Senate debates

Wednesday, 25 June 2014

Bills

Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Legislation Amendment (Removing Re-approval and Re-registration) Bill 2014; In Committee

12:39 pm

Photo of Nick XenophonNick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Again, I thank Senator Colbeck for his answer. I think Senator Colbeck knows I hold him in high regard in respect of agricultural issues. I am not trying to pick a fight with him. I am just concerned. I have a genuine concern that we are moving away from a similar type of scheme to what operates in the United States, Canada and the European Union and that the consequence of that may be that we do not have adequate scrutiny of some chemicals where it is not just a question of economics and red tape—if that is the issue for a company—and the re-registration fees being too high. Presumably if it is an effective chemical it will stay on the market because it is of economic benefit to both the company and the farmers who use it. That is one issue.

The other issue is that we have the inquiry into Australia's bee population and the effect of pollination services. I referred in my second reading contribution to the impact of neonicotinoids. There is a real concern that colony collapse disorder is materially linked in part to the use of pesticides. I think Senator Colbeck, given his passionate advocacy for agriculture in this country, knows better than most what the impact of that will be on pollination. A significant proportion of agricultural production in this country will be affected if we continue to see a decline in our bee population. I am concerned that in practical terms this bill will mean less, not more, scrutiny of neonicotinoids. I have a real fear as to what that will mean for our bee population and the ongoing impact on Australian agriculture because of the pollination it provides.

Comments

No comments