Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill 2008

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Mr ANDREW FRASER (Coffs Harbour—Deputy Leader of The Nationals) [4.18 p.m.]: No-one in this State could deny the huge financial loss suffered by individuals in the racing industry and the horse industry generally because of the recent outbreak of equine influenza. The bill has been introduced to counter exotic animal diseases, and we must ensure that it meets the concerns of not just the Parliament but also the pony club industry, and those who take an interest in horses for pleasure, own a hack, keep a draught horse or rely on horses for their business. The Opposition has concerns about the legislation and will not support it in its current form.

The Opposition appreciates Government briefings on the bill and has seen the briefing notes of Labor party room discussions, but I suggest that caucus did not examine the legislation closely enough and did not closely question the Minister for Primary Industries about the preparation and content of the bill. The New South Wales Farmers Association and others have issues about the framework of the legislation, which has been prepared and introduced within a very short time frame. The Opposition has not been able to consult fully with the Australian Veterinary Association because of the difficulties created by the short consultation phase. However, if the Government produces satisfactory amendments the Opposition may be prepared to support the legislation. But at this stage, although the Opposition supports the intent of the legislation, we will not support the bill.

Recently a report was published on the operations of the quarantine station. My understanding is that equine influenza was introduced to Australia by a horse imported from Japan for stud purposes. The cost of the damage caused by equine influenza to the horse industry New South Wales is immeasurable. The report highlights problems that have occurred at the quarantine station. By and large, the Federal Government will address those problems. However, there are unresolved issues relating not just to the outbreak of the disease but also to the spread of the disease throughout New South Wales, and why that occurred. The latter two issues have not been dealt with. The legislation does not provide adequate compensation to all those who have been adversely affected by the spread of equine influenza.

Secondary businesses associated with the horse industry in New South Wales include horse dentists, small saddle shops, hay distributors, equine equipment suppliers trading with riding clubs, and all the other businesses that rely on the operation of the equine industry. My electorate has four riding schools that were shut down for weeks during the outbreak of equine influenza. One in particular in Bucca Road was going great guns before the outbreak occurred. It had just got over the setting up period and development applications had been submitted to the local council. The riding school was moving along nicely on a shoestring budget when suddenly the whole business had to be shut down because of the outbreak of equine influenza. Has that business been offered any compensation? No. Have the people who owned the saddle and equine accessories shop in Coffs Harbour been offered any compensation for the business they lost? No.

When the equine influenza outbreak was at its peak no-one was game to go anywhere near anybody else's horses or into any establishment that sold equipment for horses because of the fear of contagion. Equine influenza is one of the most virulent diseases known, and evidence of that is readily ascertainable throughout New South Wales. I received numerous phone calls from people in Western Sydney who needed feed for their horses but could find no safe way of bringing it in. Trucks delivering hay had to travel around to different establishments where horses were kept. The risk of contamination inhibited the buying of feed. It amazed me that regulations invoked during the height of the outbreak required certain actions to be taken by people entering an infected area but not those leaving an infected area.

The bill attempts to address some of the issues. While I have no doubt that the legislation will be passed, at the end of the day compensation should cover all the losses suffered, including losses suffered by secondary businesses that employ thousands of people throughout New South Wales, such as farriers, horse dentists, riding school proprietors, and retailers of equine equipment and accessories. The livelihood of those people was severely affected but they have been ignored in compensation provisions. A woman from Nana Glen in my electorate was stranded in Queensland for approximately nine weeks during the outbreak. She had one child with her but was unable to return home to her other child. She had to live in fairly spartan conditions at a showground. Her child in Nana Glen had to be babysat for the entire period of her absence, but the compensation provided by the bill does not stretch to meeting consequential expenditure of that type. The bill refers to compensation for animals in class A and class B that were destroyed as a result of equine influenza but does not provide detail of the eligibility criteria for compensation and whether people engaged in secondary equine industries will be able to claim compensation for their losses. The legislation is much too ambiguous. New section 6A in item [5] of schedule 1 defines the meaning of emergency animal disease and states:

For the purposes of this Act, emergency animal disease means any of the following:

(a) bovine spongiform encephalopathy,

(b) foot and mouth disease,

(c) rabies,

(d) any other animal disease declared by the Minister, by order in writing, to be an emergency animal disease for the purposes of this Act.

If the Minister had consulted Veterinary Epidemiology by Michael Thrusfield, who is a renowned veterinary surgeon from the United Kingdom, he would have found a 10-point plan that could have been incorporated into the legislation. That would have provided a method of identifying the type of disease that should be declared to be an "emergency animal disease". The definition in the bill does not provide clarity. We do not know what will constitute an emergency animal disease and whether that classification will apply to horses, sheep or cattle. The definition of "emergency animal disease" provided by the bill is far too broad. If there is no clearly defined principle that can be applied to classify an outbreak as an "emergency animal disease" the Minister could apply the definition to any outbreak, which could severely affect not only the agricultural industry but also any enterprise associated with caring for animals. The definition provided in the bill could result in ill-defined classifications. Frankly, the Opposition does not trust the Minister or his advisers to properly classify diseases.

In relation to the role of the Department Primary Industries during the equine influenza crisis, we are still waiting to be told why 400 horses attending an event at Narrabri were allowed to go home on the Friday or Saturday after the disease had been recognised and acknowledged as being extremely virulent. An article I have read states that the disease could be airborne for a distance of up to eight kilometres. In spite of that, the Department of Primary Industries allowed horses to be transported all over Australia after the ramifications of the disease were made public. The Minister owes the Parliament and the people of New South Wales an explanation. Why were infected horses in Maitland not detected? The disease had been identified in horses in Sydney and everybody knew that Maitland also was an infected area, yet horses were transported from Maitland to Narrabri and from Narrabri to other areas across the State.

As a result of the spread of equine influenza the State Government had to spend millions of dollars in adopting precautionary measures and creating zones to contain the outbreak. That was followed by a protracted argument about whether vaccinations were available or would be effective. The whole approach by the State Government was an absolute shambles, a complete mess. I do not believe that the bill before the House addresses problems highlighted during the equine influenza outbreak. We contacted the New South Wales Farmers Association, and even though the bill has been brought on somewhat quickly in this place, the association advised me in the following terms:

1. The Association supports the intent of the Bill to improve the control, eradication and prevention of emergency diseases. However the Association cannot support the Bill because of the following 4 points.

