impact with buffalo dung as well as cow dung. It is one of those species that were introduced into Australia in the sixties and the nineties that has actually had a beneficial impact. We have had others. The cane toad is an example of something that was introduced to control a problem but created a problem, but it is not like that with the dung beetle. The dung beetle has actually, really, made a very positive impact in our environment and our agricultural community.

As well as improving parasite control, it leads to greater water storage in the soil and more earthworms. It is a natural solution, and that is what I really like about it. So many cases of using chemicals in farming have led to problems. This is natural. This is nature solving the problem that exists. It is also a scientific approach. I should congratulate CSIRO, as other speakers have, because they have done a lot of research in this area. I believe that we could do more to help them with research, because, by researching these types of approaches to agriculture and then investing in them, we get really good outcomes for our community—such as greater productivity on the land—and, at the same time, we control problems that exist within the community.

Federal and state governments need to work together on this. There needs to be a strong plan of where to go from here. We need to invest, and that is the secret when it comes to agriculture and all industries within Australia. We need to invest in the research. We need to then invest in the development of that research, and then we need to invest in our rural communities so that they can grow and thrive. It is because of motions like this, which really bring such an important issue to the parliament, that we can move forward. Hopefully in the future there will be plans and investment in that agricultural research and the development of the organisations that are important to support this research—organisations like the CSIRO, and the ABC, which gets the information out there to the farming communities. We do not want cuts; we want investment.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I, too, acknowledge and support the member for Canning for introducing this motion into the House. It is a motion, quite frankly, that I am very pleased and excited to be speaking about. Indeed, it was probably 20 or 25 years ago that I first met John Feehan from the CSIRO in the town hall at my home town of Gravesend, where he did a presentation about dung beetles. Since that time I have become acutely aware of the importance of the role that they play.

There has been some discussion from the previous speakers about the role that they have in burying the dung and the control of flies. The other parasite that they are quite effective in the control of is the buffalo fly. In Queensland and northern New South Wales the buffalo fly is a very serious pest and has severe ramifications for the productivity of animals, and the dung beetles certainly play a role in controlling that fly.

But I would like to go a little bit further. I think that a lot of people do not understand the agronomic benefits of what dung beetles provide. It is that cycle, that circle of life, and the overall management of a farming system that they thrive in. For the dung beetles to be working efficiently your cattle have to be healthy. They need to have a level of nutrition such that their digestive system is working correctly so that the dung they produce is at a consistency that is easily buried and has the nutritional value that can be buried into the ground.

Dung beetles are but a part of that system. In my own case, when the dung beetles were introduced, we had some areas of hard, bare, scalded, severely eroded country. Over a period of three to five years that area became completely covered in natural pasture again. The dung beetles broke up that hardpan and buried the nutrient and opened it up to allow the water to penetrate. This increased the water-holding capacity of that soil and let the seedling plants get a hold on. I have seen large areas of quite bare and eroded pasture land rehabilitated largely because of the work of the dung beetle.

There has been quite a bit of discussion in this place, in the last couple of years, about carbon sequestration. The dung beetles would be the greatest sequesters of carbon that we have in Australia. They are the unsung heroes. If we could measure the amount of material that is buried by dung beetles below the soil we would find that the tonnages of carbon that have been sequestered would be significant. They would be significant enough that we would go a long way to meeting our international requirements, under the conventions we have signed.

There is need for more research and understanding of these dung beetles because, inadvertently, they can be damaged quite severely. For instance, if a farmer drenches his cattle with a drench that is inappropriate it can decimate the dung beetle population. It is very important that when farmers are drenching their cattle for internal parasites they choose a drench that is dung beetle friendly because, inadvertently, you can cause a lot of damage.

When the dung beetle population declines, you can see that right across the whole landscape. You will see that if a cow pat is left unburied that area of soil is not useful for several years. The stock will not graze the grass that grows up through that cowpat until it has completely eroded away, through natural causes. The efficiency of that land is indeed reduced significantly.

I support the member for Canning in his motion; I believe the dung beetle is the unsung hero. Unlike the members of the opposition, the dung beetle understands what his job is; he is very good at it; he does not deviate from it. He does not want to do things that are not relevant to his job; he just gets on and does it in a professional and workmanlike manner. He does not seek public applause. He does not seek grandiose statements in this place, and I support the member for Canning.

Cathy McGowan (Indi, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No flies on us today! I rise today to support the motion put forward by the member for Canning, and I call on the government to ensure the continuation of the dung beetle program. It is your job. I am really pleased to speak on this topic today because it brings together so many of my passions: passions for agricultural research, biological agents, the link between country and city, and cooperative research. It is very practical research that is undertaken and at a very insignificant amount of money. I am a sheep producer, and I am very sad to see that the member for Parkes has left. He constantly talked about the farmer 'he'. I just wanted to remind him that many of us farmers are 'she', and I suspect dung beetles are not all 'he' either; so I am sorry about that the member for Parkes.

