Don Farrell (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Honey bees, yes, and pigs—you would know something about them. In his closing remarks to the House of Representatives, the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry made the excellent observation that, if the horse industry were allowed to avoid paying their share in an emergency quarantine response, then other livestock industries would have little incentive to remain in the EADRA. There is the risk that other livestock industries would conclude that there is no need to pay a levy, because the government will bail them out in the event of a crisis. The alternative would be for the Australian government to let the entire industry collapse—obviously a completely unacceptable alternative.

I remind senators opposite that the government consulted extensively before drafting this policy. It has the support of the three peak horse industry bodies, including the Australian Horse Industry Council, the Australian Harness Racing Council and the Australian Racing Board. It also has the support of many other  smaller horse industry bodies such as Riding for the Disabled, Australian Horse Riding Centres and the Equestrian Federation of Australia. After much consultation it was agreed that the fairest way to impose a levy was at the point of registration of a new horse. The coalition has expressed a view that the sporting and hobby clubs will bear too much of the cost of the levy while the racing industry will get off lightly. Any future levy established is going to be negotiated between the government and the horse industry. I am confident that any future increase in the levy will be fairly negotiated. The current government has already acted fairly and reasonably by not pursuing the costs of the equine influenza outbreak and has wisely chosen to set the current rate at zero.

If the coalition votes down this legislation, it is in effect condemning the horse industry to future uncertainty and the whim of future governments who may not be inclined or in a position to act so reasonably. These bills at the very least put down a framework which will move the horse industry forward and provide certainty to the industry, in the event of a future emergency disease outbreak, that their horses will be protected. In the absence of any real alternatives being offered by the alternative government, the most sensible and responsible course of action is to support this legislation. As I have said before, all the other major livestock industries are party to the EADRA agreement. If this legislation fails to pass the Senate, I fear that the horse industry will be left in a state of limbo for a significant period of time, so the time to pass this legislation is now. There is consensus among the peak horse industry bodies that this needs to happen. They are willing to sign up to the EADRA and to be a party to this agreement. They were asking to be party to the EADRA even before the horse flu outbreak because they understood that they were in a vulnerable position, being, as they are, outside of this agreement. This was a request that the previous government failed to action.

I seek to summarise the current situation. I think it is important that we cover all of the circumstances. The first point that is worth noting is that both sides of politics have known for some time that the horse industry should be a party to the EADRA. The second point to note is that the horse industry as a whole wants to be a party to the EADRA. The third point to note is that in 2007 the quarantine system broke down and emergency control measures were rapidly implemented, but at a huge cost and distress to the racing community. In the aftermath, the Australian government was left with the clean-up bill—as I indicated earlier, at a very significant cost of $350 million to the Australian taxpayers. After the disaster of the equine influenza outbreak, we have the opportunity to pass legislation that will fix this problem. The legislation will provide certainty for the future, yet the opposition has decided to oppose the legislation because it is not entirely to its liking. I believe this to be an irresponsible position for it to take, and I sincerely hope the legislation passes the Senate. (Time expired)