2. The Association cannot support Schedule 1 clause 55 (Section 55 1 b ii or Section 55 1 c ii), until:

a. a list of the diseases for class A and B have been provided on the public record and

b. the decision criteria for each class has been provided on the public record and

c. the proposed compensation arrangements for each class have been provided on the public record

I believe they are reasonable requests. The association continued:

3. The Association cannot support Schedule 1 clause 59 (Section 69A 1b), until:

a. Further clarification on the public record is provided for the wording of Section 69A 3 regarding the waiver of fees.

That is because the bill provides for fees to be charged in relation to exotic diseases but it also allows for the waiver of fees. We would love to support this bill. I suggest that the Government put it on the table for a week and bring it back to us next week, having covered the concerns raised by the New South Wales Farmers Association in relation to these matters, to ensure that the legislation reflects what the industry in this State wants. As I said, there is a proper list of points in relation to epidemiology of exotic diseases. An emergency animal disease outbreak might be very localised and able to be handled on that basis. Without some sort of formula in the bill or the regulations we cannot support the bill.

The member for Hawkesbury, who has had a long history in the equine industry, has concerns about the bill. As the equine influenza outbreak spread and people began to realise its impact I received many calls from people in his electorate and from him raising questions. We did not receive answers from the Department of Primary Industries. The Department of Primary Industries must assure us that it can handle any future outbreaks.

I did not realise this legislation was coming on for debate so quickly and I did not bring to the House a list of items that were put up for public auction on GraysOnline in May. Hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of equipment was put up for auction. I am quite happy to provide that list to the Minister, although I am sure he knows all about it. Items such as mobile phones, computers and office equipment, most of them still in their packaging, were up for sale because the equine influenza outbreak was declared over and the equipment is now surplus to requirements.

During the outbreak there was a lack of communication from the Government to horse sellers, to farmers and to the community. Yet this long list of equipment was auctioned on GraysOnline with a total reserve of $6,174. It is laughable. The equipment should have been kept in the possession of the Department of Primary Industries in case there is another outbreak of exotic disease. At the outbreak of the equine influenza the Government reacted slowly, but when it did react it obviously bought all this equipment, right down to boot covers, that would be needed if we have an outbreak of exotic disease. But as soon as the emergency was declared over the Government said, "Let's flog this online because we will not need it again."

This bill suggests we may need it again, yet all these computers, mobile phones and communication devices that would be needed in an emergency were flogged as soon as the emergency was declared over. There was hand and foot wash and clothes wash. All the bits and pieces that would be needed in the event of an outbreak of a disease have now been flogged off: the auction is over. The Parliamentary Secretary may be able to advise the House what the auction realised and the actual cost of those items to taxpayers. The situation shows the ineptitude of the Government. Why was the equipment not stored? It is just bizarre. The auction list is an inch thick. I forget how many items are on it. I will give it to the member for Hawkesbury to use in his contribution to the debate. He can have a bit of fun going through it item by item.

For the reasons outlined and because of the concerns of the New South Wales Farmers Association and the ineptitude of this Government, we cannot support the bill in its current state. We ask the Government to withdraw the legislation until next week and to address the concerns of the association so that we can support the legislation, which I believe is badly needed.

Mr FRANK TERENZINI (Maitland) [4.36 p.m.]: I speak in support of the Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill 2008, which will improve the operation of the Exotic Diseases of Animals Act 1991. The bill provides a more streamlined response to emergency animal disease outbreaks. The significance of agricultural industries is underscored by the financial contribution they make to this State. The gross value of agricultural production for the 2005-06 financial year was $8.7 billion—more than 23 per cent of Australia's total. This contribution shows clearly how critical agricultural industries are to New South Wales, particularly in regional and rural areas. It is therefore essential to ensure that our biosecurity legislation, including the Exotic Diseases of Animals Act 1991, adequately protects these industries.

In addition to using the response powers set out in the Exotic Diseases of Animals Act, the New South Wales Government has a range of ongoing programs to prepare for future outbreaks. For example, the Government conducts research on endemic, exotic and emerging pests and diseases. These diseases can threaten the production, welfare and market access of our State's animal and plant products. In addition, the Government maintains a comprehensive network of inspectors, advisory and research staff, and diagnostic and identification services. These staff and services enable the Department of Primary Industries to launch a quick response in times of emergency. This was clearly demonstrated during the recent equine influenza campaign.

The Government also manages eradication programs with the assistance of rural lands protection boards and industry organisations. It does this by the planning and resourcing of control and eradication strategies. Follow-up surveillance is used to confirm the success of eradication programs. The programs are then evaluated to improve the cost effectiveness of future programs. The Government's network and research centres, accredited diagnostic laboratories and regulatory and extension officers all contribute to biosecurity management.

One example of the Government's work in this area is the New South Wales Centre of Excellence for Animal and Plant Biosecurity. The centre is a joint venture between the Department of Primary Industries and the University of Sydney. The centre links a highly responsive, world-class set of facilities and staff to cover diagnosis, surveillance, prevention and control of biosecurity threats. Because of the importance of the centre's work the Government has just announced a boost in its funding of $43 million over five years. Another means by which New South Wales ensures agricultural biosecurity is surveillance programs. For instance, the testing of sentinel cattle herds around the State allows for rapid detection of any new incursions of disease. These tests also provide evidence of our disease-free status.

Biosecurity management includes education and awareness programs for prevention and response strategies. The Government does this by providing a broad range of information on best practice management. As well as the important programs I have already outlined, the Government's extension and technical staff play a significant role in biosecurity management. They help pre-empt biosecurity issues by providing technical and social support to the agricultural sector. Farmers benefit from this front-line service. At the same time, the Government can gather data for ongoing biosecurity management. With the assistance of rural lands protection boards, the Government maintains a database of more than 86,000 property identification codes. It has also put in place a National Livestock Identification System, which is used to trace the movements of livestock.

Biosecurity data management is an important part of decision making in emergencies and for planning management programs. The New South Wales Government contributes to Australiawide data management by providing the Commonwealth Government with its surveillance data. The bill will improve the biosecurity of New South Wales by extending the emergency powers under the Act to outbreaks of all emergency animal diseases. This will allow the Act to cover emergency endemic, as well as exotic, diseases. To reflect the change in the scope of the Act its name will change. It will now be known as the Animal Diseases (Emergency Outbreaks) Act 1991.

