Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) Share this | Hansard source

As a general comment, I say to the honourable senator that Australia’s approach to import risk assessments is always based on the science. The science has to drive this, and sometimes it is very frustrating for players who want to have a say in this to nail down their arguments in scientific terms—that is what I invited people to do in another area of my portfolio, fisheries, in relation to the prawn import risk assessment. What drives Biosecurity Australia and others is the science, and that is what we, as a government, are going to rely on.

In relation to the potential import of New Zealand apples, I indicate to the Senate that the final import risk assessment was issued by Biosecurity Australia on 30 November 2006. Australia’s Director of Quarantine has subsequently determined a quarantine policy consistent with the requirements of the Quarantine Act 1908 that requires New Zealand to comply with very strict quarantine conditions before apples can be imported into Australia. It is likely to take some time before New Zealand apples might be imported. The Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service is now working with its New Zealand counterpart to ensure that New Zealand develops detailed operational arrangements that will comply with Australia’s quarantine requirements as specified in the import risk assessment. We cannot allow the threat—and this is very important—of a World Trade Organisation dispute action to deter us from making an appropriately thorough assessment of these operational arrangements.

On that point, I indicate to the senator that we are, quite rightly, as is New Zealand, signed up to the World Trade Organisation. New Zealand growers on the other side of the Tasman are threatening to take Australia to the World Trade Organisation because we are being too tough. On the other hand—surprise, surprise!—apples growers in Australia are saying we are being too soft. Chances are the science is in fact somewhere in the middle. That is what the scientists have advised us as a government and that is what we are working through.

I say to anybody that has issues in relation to import risk assessments: if we do not get the science right that can withstand a challenge in the World Trade Organisation, then we will not be the masters of our own destiny and the parameters that might be imposed by the World Trade Organisation will become the rules that have to be abided by. This is a two-edged sword for anybody that wants us to take action which goes above and beyond the science. Simply, New Zealand growers are saying we are being too tough; domestic growers are saying we are being too soft. It positions us as a government quite comfortably in the middle—not for any political reason, I hasten to add, but simply based on the science. Unless Senator Fielding has some scientific evidence to offer—and if he does, he should have provided that to the committee investigating this—I suggest he and anybody else not seek to play politics with what is a very sensitive issue.