After six public hearings and 104 submissions to digest, the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Senate Committee, on Thursday the 8th of December, released its 171-page inquiry report on the Adequacy of Australia’s biosecurity measures and response preparedness, in particular with respect to foot and disease and varroa mite.
The report has made 29 recommendations primarily focused on the immediate threats represented by the varroa mite incursion, and the increased potential for an outbreak of FMD and LSD from Indonesia.
It notes AHA’s key roles in supporting Australia’s national surveillance programs as well as our emergency disease preparedness activities and programs such as the development of AUSVETPLANs, managing the EADRA and continuing to roll out our member-based training services.
Overall, AHA welcomes the report and the recommendations from the committee but acknowledges that for several of these recommendations to be implemented effectively, will require time, resourcing and funding – a point stressed by AHA in our submission and in discussion with the committee.
We look forward to working with our members, particularly the Australian Government, to fully consider and proactively address these recommendations because only then can we ensure that our biosecurity system and its frameworks, tools and resources remain fit for purpose in protecting agriculture and our national prosperity.
Staff at AHA have pulled together a digest of the recommendations worth noting by our members; these are highlighted below.
| Sustainable funding |
| Since 2019, Animal Health Australia, and other Biosecurity Collective partners have been calling for a sustainable funding model for our biosecurity system. Recommendation 21 states that the Australian federal, state and territory governments commit to a sustainable biosecurity funding model to reflect the changing risk profile of pests and diseases to Australia’s agriculture and environment and overall way of life. This process has already started with the Australian Government’s recent consultation survey on a sustainable funding mechanism for biosecurity. |
| AUSVETPLANs and their ongoing reviews |
| The committee acknowledges the value of the work done by AHA and our members in the preparation of plans for a response to a pest or disease incursion, through the AUSVETPLAN and processes. Overall, the committee heard that the AUSVETPLAN is valued by industry and producers, particularly for its role in promoting collaboration across a wide range of stakeholders and ‘guidance based on sound analysis, linking policy, strategies, implementation, coordination and emergency management.’ However, recommendation 9 states that AHA broaden its stakeholders across the supply chain (such as transport and retail sectors) to be involved in the development of the plans; the need for key actions and risks to be prioritised; the need for plans to be current and communicated and roles and responsibilities understood; and, for responses to be governed by the plans. Importantly, they acknowledged that the lack of resourcing within AHA, governments, and industry bodies make it challenging to review and update the AUSVETPLANs as required, and this would require additional resources to maintain and deliver, a point stressed by AHA both in our submission and in discussion with the committee. |
| EADRA and compensation arrangements |
| The committee notes that the EADRA has appeared to have served Australia adequately, establishing a mechanism to share costs and provide compensation to producers in relation to incursions of exotic pests and diseases. And, it is clear to the committee that these arrangements must continue to evolve. The committee is aware of the growing challenges facing primary producers— including extreme weather events, drought, and rising input costs—as well as increasing biosecurity risks. It is vitally important that cost sharing and compensation arrangements adequately provide for producers to ensure appropriate responses to incursions, resilience, and recovery to safeguard Australia’s food production capacity. Recommendation 11 states that the Australian Government increase funding to both Animal Health Australia and Plant Health Australia to enable them to appropriately maintain, review and develop funding and compensation arrangements. This was a point stressed by AHA both in our submission and in discussion with the Committee. |
| Vaccine banks |
| The committee is satisfied that the current vaccine bank arrangements in place would meet Australia’s needs for vaccines in the event of an FMD incursion, and it supports the establishment of a similar vaccine bank for LSD. Recommendation 16 states that the Australian Government and Animal Health Australia establish a lumpy skin disease vaccine bank for use by Australia in the event of an incursion. This process is already in train. |
| Stakeholder engagement, awareness and communications |
| The report notes that stakeholders are engaged with current biosecurity issues, particularly around FMD and LSD preparedness but believes more targeted and ongoing communications could happen. The National Biosecurity Communications and Engagement Network (NBCEN) has been given the task through Animal Disease Preparedness Joint Interagency Taskforce to improve coordinated crisis communications, particularly given the role of social media, and work on national communications and engagement plans has begun. It is hoped this will be finalised early in 2023. Recommendation 29 states that government departments, Animal Health Australia and Plant Health Australia consult a wider range of stakeholders from across the supply chain, including the transport and livestock transport sectors and the retail sector into the future and make them aware of their roles and responsibilities during an EAD response. |