The bill will further improve our biosecurity by strengthening controls over a possible or actual emergency disease outbreak in several ways. For example, the bill extends the reporting requirements for veterinary practitioners. They must report diseases they suspect are new or emerging, or are not endemic to New South Wales. Veterinary practitioners must also report diseases that do not usually occur in the species of animal or animal product they are examining. These actions will help manage new and emerging diseases that may not have been previously recorded and can pose key biosecurity threats to New South Wales.

Furthermore, the provisions of the Act to control the spread of disease will be strengthened. They will allow for the pre-emptive destruction of animals that are at risk of contracting and spreading a disease even though they may not show signs of it. This change will allow an effective buffer to be established between an infected area and an area free of infection. It must be emphasised, however, that this power is a last resort. It will be used only when other disease control mechanisms, such as vaccination, are not available or effective, and when moving the animals is not an option. Compensation will be paid to owners of animals that are destroyed. The New South Wales Stock Diseases Act 1923 and the Victorian Livestock Disease Control Act 1994 already have similar provisions. The amendments will ensure consistency with those Acts.

The Exotic Disease of Animals Amendment Bill 2008 will enable a more effective response to outbreaks of emergency animal diseases in New South Wales, and it will improve our biosecurity. This will in turn strengthen the protection of our important agricultural industries. As members may be aware and as the member for Coffs Harbour said, my electorate was one of the areas severely affected by equine influenza. For a significant period my electorate was in the purple zone. Had the measures in the bill been in place they would have assisted enormously in ensuring a much earlier response to the outbreak.

I take this opportunity to commend the Minister for Agriculture and the New South Wales Government for the way they handled the equine influenza outbreak in my electorate. It was a new phenomenon, of course, but it was very well handled. The outbreak was contained and we had a satisfactory result in the end, which is pleasing. I commend the Minister for his efforts, as well as the many officers from the Department of Primary Industries in my area that played their part in ensuring that everything possible was done to contain the outbreak successfully. For the reasons I have outlined I am very happy to commend the bill to the House.

Mr RAY WILLIAMS (Hawkesbury) [4.44 p.m.]: In speaking against the Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill 2008, first I place on record that I believe it is an ill thought out bill that will do precious little to strengthen the containment of exotic diseases throughout New South Wales. I will outline my reasons for that in a moment. As the Parliamentary Secretary the Hon. Henry Tsang said in delivering the second reading speech on behalf of the Minister in the other place, veterinary practitioners will be required to report exotic diseases and diseases in horses. These extremely professional people would at all times report anything that was unusual or anything they have not come across before. To suggest that veterinary practitioners may not report such diseases is an absolute sleight on our good veterinary practitioners across New South Wales. Regardless of what we do in this House, veterinary practitioners would certainly report any diseases that are harmful to the industry because they know as well as anyone that exotic diseases such as equine influenza have an enormous impact on our horse and racing industries.

I place on record and commend the actions of Derek Major, a veterinary surgeon from the Agnes Banks Equine Clinic, who had extremely valuable input into the containment of equine influenza, the treatment of the disease, the vaccination of horses, and the implementation of zonings. I also place on record that it is not appropriate to simply draw a line on a map to implement zonings and then say, "Horses that are inside that area will stay there and the disease will be contained in that area."

The bill is a knee-jerk reaction by the Government to the equine influenza outbreak. The Government was very slow off the mark in its response to the outbreak. All of a sudden, it saw a disease come into this country that would have a dramatic impact on the racing industry, which in turn would bring about a dramatic reduction in the taxes that were to flow to the Government from revenue from the racing industry. As I said, the bill is a knee-jerk reaction. The Government has tried to dress it up as responsible legislation but it is certainly less than responsible.

The main purpose of the bill is for the New South Wales Government to claw back some money, to shift the cost of the equine influenza outbreak from the Government to the racing industry. One can go through the bill from top to toe, but that is the main purpose of it. The outbreak cost this State, and it certainly cost the former Federal Government. The former Federal Government was very quick to act in relation to the outbreak; indeed, it acted immediately. It understood explicitly the importance of the racing industry to this country—not simply because of the revenue it raises but because it provides an enormous amount of employment.

When equine influenza struck the racing industry, an enormous amount of direct and indirect employment simply stopped. The many people affected included strappers, jockeys, veterinary dentists, veterinary surgeons, and the many hundreds of thousands of people who work on race days, including those who operate totalizators, bookmakers, bookmakers' clerks, and float carriers. There were even reports about the effect of the outbreak on people who make hats for the various large race days across the city, including the group one meetings. All those people, who play an active part in the racing industry, were affected by the outbreak immediately. Indeed, the outbreak brought the racing industry to an absolute halt.

At the time of the equine influenza outbreak I delivered a private member's statement because I was very concerned that the New South Wales Government was simply sitting on its hands with regard to the issue, which it was. Hundreds of people across my electorate of Hawkesbury were affected by the outbreak—not only those in the racing industry, who were compensated to some degree, but also recreational riders. It has been suggested that 200,000 horses are involved in commercial business activities yet 60,000 horses are involved in recreational activities. Off the top of my head I can cite societies such as the Arabian Horse Society, the Quarter Horse Association, the Australian Stock Horse Association, and the Clydesdale Association. A large number of recreational horse owners belong to registered associations, but many hundreds of thousands of recreational horse owners across this country do not belong to a registered association. The owners of those horses are the people who were most affected by the equine influenza outbreak. They are the people who, because they did not undertake a business activity with their horses, were most affected by the outbreak because they had to pick up the veterinary fees to treat equine influenza.

Horse owners also had to pick up the cost of quarantine services and agistment. If the horses were not on their owner's property when equine influenza broke out and after the zone limits were imposed, the owners had to pay for agistment. A large group of people who were participating in a horse event at St Albans when the zones were imposed were trapped for weeks. They tried to get answers from the New South Wales Government, but they were not forthcoming. We did what we could to help them and the local community supported them by providing feed for the horses and other assistance. They could not simply throw their horses on Crown land; they had to stay and look after them. It was all right to direct money into commercial and business-related equine activities that suffered as a result of equine influenza, but it was quite another thing to get phone call after phone call from the hundreds of people outside the racing industry who had horses and ponies that were affected and who incurred great expense.

