Senate debates

Wednesday, 4 February 2009

Horse Disease Response Levy Bill 2008; Horse Disease Response Levy Collection Bill 2008; Horse Disease Response Levy (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2008

Second Reading

5:23 pm

Photo of Glenn SterleGlenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

If we are talking about the good old days, Senator McGauran, you should have taken your brother out the back and sorted it out, but unfortunately it has not worked. The opposition opposed these bills in the House and incorporated dissenting reports within the Senate committee report. However, the Independent member for New England, Tony Windsor MP, supported the passage of the bills in the House. There needs to be some system to cope with the consequences of an outbreak, and these bills provide for this. It seems reasonable that the Australian taxpayer will expect to be reimbursed for at least part of the cost of an emergency response—not all, but at least part. The financial security of many thousands of Australians relies on a strong and secure horse industry, as I said earlier on.

In my home state of Western Australia the industry employs an estimated 12,000 people and the Rudd government will not sit back and wait for the outbreak of disease in the horse population. The government will implement the recommendations of the Callinan report and will act to strengthen our quarantine and biosecurity services. The government will give those people working in the horse industry a solid footing so that they know that if there is another outbreak they will have governmental protection and not an industry catastrophe. The measures in the main bill are appropriate and they are necessary. There is ample capacity within the legislation for the levy schedule to take into account different sectors of the industry and, as I have mentioned, the bill sets the proposed rate of horse disease response levy at zero. I cannot stress that enough.

As senators are aware, the bill did go to the Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport for further examination. It was evident to the committee that the general principle on which this legislation is based is soundly consistent with measures applying to all livestock. This legislation represents an insurance measure to ensure that horse owners will have funds to deal with any future outbreak of equine diseases. The committee resolved to support compulsory registration for all horses and believes that this, together with the establishment of a national register, would greatly enhance the ability of animal health agencies to respond in the case of emergency. The establishment of such a register would of course require further consultation and agreement between the states and territories. We have not backed away from that through this whole process.

A number of submissions and testimonies were made by interested and affected parties over the course of the hearings, and the committee heard a number of concerns of community recreational owners and riders. It is important for all senators to remember that the policy detail of the horse disease response levy are not yet available and should not be condemned or discarded at this time. The bills before us are enabling legislation. That detail will be provided and, as I said before, we will be open for comment and consultation.

It is also important that all senators be aware that these bills have the support—I must stress this again—of a number of industry groups, such as the Australian Racing Board Ltd, Harness Racing Australia and the Australian Horse Industry Council, as well as Thoroughbred Breeders Australia, Riding for the Disabled and the WA Horse Council, to name a few.

I am confident, as is the committee, that the regulations can be framed so as to take account of a wide diversity of horse ownership and riding activity in the community and that they will also be equitable. Equity issues are important to consider when discussing these bills. Whilst all parties agree with the principle of a broadly based levy, it may be appropriate to exempt some classes of owners, riders and community groups.

In summing up and without sounding like a broken record, I do wish to stress once more that, in regard to performance organisations, the intent is to cover organisations that hold regular events or competitions, such as polo matches, endurance events, campdrafting, equestrian rodeos and dressage. However, small community organisations and groups, such as some pony clubs and Riding for the Disabled, will likely be excluded from the levy arrangements where these organisations do not conduct regular competitions. As I have said previously, and I reiterate this, the regulations have not been prepared, as detailed consultation with industry has to take place, needs to take place and will take place. This will be done following the passage of the bills. The regulations cannot, as I said before, go beyond the scope of the bills and will be disallowable in the parliament.

So, for fellow senators and senators opposite, this bill has been debated in both houses and has been reviewed by the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Committee—a wonderfully hardworking committee, if I can say so myself, and that is all members of that committee. Upon review of the submissions made, comments and testimony received, and extensive consultation, it was the committee’s recommendation to the Senate that these bills be passed without amendment. I commend these bills to the Senate.

Comments

No comments