Australian Government floats shipping container levy amid biosecurity funding reform

A levy on shipping containers entering Australia is being considered by the Federal Government as it moves ahead with plans to establish a promised “sustainable” biosecurity funding stream.

The proposal is one of six contained in a public discussion paper, released this month, examining the benefits of existing and proposed funding arrangements to support biosecurity operations in the longer term.

WA Agriculture Minister Alannah MacTiernan has backed the idea, telling Countryman it “should be considered”.

“I would like the Commonwealth to reconsider the idea of having a levy on containers, which has been proposed from time to time,” she said.

“A lot of this (biosecurity threats) is coming in from overseas, so that’s something perhaps that we could consider.”

Cargo and sea vessels were among the main pathways through which a pest or disease could reach Australia, according to the discussion paper.

The Federal Government is calling on farmers to review the paper and have their say on what a sustainable biosecurity funding model should look like via an online survey.

“We invite all our stakeholders — individuals, agricultural producers, businesses, industry and community associations, research bodies and governments — to contribute suggestions for improving sustainable funding and investment for biosecurity,” the paper says.

“We want to hear from you about the options raised in this discussion paper as well as your practical ideas.”

According to the paper, successive independent reviews of the biosecurity system — including by the CSIRO — recommended reform and emphasised the importance of “secure, certain, equitable and sustainable funding”.

A report by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry last year also highlighted “the need to deliver a sustainable and long-term funding and investment model aligned to emerging system needs”.

Federal Agriculture Minister Murray Watt said Australia’s biosecurity system was “facing increasing pressure from disrupted global trade supply chains and travel”.

“We know there is broad support for sustainable funding and we want to discuss with the Australian public the best way to go about that,” he said.

“I encourage everyone to look at the discussion paper and give us their views and ideas on what a model could look like.”

The Albanese Government allocated $134 million in biosecurity funding in its first Federal Budget last month.

Several industry peak bodies including the National Farmers’ Federation subsequently expressed frustration the Government failed to deliver its promised “long-term” biosecurity funding stream.

Mr Watt this week brushed off the criticism, repeating his previous claims the $134m package was merely the first step.

“The October budget includes a $134m down-payment on the Government’s commitment to long-term, sustainable funding for biosecurity, by investing in front line staff, 20 new detector dogs and stronger defences against the threat of FMD and other diseases,” he said.

“We are also laying the foundations for a national livestock traceability scheme that delivers a fit-for-purpose, modern system to protect our valuable livestock industries.”

The scheme would include a nationally agreed plan to make electronic identification mandatory for sheep and goats, a policy that received in-principal support from all State and Territory agriculture ministers at a meeting with Mr Watt in July.

“This year we have seen two highly contagious and potentially deadly livestock diseases spread through Indonesia — foot-and-mouth disease and lumpy skin disease,” Mr Watt said.

“Australia is free of both diseases, and since their appearance, Indonesia is making good progress on getting them under control. But it’s demonstrated that we can’t afford to take our foot off the pedal and get complacent on our biosecurity.”

Previously flagged sustainable funding options mentioned in the paper include: expanded or reformed industry cost recovery arrangements (at border and pre-border); various air and sea freight, conveyance or container levies; an increased passenger movement charge, with a fixed share going directly to the Commonwealth’s biosecurity system; and a revenue source from beneficiaries of the biosecurity system.

A strong biosecurity system was critical to protecting Australia’s economy, according to the paper, with the nation’s agriculture, fisheries and forestry industry exports forecast to be worth a combined $74.5 billion in 2022-23.

“A sustainable funding model should support long-term operating requirements, be adaptable to evolve with operational and industry requirements, and sustain investment in the resources and information systems needed to deliver safe and efficient regulated outcomes,” the paper states.

“The proposed model should recognise the distribution of benefit, risk and costs across wide-ranging stakeholders, and options to remove unnecessary system costs while enhancing operational efficiency.”

Go to haveyoursay.agriculture.gov.au/sustainable-biosecurity-funding to read the discussion paper and complete the survey by November 21.

Recommendations will be presented to the Federal Government next year.