It will be found that equine influenza entered this country on a Japanese stallion that was imported for stud duties for the thoroughbred and racing industry. I have some sympathy for the expectation that quarantine procedures will contain something like equine influenza. Equine influenza is like no other disease I have seen in the horse industry: it is airborne. Horses that had no physical contact with infected horses that were a half a kilometre away contracted the disease. I do not know how one could bring a horse infected with equine influenza into this country and expect to contain the disease in any way, shape or form apart from shutting the horse away in a completely sealed vault. The moment the horse stepped off the plane when it arrived in this country the disease was airborne and it was highly likely that other horse would pick it up. Anyone who came into contact with the animal as it was unloaded from the plane and loaded onto a float was also a potential disease carrier. The person charged with transporting the horse may have delivered it and then loaded another horse. Humans can transport the disease and it is airborne; I do not know how anyone could ever contain it.

Diseases such as equine influenza must be detected in the country of origin and contained to prevent further outbreaks in this country. We must ensure that any animals imported into this country are free from disease prior to their boarding a plane and heading here. A horse can contract equine influenza and show symptoms within approximately 48 hours. In some cases the symptoms are evident much sooner. It is not unreasonable to expect a horse awaiting transportation to Australia to be held in quarantine to establish whether it has equine influenza prior to its being loaded on a plane. Once the disease is here it is very hard to contain. As I said, I have some sympathy for the people who it is believed have not carried out their duties appropriately. I suppose that will be established in the investigation.

To ensure that this legislation controls the spread of the disease it includes a provision allowing for the destruction of a diseased animal and, in certain circumstances, an animal that is not yet showing signs of a declared disease. It is extraordinary that one can think that a horse has a disease and it can be destroyed. That is the most bizarre provision I have ever seen. Some horses in the racing industry are worth many millions of dollars. It is absurd to suggest that valuable horses should be destroyed if it is suspected that they have a disease. That is one of the reasons the Opposition opposes this bill. I put on the record my appreciation of the contribution made by the shadow Minister for Primary Industries, the member for Coffs Harbour, in opposing this bill.

The bill provides that on-the-spot fines or penalty notices can be imposed for minor offences. I referred previously to cost shifting. This process has been expensive because finally, after many weeks or months, the New South Wales Government recognised that it had a problem. It was not collecting taxation revenue from the racing industry and decided to do something about it. It held a stand-alone race meeting at Warwick Farm involving horses from that venue—no other horses could participate. That single stand-alone race meeting generated $450,000 for the State Government, but it still did not declare a state of emergency.

Anna Bligh had been Premier of Queensland for only about a week when equine influenza broke out and she immediately declared a state of emergency in that State. That should have happened in New South Wales. The Federal Government—that is, the previous Federal Government—immediately injected a massive amount of money into the industry. I keep referring to the "Federal Government" and I want to make it clear that I am definitely referring to the former Coalition Federal Government. The former Federal Government responded because the racing industry generates so much taxation revenue and provides so much employment across this great country. In contrast, the New South Wales Government sat back for weeks and months.

I made a private member's statement and the Leader of the House responded that the Government was closely examining the issue. Gee, golly, whiz! I am glad it was looking closely. However, while that was happening people in the industry were eating paint off the walls. There were no jobs for track-work riders, strappers, float carriers, farriers and so on. There was no work, no money and no food on the table. How did they look after their families? They did it tough. But for the good efforts of the community, they would have been on bare bones. It took a long time for the New South Wales Government to wake up and do something. I must admit that, to its credit, when it responded the zones were imposed and that helped to deal with the crises. It should be acknowledged that the Hon. Ian Macdonald did a fair job in helping the industry once the Government woke up. Unfortunately, it was a little too late.

Tony Burke, the Federal Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, suggested the same course of action and the Federal Government tried to claw some money out of the industry. That is a disgrace. Equine influenza came into this country through no fault of anyone in the industry. Sometimes governments need to pick up the costs. They should not slap the recreational riders or those involved in the racing industry and expect them to pick up the pieces because of a disease that came into this country through no fault of any horse owner in New South Wales or, indeed, in Australia. The cost had to be carried by government and that is why the Opposition opposes this bill.

Mr DAVID BORGER (Granville) [4.59 p.m.]: I support the Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill. On 28 February New South Wales was declared free of equine influenza. That was only six months after the highly infectious and rapidly spreading respiratory horse disease was first detected. I remind the member for Hawkesbury that the Iemma Government controlled and eradicated equine influenza in record time after the Howard Government allowed it to escape from the Commonwealth quarantine facility at Eastern Creek. The incompetence of the Howard Government's quarantine measures from the time the infected horse arrived in Australia led to the spread of this highly contagious disease. It is testament to the Iemma Government's response that this disease has been eradicated at all.

The member for Hawkesbury was too busy stacking branches with people to vote for him in the preselection to know what was happening at the time. But Ian Callinan, the special commissioner, has brought down a report that points the finger fairly and squarely at the former Howard Government and the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service. They failed in their duty. There were systemic problems with the way they handled the matter. They had a poor grasp of biosecurity measures in this country. Everyone knows that except the member for Hawkesbury. It is clear to everyone—the racing industry, the farmers and so on—where the blame lies. Horse industries across the State and eastern Australia ground to a halt when the disease was detected. A statewide lockdown stopped all horse movements and forced the cancellation of every horse event in New South Wales. It was through the hard work of those involved in the control and eradication program that horses can once again move anywhere in New South Wales, as long as they have a travelling horse statement and events are registered.

The success of the Government's containment and vaccination strategy is remarkable. It is due to the massive effort of the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, the rural lands protection boards, New South Wales Police, the State Emergency Service, Rural Fire Services, the Roads and Traffic Authority and many other State Government departments. The outstanding effort of private veterinarians should also be acknowledged. The horse industry, both recreational and professional, must also be thanked for its valuable contribution to the successful eradication of equine influenza. I do not know why The Nationals are opposing this bill. Much consultation has been carried out with affected parties. The New South Wales Farmers Association wrote to the Minister on 10 March and said:

The Association has considered and is comfortable with the intended outcome of the proposed changes.

