House debates

Wednesday, 15 November 2023

Bills

Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Bill 2023, Primary Industries (Customs) Charges Bill 2023, Primary Industries (Services) Levies Bill 2023, Primary Industries Levies and Charges Collection Bill 2023, Primary Industries Levies and Charges Disbursement Bill 2023, Primary Industries (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023; Second Reading

10:35 am

Photo of Shayne NeumannShayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the streamlining and modernising agricultural levies legislation—the Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Bill 2023 and related bills. This deals with primary industries, excise levies, customs charges, services levies, the collection of these things, the disbursement and some transitional legislation as well.

The agriculture, fisheries and forestry sectors are major contributors to our Australian economy. The combined gross production is expected to reach $86 billion in 2023-24. It's an extraordinary contribution to the economic, social and environmental fabric of our nation. These sectors contribute 12.1 per cent of our exported goods and services and employ 2.2 per cent of the total Australian workforce. More than 300,000 Australians have jobs in agriculture, fisheries and forestry, and a further 229,000 are employed in the food and beverage manufacturing sector. This government recognises the importance of these sectors and the contribution they make to our rural and regional communities and the overall national interest. In my own electorate, Blair, in South-East Queensland, which is an agricultural region, I know that there are a broad range of agribusinesses which employ thousands of locals.

According to Regional Development Australia, in 2020-21, the total agricultural output in the Ipswich and West Moreton region was $819 million. The largest commodity produced were vegetables, which account for 34 per cent of the region's agricultural output. Not far behind was livestock slaughtering, which represents 30 per cent. In fact, I have two of the largest meat processing plants in the country, JBS at Dinmore and Kilcoy Global Foods. Meat processor JBS is the single biggest non-government employer in the city of Ipswich. Recently I visited its Dinmore processing facility, when they announced that they would implement a second shift starting from next year, creating 500 new local jobs and taking the total number of onsite workers up to 1,800.

Just last month, in conjunction with JBS, I invited local high school principals and staff to visit the Dinmore facility to learn about the exciting opportunities available to their students as part of the jobs announcement, including school based traineeships and pathways to employment for school leavers in the agricultural sector and the manufacturing of food. There's a lot happening in the agricultural food processing sector, and this government, the Albanese Labor government, is right behind it.

We're focusing on the critical areas of climate biodiversity, workforce and trade to benefit the sector in rural communities. This will help strengthen the competitiveness and productivity of agriculture, fisheries and forestry to keep them on a path towards the goal of $100 billion by 2030. Having an effective agricultural levy system is critical to the goal. The system is a longstanding successful partnership between industry and the Australian government to facilitate industry investment in strategic activities that could not be funded by primary producers on their own.

The levy system was created by the Hawke Labor government in the 1980s, under the late, great primary industries minister John Kerin, our longest serving agricultural minister and arguably our best ever, who sadly passed away earlier this year. The system allows primary industries to collectively invest in research and development, marketing, biosecurity activities, residue testing and biosecurity responses. These investments are managed by 15 rural research and development corporations, RDCs, along with Plant Health Australia, Animal Health Australia and the National Residue Survey, which sits in the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 10:39 to 10:51

I was talking about the RDCs. Each year, these bodies receive about $600 million in levies from farmers, producers, processors and exporters. In addition, more than $300 million is provided on average each year by the Australian government to the RDCs in matching funding for research and development. These bodies are the cornerstone of the agricultural innovation system, and their investments are helping to capitalise on significant opportunities which exist within the sector: new products, new markets and more sustainable emissions practices. ABARES advises that, for every dollar invested in agricultural R&D, there is close to an eightfold benefit to farmers. I'm sure many businesses would like to get that kind of return. Continuing to invest in R&D will be even more important in the coming years, as we ramp up our efforts to reduce emissions and adapt to a changing climate.

The work of Plant Health Australia, Animal Health Australia and the national residue survey is critical to our biosecurity system and our access to international markets. The levy system, in its current form, has been in place for decades and is really accepted around the world as one of the world's best. It allows the government to collect levies at industry's request that can be invested in priorities that could not be funded by many primary producers on their own. However, the complexity of the framework that supports the system has grown inconsistent and is making it difficult to understand and administer it. There are than 50 pieces of legislation covering 110 levies across 75 commodities and 18 levy recipient bodies. A 2018 review of the whole sector, and the legislation that covers it, found that the framework is necessary for a successful industry-government arrangement but the current situation is ineffective in meeting industry's needs now and in the future. The previous government was in power at the time.

The package of the agriculture levies bill will replace the existing framework with a more contemporary, flexible and efficient system which will better support the agricultural sector. The new framework, once enacted, will condense over 50 pieces of legislation down to five acts and associated subordinate legislation. It will provide the RDCs with more certainty in terms of matching the funding as well. It will provide more flexibility in proportionate compliance measures supporting levy collection. By allocating all levies detailed in subordinate legislation, the new framework will make it easier for industries to seek and establish a new levy or to adjust the settings of their existing levies. The legislation also operates separately from the new biosecurity protection levy, and the new framework will also provide a solid foundation on which to base any future reform.

But the key features of the framework will remain the same so industry has certainty. The new framework will not change existing levies or charge rates and will continued support the fundamental principles of industry led system. This is critical in terms of the sector. The new bills are critical in terms of consultation with the sector as well. There are many imposition bills and there are two accompanying bills to this particular legislation. The separate bill, the consequential amendments and transitional bill, is being introduced to manage the consequential changes and arrangements. This package of bills is the result of extensive consultation over several years to ensure a new framework meets the demands of those who benefit from the system. We're about reducing regulatory burdens for levy payers and the RDCs, and I note the Office of Impact Analysis has assessed the proposed legislative framework as good practice.

I welcome the opposition's broad support for the package of bills and I welcome the comments from the Leader of the Nationals and member for Maranoa in his contribution about how our nation's agricultural levy system is something we should be proud of. Growers, producers and industry stakeholders all agree it has been a resounding success over the many decades since it was introduced by the Hawke government.

In relation to the amendments proposed by the member, the reasons for not explicitly referring to Animal Health Australia, Plant Health Australia or animal and plant disease deeds is to ensure legislation remains flexible, adaptable and fit for purpose in the future. Subordinate legislation can deal with a lot of those issues. That is the whole intent of the modernised agricultural levy package. The explanatory memorandum makes it clear on page 13 that the relevant clauses that the member seeks to amend are covered by a levy funded by the operations of AHA and PHA. If the amendments were to be accepted, for spending to be permissible, AHA and PHA would need to undertake biosecurity activities using levy funds. In practice, only some of the activities described will be undertaken by AHA and PHA, and in many cases these bodies may contract third parties to undertake activities. Where appropriate, R&D activities will be undertaken through an RDC. The proposed amendments could unnecessarily limit spending of biosecurity activities and biosecurity response levies and charges. The current proposed provisions in the bills provide an appropriate level of flexibility in relation to the scheme, and the AHA and PHA can, in consultation with industry measures, decide how biosecurity activities and biosecurity response charges and levies will be spent.

Together, these bills establish a new legislative framework, providing a more effective and efficient system, and I commend the legislation to the chamber.

Comments

No comments