But in talking to this topic, which I too agree with is a very important topic, I want to say it is such a small amount of money; it is $250,000. Why can't the MLA, CSIRO or someone else find the money to do this? I have been approached by my constituents who have actually asked me to lobby the government and state ministers for agriculture to see if we could do something about this. In particular, I would like to acknowledge members of my community Peter Serpell, Lachlan Campbell, Belinda Pearce and Jos McZenzie—members of the Kiewa Catchment Landcare Group—for taking this issue up. On behalf of the community of Indi, it is fantastic to have such strong Landcare groups who understand how important these research projects are, and how such a little bit of money will make such a big difference. I support what my colleagues have said about the great environmental and climate benefits that dung beetles have delivered.

I want to particularly emphasise today, and it seems many of my colleagues laugh when they talk about the dung beetle debate, that this has such importance for urban Australia—it is the great barbecue tradition. It is within our ability in rural Australia to solve the problem of the fly that enables so many of our friends in the city to have their afternoon barbecues on the weekend and to go outside on the patio and enjoy the beautiful weather. Many people in my community have said: 'Haven't you noticed there are no flies around now? It is getting hot but where are the flies? Haven't we enjoyed the fly-free afternoons and evenings.' To think that would go, and to think our city friends would again be attacked by flies for the sake of $250,000. I rest my case. There is no argument for it.

To bring the words of my constituents to the debate, the Kiewa Landcare group tells me that we need to introduce a further 20 beetle species. In south-eastern Australia, we only have one species that operates in winter. So to put all our eggs in one species basket, as they tell me, is not a strategy. The original CSIRO dung beetle project was closed before all the desired introductions were made, so there is a huge opportunity waiting for us. It is my hope that through this debate—and I again congratulate the member for Canning for bringing it to our attention—the original dung beetle project will be realised, and we will say, 'No, it's not just this one; we actually need to open up the 20 different species that we know we need right across Australia.'

If I could make my comments more pertinent to the bigger picture of what we are talking about, this is about our agricultural research. This is about applied agricultural research that has direct benefits to our communities, farmers and economics. I ask my colleagues opposite: what can we do in rural and regional Australia to give you the power you need to take this really important battle up to where it needs to be done? Up to the cabinet minister, if we need, but certainly to MLA—the board of MLA—to say we need more research; we need more money invested in research; and we need more money invested in biological agents, because we have been hearing that they are the ones who do all of that magic work.

They are so important because they do not take outside chemicals to solve problems; they enable nature to do what it does so well. In this particular instance, it is a project that I think has just grasped the imagination of so many people, because they can actually see the symbolism of $250,000 solving the fly problem and doing all of this other good work for our environment. It might end for lack of political knowledge, I think, or political ability. Anything that we can do, or I, as a crossbencher, can do to support the government to actually make a case, I am right behind. So, a matter of urgency, $250,000 in the scheme of things it is not a lot. I urge the government to investigate expansion of the program and all biological programs in Australia. I particularly congratulate the member for Canning for bringing this really important matter to the attention of the House.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also join with the accolades that have been laid upon the member for Canning. Our job here in this House is vast by any stretch of the imagination. When I first took on my role as the federal member for the electorate of Wright, a predominantly regional and rural seat comprising just on 8,000 square kilometres, I never thought that I would stand proudly on the floor of the Australian parliament to advocate the importance not only of the ecology but also of the benefits of the dung beetle. It is only as you get closer to the species that you understand the importance of the dung beetle in the ecology of our environment.

There are over 6,000 species of this one particular animal. In its level of importance in the Australian landscape it is up there with the humble bumblebee—the honey bee. Without the honey bee, without that process of third-party pollination being able to take effect, our agricultural production would be decimated virtually overnight. Maybe not to the extent of the humble bumblebee, but certainly in that ilk of importance, is our dung beetle. It is under threat from many different avenues. We heard from the previous speaker that it was under threat from a financial perspective. Today I want to raise the threat of the current weather conditions and the impact that they are having on the humble dung beetle and some of the progressions that have come about now with new species, which I will speak about.