The association has been consulted and discussions have taken place. The association is comfortable but I do not know why The Nationals are not comfortable, as there does not appear to be an issue. The horse industry should be thanked. Equine influenza is highly infectious and had spread extensively before it was detected. A massive campaign was undertaken on a scale never before seen in Australia to eradicate the disease. This made it one of the largest exotic animal disease control campaigns ever undertaken. At the height of the outbreak more than 47,000 horses on around 6,000 properties were infected with equine influenza. The Government spent $56 million to combat the disease and has successfully defeated it. The way in which this State has been able to control and eradicate equine influenza demonstrates internationally that this Government is serious about our biosecurity. It is testament to the skills and capacity of New South Wales to deal with a major exotic animal disease.

The whole-of-government task force set up to coordinate the campaign spent many months working around the clock. During the outbreak, the equine influenza call centre successfully handled a massive 60,500 calls. It is an insult to all those who gave of their time and worked in a feverish way to try to eradicate the disease for members today to denigrate and downgrade their contributions. The New South Wales Government enlisted approximately 2,000 staff, and I thank them today on behalf of the racing industry and all the other industries involved for all their hard work during that critical period. More than 20 control and vaccination centres were established across New South Wales. More than 52,000 horses were vaccinated. New South Wales Government laboratories carried out more than 132,000 tests. It was a mammoth effort, and everyone involved in helping to eradicate this terrible disease should be commended.

Horse breeding is big business, with more than 100 breeds in New South Wales. Although thoroughbred racing comprises only 20 per cent of horse numbers, it is the largest economic sector of the industry. Top stallions earn fees of more than $100,000 for each standing, and individually serve 200 mares in the season between September and December. The 2007 breeding season was drastically affected by equine influenza due to the restrictions on horse movements. In any normal year, 7,000 thoroughbred foals are born in New South Wales. Yearlings fetch an average price of $100,000. The harsh economic toll of this disease on the thoroughbred industry is easy to calculate. The importance of controlling and eradicating the disease is highlighted by the fact that the industry contributes $6.3 billion annually to the Australian economy.

Adjoining my electorate of Granville and the electorate of Parramatta is Rosehill racecourse. The outbreak of equine influenza was decimating to local trainers. The horseracing industry supports a huge economy, including local tourism. During the management of the equine influenza outbreak it became evident that the introduction of a fee or charge on the industry would be necessary. The charge would be made for the issue of permits and other Government activities during future emergency animal disease outbreaks. The bill provides for the fees or charges to be legislated in the regulation. It will enable greater cost recovery and allow for ongoing improvements in delivery of Government services. The bill also proposes to make similar amendments for cost recovery to other biosecurity legislation to maintain consistency. The Department of Primary Industries will consult with industry stakeholders during development of these regulations, as it has consulted during the development of this draft bill.

A number of the amendments set out in the Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill 2008 were identified during the management of the equine influenza outbreak. The amendments will enable an even faster and more effective emergency response to disease outbreaks in the future. This will go a long way towards protecting our State's livestock. For example, the bill amends the Act so that on-the-spot fines can be issued for minor offences. Further, court proceedings will be permitted to commence up to two years after an offence has allegedly been committed. This means that people who do the wrong thing and jeopardise our biosecurity are more likely to be caught and convicted. The bill goes a long way to helping protect our precious livestock industries. It makes sure that there is greater protection during times of emergency and exotic disease outbreaks. I commend the bill to the House. We must move forward and have a system in place for all these sorts of outbreaks so that we can respond rapidly in the future.

Mr KEVIN HUMPHRIES (Barwon) [5.06 p.m.]: The Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill 2008 will enhance the measures that can be taken under the Exotic Diseases of Animals Act 1991 to control, eradicate and prevent the spread of animal diseases. The bill also amends the Act with respect to proceedings under other primary industry legislation. The Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill represents a significant deviation from current policy, as the equine influenza crisis in 2007 exposed major problems in emergency responses to animal disease outbreaks, not only in New South Wales but also in other States.

Emergency powers will be strengthened to prevent and manage outbreaks of all animal diseases. Identification of diseases and veterinary reporting requirements will be strictly enforced under the new legislation. Veterinarians will have a duty to report suspicious symptoms of new and emerging diseases. The Minister will now have power to make control orders rather than direct an inspector to make control orders, thus removing administrative delays. While everyone in this House acknowledges the seriousness of the equine influenza outbreak, it is not the first outbreak of a serious disease in this country. We have had others in the past 100 years, none more serious than scabies, which resulted in the formation of the rural lands protection boards at the beginning of last century.

One concern we have, and it came from the briefing by the Minister's office, is that a lot of amendments to the emergency powers are extremely punitive and in most cases refer to prosecutions, including extending the limitation period for prosecutions under the Act and other biosecurity legislation from six months to two years from the time the offence was committed, to allow sufficient time, supposedly, to investigate and collect evidence. The member for Granville alluded to on-the-spot notices and fines, and the Act provides that penalty notices will be issued for minor breaches of the Act. A general offence of providing false or misleading information in relation to a declared emergency animal disease will be inserted. Some members have already commented in the House on the wonderful job done by many private veterinarians and many members of the rural lands protection boards—and I will talk about them shortly, given that their conference is today—and many good people who were seconded into the Department of Primary Industries.

I refer to the spurious statement that veterinarians, chief veterinary officers and those associated with rural lands protection boards gave false or misleading information. The bill should contain educative rather than punitive measures. It should put in place strategies, something that was missing when equine influenza was declared. A significant number of groups were affected by the equine influenza outbreak. The New South Wales Farmers Association does not support the bill in its current form because it is not sufficiently detailed and lacks clarification on several key points. The Opposition will oppose the bill in its present form. We ask the Government to amend the bill. Indeed, the Farmers Association states:

1. The Association supports the intent of the Bill to improve the control, eradication and prevention of emergency diseases. However the Association cannot support the Bill because of the following 4 points.

2. The Association cannot support Schedule 1 clause 55 (Section 55 1 b ii or Section 55 1 c ii), until:

a. a list of the diseases for class A and B have been provided on the public record and
b. the decision criteria for each class has been provided on the public record and
c. the proposed compensation arrangements for each class have been provided on the public record

3. The Association cannot support Schedule 1 clause 59 (Section 69A 1b), until:

a. further clarification on the public record is provided for the wording of Section 69A 3 regarding the waiver of fees.

The last part deals with costs and potential cost shifting as opposed to the Government taking responsibility in the event of an outbreak or an emergency. When initial announcements were made about equine influenza I remember driving from Coonabarabran to Moree. On Sunday morning I remember vividly receiving a number of phone calls from people in Warialda who had been notified, I think, by police and the local emergency services that the Warialda showground had been put into lockdown. Whilst people were still coming and going, families were advised that they would not be able to move their stock or their vehicles. Apart from a few rapid phone calls, the closer I travelled to Narrabri, the more phone calls I received. The problem was that there was no reference point where people could receive adequate information and it is essential for proper strategies to be in place during times of emergency.

This outbreak highlighted that we did not have, and I suspect we still do not have, strategies to provide ready information to people to allow them to make prompt decisions. It also highlighted a lack of staffing within the Department of Primary Industries. A number of people had to be urgently recalled who had previously been retrenched or had taken redundancy, including veterinarians. About 2,000 people were seconded back into the call centres and testing centres and they did an excellent job. One of the reasons for the inordinate number of calls to the centres was that people made repeated calls because it took so long to get adequate information out into the field.

The outbreak also highlighted a lack of coordination. Unlike Queensland, which declared a state of emergency early in the piece and provided financial packages, New South Wales did not do so until later. Many of my constituents were at horse events, camp drafts and shows at Warialda. Other constituents were in lockdown in Warwick, Stanthorpe and Toowoomba, some for two to three months. My office staff and I spent considerable time dealing with the Queensland Department of Primary Industries, which expressed frustration about why the New South Wales Minister and department took so long to declare a state of emergency. In the meantime significant inconvenience was caused not only to the horse racing industry but the equine industry in general throughout New South Wales.

I had immediate contact with recreational users or people attending events or camp drafts. Horse breeders, trainers, spellers, breakers and farriers had little or no information. Horse racing clubs in country areas, which were doing it pretty tough anyway lost out on income and this eventually filtered down to the greyhound racing clubs. They lost income from this outbreak. Not only those at the high end of the horse racing industry were affected. Compensation for some of the groups was not forthcoming or was made very difficult. When people affected by equine influenza made approaches to bodies such as the Rural Assistance Authority they were made to feel guilty for even complaining. Most of the jockeys in Moree, Narrabri and Goondiwindi ended up mowing lawns to make enough money to support their families. Drovers on stock routes saw their stock impounded and this became a serious issue. The equine influenza outbreak highlighted the lack of communication in this State about the declaration of an emergency, and compensation and cost sharing still need to be addressed.

I turn now to biosecurity. A previous speaker stated that New South Wales is in the vicinity of producing $8 billion to $10 billion worth of agricultural products in this State. New South Wales has a disease-free status and it is important that we follow proper emergency procedures and that everyone knows their role. My concern is that the Department of Primary Industries has been gutted of its key staff. There is no district agronomist from Coonamble to Walgett or east and west of Moree. They are the front-line people in advising growers on grain, which is the wheat breadbasket of this country.

It was acknowledged that the Department of Primary Industries had to recall previous staff that had been retrenched to make sure there were sufficient district veterinarians. Indeed, a huge number of private veterinarians were also seconded. Government funding to maintain the biosecurity status has been debated already. Boggabilla has no station and the tick stations on the North Coast are a disgrace. Yanco agricultural training and research centre in the Riverina was closed and the Trangie research station was threatened with closure, with the threat only now being lifted after years of it hanging over that facility. I will be visiting that station on the weekend. Some key parts of New South Wales have no district agronomist. As of today the Minister will adopt recommendations made by a report, which will result in further deterioration in the numbers of key people on the ground in pastoral centres on the ground. Those people would play a key role in supporting emergency services in any impending outbreak. We will have an outbreak of foot and mouth disease and bird flu in this country. If we do not have the right people on the ground, we will be in trouble. Biosecurity is a huge issue. As the member for Hawkesbury said, we should take preventative measures and we must ensure that horses from overseas are disease-free.

Many farmers in the north-west say, "Come clean, go clean." Strategies for the management of the next potential outbreak emergency is contained in a document that I am willing to table, as it will be tabled in the Senate estimates. As the member for Coffs Harbour mentioned, following the declaration of the end of the equine influenza outbreak, the Minister for Primary Industries undertook to sell off all the equipment. We consider that some of those critical items should be kept on the register for times of emergency. Recently hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of equipment that was purchased for use during the equine influenza outbreak was sold off, for the princely sum of $6,140. Talk about waste—78 hand-held global positioning system receivers, still in their boxes, worth about $1,000 each, were sold off for $29 each; numerous brand-new computers, some still in their boxes, sold for $9 each; hundreds of mobile phones, still in their boxes, were sold for between $9 and $18; and all the protective clothing, filing paraphernalia and disinfectants were sold off.

The equipment was worth much more than $6,140, but that is how the Government is planning for the next emergency outbreak. The Minister needs to address that matter. We consider that the bill is underdone, and that is why we oppose it. As many matters still need to be addressed we ask that this House return the bill to the Minister for him to tidy up the amendments that have been mentioned today.

Mr PHILLIP COSTA (Wollondilly) [5.21 p.m.]: I support the Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill 2008, and I heed the comments that have been made about it. I will address the importance of biosecurity, particularly in exports. The Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute is in my electorate. It provides a front-line service for research and detection of diseases. It had a large part to play during the equine influenza outbreak. My electorate is very much covered by the horse industry. In a couple of weeks time the new Harold Park Raceway, Menangle Park, will open in the centre of my electorate. We are very much aware of the disaster caused by the equine influenza outbreak. We heave learnt from that and the bill is part of the action taken to deal properly and timely with a potential future disease, whatever it may be. I will address that later in my contribution.

The bill will make significant amendments to strengthen the provisions of the Act to control the spread of emergency animal diseases. Those diseases have the potential to play havoc with New South Wales agricultural industries, as well as damaging our export markets. Export market access is critical to agricultural industries in New South Wales and to the broader New South Wales and national economies. Maintaining our export industries has flow-on effects for rural businesses and jobs, as demonstrated during the equine influenza outbreak. In 2005-06, 61 per cent, by value, of the agricultural commodities produced in New South Wales were exported. Those exports were estimated to be worth $5.3 billion. Australia's export markets demand products that are free of pests, diseases and contaminants. Our biosecurity status is crucial for maintaining and developing overseas markets.