Some interesting facts on the dung beetle: did you know that they could bury over 250 times their own weight each night? Did you know that each cow can produce 15 of the cow pats that they work through per day? So the number of dung beetles that we can use just by using those two base parameters is enormous. Our weather conditions have had a negative impact on our dung beetles. They look for a particular type of dung that provides a level of nutrient and where they can meet their new partner, their lady friend. The member for Parkes, earlier on, spoke about dung beetles as being 'hes', and the member for Indi said there are shes. There are shes. It is an interesting pattern that, when the male dung beetle rolls up his ball and fights off his little competitors as he tries to get it back to his house, the female dung beetle actually sits up on top of the ball as he rolls it long. It is quite comical to watch how they do it, because he rolls the ball with his large back feet in reverse, while the female balances on top of the ball. They go back to the hut where they have made their nest; they make their larvae; the little baby dung beetles are born inside the ball; and then they eat their way out. So if you ever think you are having a bad day, whether in politics or business, spare a thought for the poor humble dung beetle, because they go about their job surrounded in crap, nude and walking around backwards. Some of our colleagues in this House, without the inference of nudity, would probably think that they are of a similar ilk.

Can I talk very briefly about the very exciting parts of the dung beetle and what they bring—

Honourable Member:

An honourable member interjecting—

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mate, without them we are buggered! I take the interjection. You speak to those advocates who have now made a business out of selling dung beetles. If you do not have any on your farm because of the weather conditions, there are now commercial operators that you can go to and buy them. You buy them in one- or two-kilo packs off the internet; they will be bundled up; they will arrive in a stock standard Australia Post bag in your mail, depending on where you live; and then you take them out and spread them through your paddock. I am surprised there are not more members from the Greens here speaking on this, because this is truly a green initiative that is driven by our regional and rural members of the coalition. Some of the most arid landscapes can be transformed virtually overnight because of the incredible efforts. If you do not think that is exciting, I do. All hail to the dung beetle.

Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the final speaker on this motion, there are just a couple of things that I wanted to highlight. Some of them have been highlighted by previous speakers in relation to this motion about the dung beetle. One of the previous speakers, the member for Indi, sums this up quite well. The issues raised in this motion could be settled if the government just acted and funded the CSIRO properly. We have seen funding cuts to the CSIRO and the sacking of scientists in agricultural research and development, which could help solve the issues that are raised in this motion. Now, $250,000 does not sound like a lot when it comes to the broad research budget, but it is a lot of funding if your funding has been cut, as it was so savagely cut by this government in the last budget.

In all regional areas, it is hard to find a farmer who does not have a dung beetle story. We have heard discussion today about dairy farms. The example that I would like to raise from my electorate about the importance of the dung beetle is in relation to pigs and a free-range pig farm, the McIvor Farm Foods.

Honourable Member:

An honourable member interjecting—

Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My colleague next to me is smirking, but I raise this issue because it is an area that is much loved. These pork products—the bacon, the ham; the list continues—are favourites at our local farmers markets and our foodie restaurants in Central Victoria and Bendigo.

The pigs on McIvor Farm never see a concrete shed. They never experience an enclosed environment. They are truly free range. The passion of the owners is to have a farm with both agricultural and biological farming principles that are focused on the environment. The owners of this farm believe, and they advocate quite loudly, that to be an environmental farm they need to focus on the land. They say that they work with both pigs and their love of nature to produce this purely free-range system. Their system, they argue, is very different. To ensure that they have free range, they ensure that the pigs are part of the regeneration of their land. Those who may have farming electorates know that pigs can be very destructive to the land—uprooting soil, disturbing the land, creating problems, and so on—so the owners introduced the dung beetle to assist with the nutrients in the soil, to ensure that the soil and the plants are continuing to regenerate, repair and grow. That is just one example of how a farm near my electorate is already using the dung beetle.

I do, though, have a few concerns with an aspect of this motion, whilst we have said that we support the bipartisan approach, and that is the call in the motion for agriculture research and development organisations to provide support in researching the benefits and the quarantine implications associated with importing these two new species. If the government are serious about this point in the motion, then why have we seen such a debacle when it comes to biosecurity? Again and again, we have organisations coming out and saying that this government does not know what it is doing about biosecurity. Last week in estimates we heard that the most recent industry to come out to raise questions about the government's approach to environmental biosecurity, the Tasmanian salmon industry, is concerned at the lack of consultation with industry. It is another example of how the government like to stand up and pretend that they are being the champion of agriculture and the champion of these issues, yet one hand is not talking to the other. If they are serious about dung beetles, if they are serious about the importing of new species and the quarantine implications which are outlined in this motion, then why on earth are they not doing what other industries in agriculture are calling for and consulting properly?

I mentioned at the beginning of my speech, and would like to reiterate it towards the end, the cuts to R&D, the cuts to the CSIRO, the cuts to the universities who will train the scientists to do the research that this motion is calling for— (Time expired)

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. The honourable member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.