The New South Wales Government plays an important role in maintaining our international market access. It does this through pest and disease surveillance and control activities. Further, the Government ensures that New South Wales is prepared to eradicate incursions that pose biosecurity threats. It does this by conducting research on endemic, exotic and emerging pests and diseases. Those diseases threaten the production, welfare and market access of our State's animal and plant products. New South Wales maintains access to export markets by testing for important diseases and by activating emergency response teams if a disease is detected. For example, veterinarians test cattle for bovine spongiform encephalopathy [BSE] or, as it is commonly known, mad cow disease in cattle, and scrapie in sheep.

Tests are carried out on adult cattle and sheep that show clinical signs that may resemble those diseases. Because we regularly prove that mad cow disease and scrapie do not occur here, Australia has access to lucrative overseas markets, including the European Union and Japan. The Government is also involved in programs to prevent chemical residues in agricultural exports. Any residues detected through the National Residue Survey are investigated and dealt with under State legislation. Growing international and interstate trade, travel and tourism all increase the risk of biosecurity threats. Along with today's market trend for fresh food and new garden plants come new biosecurity risks and threats from imports.

A zero-risk approach is considered both unrealistic and unachievable in managing these risks and threats. New South Wales takes a risk management approach to protect biosecurity without stifling trade and tourism. A zero-risk approach to biosecurity would inhibit trade and tourism. With the agricultural sector relying heavily on the export market, it is particularly important that we protect our State and country from diseases that affect our livestock. The Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill 2008 will enhance our ability to respond quickly and effectively to any outbreak of a serious animal disease. The bill provides two significant amendments. When taken together, they provide for the most effective control of the spread of unwanted and potentially devastating livestock diseases.

First, the bill introduces the requirement for persons to disinfect themselves when leaving any premises, place or vehicle. This amendment extends the current arrangements, which provide only for disinfection orders for persons entering premises. Second, the bill introduces controls and restrictions to prevent the movement of soil. This provision will be used in particular circumstances where a disease can be transmitted through soil. Soil can be contaminated with infectious disease organisms and the indiscriminate movement of soil can spread the infection. At the same time, permits will be provided for low risk movement of soil, for example, for laboratory testing of soil samples.

The bill allows for orders made under the Act to be published on the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries' website. This process is cost-effective, immediate, far-reaching and accessible to most. Along with the existing means of notification, such as newspaper and radio, the website will help to ensure that more people know about the orders sooner. Further, along with the issuing of an individual permit, the bill introduces the concept of a general permit, which can be issued on the department's website to a class of person. A general permit will apply to a whole category of people or all people in New South Wales. The general permit will reduce red tape, as it will avoid the need to deal with and issue hundreds of individual applications for the same permit.

The bill introduces also an offence for providing false or misleading information in a statement made or information in relation to a declared emergency animal disease. That will provide another safeguard in a response to an emergency disease outbreak. It will encourage the provision of full and factual information. The proposed amendments are sensible and effective. The amendments will help to ensure that our valuable agricultural animal export industries are protected, particularly those for export. We have learnt a lot from the equine influenza outbreak and, hopefully, we will not need to deal with something as serious as that for a long time. I agree with the member for Barwon that it is inevitable that one day we will have another problem. The bill prepares us for that day. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms PRU GOWARD (Goulburn) [5.30 p.m.]: I oppose the Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill 2008. I do so as a member of the Opposition and the elected representative of Goulburn. The seat of Goulburn takes in the district of Goulburn, which is a well-known grazing area with a very old and fine reputation for wool. If Australia rode on the sheep's back in general, then Goulburn in particular has grown and flourished in lock step with the fortunes of the wool industry. That is why this legislation is of such interest not only to the graziers my electorate but also to the entire community: shearers, farmers, wool classers, wool brokers, stock and station agents, their families, and the wider community. It is also of deep interest to the beef and dairy industries, as well as to that considerable industry of horse riders, breeders and trainers in the Southern Highlands and Goulburn areas.

It was the bitter experience of woolgrowers with the Government's mismanagement of the ovine Johne's disease in the 1990s that has led me to take a strong stand on this legislation. The complete absence of scientific justification in the harsh measures the Government took in responding to this disease, which I understand turned out to be more an endemic consequence of malnutrition, will not be forgotten in the Goulburn area for generations. Stock could not be moved out of zones, so farmers could not sell and went broke, studs collapsed, and the local wool industry was brought to its knees—all for something we did not scientifically understand. Eventually a vaccine was developed but in the meantime farmers committed suicide and the disease was barely controlled, with the lack of compensation being seen as the principle reason for both. Contrast this with the British Government's management of a similar bovine encephalitic disease, where adequate compensation was recognised as a key to the successful management of that disease.

This legislation is said to be the result of an agreement signed in 2002 as part of a national cost sharing deed but it has taken this long for this lazy State Government to get around to amending the legislation, and even five years after the event it cannot get it right. The Government has been caught once again on the hop with a terrible response to the equine influenza outbreak and this legislation is now a hurried and unthought through response to that. The Government has had five years to fix this and when it does it is wrong. There is nothing wrong with amending the exotic diseases legislation. We need, and have needed for some time, an improved response consistent with the cost sharing deed, but this measure is the wrong response.

The State is no longer confining itself to exotic diseases. It is now about emergency animal diseases. That is a pretty broad spectrum and could well lead to the sort of technically unsupported decision that we saw in the case of ovine Johne's disease. We need to see, as the New South Wales Farmers Association has demanded, a list of the diseases for classes A and B, the decision criteria and the proposed compensation arrangements for each class. The Act also allows the Minister to modify and enhance the measures that may be taken under the Act for controlling, eradicating and preventing the spread of emergency animal diseases. They did that in the case of ovine Johne's disease, with tragic consequences. There is every risk with this legislation now extending to emergency animal diseases that it will continue to happen.

One of the principles underlying the amendments in the bill is the extension of ministerial discretion. This is a recipe for confusion and lack of rationality, ability and transparency. These are all-important as factors in public administration and public confidence in that administration. The Act also seeks to modify grounds for the payment of compensation to the owner of an animal that has died of an emergency animal disease. There is no-one in Goulburn who does not believe that is code for enabling the Government to avoid paying compensation. That is a recipe for not handling an emergency animal disease and it could even drive some exotic diseases underground.

What is essentially troubling about this legislation is, firstly, the extension of ministerial discretion to which I have referred and, secondly, the failure of the legislation to base itself in good epidemiology. I quote from the recognised Veterinary Epidemiology 1995 text by Michael Thrusfield of the Department of Veterinary Clinical Studies at the Royal School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh:

Before any control or eradication campaign can be undertaken, several factors must be considered. These include:

1. the level of knowledge about the cause of the disease and, if infectious, also about its transmission and maintenance, including the range and the nature of the host/parasite relationship;

2. veterinary infrastructure;

3. diagnostic feasibility;

4. adequate surveillance;

5. availability of replacement stock;

6. producers and society's views;

7. the disease's public health significance;

8. the existence of suitable legislation with provision for compensation;

9. the possible ecological consequences; and

10. economic costs and the availability of funds for the program.

Although it would be asking a bit much for the Government and its advisers to be 100 per cent informed in all of those 10 listed areas, it should be at least 80 per cent informed in at least three-quarters of them before electing to proceed. In relation to what was attempted with ovine Johne's disease—a comprehensive demonstration of incompetence and denial of recognised professional standards so very fresh in the recent memory of the people of Goulburn—the inability to kick off on even 20 per cent of these necessary areas of knowledge and resources has been spectacularly demonstrated over the intervening 15 years. The Government cannot be permitted to increase its discretion and water down its responsibilities at any time, let alone in the face of such a disastrous track record.

There is very strong feeling among farmers that the Government did not care about their industry, their livelihoods and their future in the way it managed ovine Johne's disease. This legislation again confirms that. It is bad legislation on many fronts. In particular it confirms the fear of the farmers that the Government has learnt nothing and has no more respect for science and good process today than it had then. It is unwise in the extreme to give even greater discretion to a Minister and a Government that has a manifestly poor track record in managing science, evidence and the need to respect and work with the industry it is seeking to manage and protect. I join my colleagues in encouraging the Government to adopt some appropriate amendments in the other place.

Mr JOHN WILLIAMS (Murray-Darling) [5.36 p.m.]: The Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill 2008 gives me the opportunity to speak of my experience during the equine influenza outbreak and the way the Government dealt with it. The Victorian Government was proactive from day one of the announcement of the outbreak. Bridge crossings from towns along the Victorian border were manned 24 hours per day to stop horses passing from New South Wales into Victoria. It was a different scenario in my electorate.

In the Murray-Darling electorate we saw people grounded at events where horse events had taken place. The horses were provided with feed and water but were not allowed to move from the area because of the time it took the New South Wales Government to react to the outbreak. Country races, which are a key financial boost to the communities of my electorate, were cancelled. Consequently, one of the major events in the calendar of those communities was cancelled and the economies suffered. I believe all of that occurred because the outbreak was not handled properly. In contrast, it was pretty much business as usual in Victoria because the spread of the disease was contained. So Victoria's Spring Racing Carnival went ahead as planned.

As I speak rural lands protection boards are undergoing huge changes instigated by the Government. People may not realise the important role played by rural lands protection boards in controlling the movement of stock. In the Western Division properties have changed hands, and owners have moved from South Australia and Victoria. Recently dairy cattle were spelled in the Western Division. But for the diligence of the rural lands protection board ranger who was tracking and restricting the movement of stock, my electorate may have been faced with a disease outbreak carried by stock from an infected area. The Department of Primary Industries needs to provide sufficient numbers of officers to proactively ensure that people are mindful of the consequences of an outbreak of disease and its ramifications for the economy.

Recently I attended a meeting in Dareton to discuss concerns of citrus growers related to the outbreak of a gall wasp infestation in the area. That outbreak also highlights the department's responsibilities for containing exotic disease outbreaks. As a result of the infestation the trees of many citrus growers will be devastated. Unless growers can muster support from the Government and the department during the crisis they will be forced to destroy their orchards. That is not the best way to go. The Government and the department have a responsibility to protect rural industries. The Government in particular has an obligation to provide adequate resources and ensure that sufficient numbers of officers are available at the grassroots level to contain exotic disease outbreaks and pest infestations, thereby ensuring that New South Wales primary producers are protected at all times.

Ms KATRINA HODGKINSON (Burrinjuck) [5.42 p.m.]: It is with pleasure that I join in debate on the Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill 2008. Although most of the salient points relating to this debate have already been made, I highlight the need for country communities to be protected. The views of organisations representing country communities, such as the New South Wales Farmers Association, need to be conveyed to the House. The association has drawn several of its concerns to the attention of the Opposition. One concern is that the schedule to the bill does not list the diseases defined as "emergency animal diseases".

The Opposition takes very seriously the concerns expressed by the association. I am aware of the cost of disease outbreaks that have been borne by merino stud breeders in the southern and central tablelands of New South Wales and the farce of Government inaction endured by many animal breeders in my electorate and surrounding areas over the past 12 years. The Government has demonstrated its mismanagement during animal disease outbreaks. Many members have outlined the impacts of equine influenza upon horse trainers, horse breeders, jockeys and others involved in the equine industry. The Burrinjuck electorate has numerous horse studs and training areas. Many of my constituents who are involved in the horse industry have been impacted by the outbreak of equine influenza. The third edition of Veterinary Epidemiology by Michael Thrusfield deals with important factors in control and eradication programs. It states:

Before either a control or an eradication campaign can be undertaken, several factors must be considered. These include:

the level of knowledge about the cause of the disease and, if infectious, also about its transmission and maintenance, including host range and the nature of the host/parasite relationship;

veterinary infrastructure;

diagnostic feasibility;

adequate surveillance;

availability of replacement stock;

producers' and society's views;

the disease's public health significance;

the existence of suitable legislation with provision for compensation;

the possible ecological consequences; and

economic costs and the availability of funds for the program.

Many of the factors I have listed in that extract are not covered by the bill. The bill leaves many stones unturned. Many concerns have been raised during the debate about the inadequacies of the bill. I support the Opposition's attitude to the bill.

Mr STEVE WHAN (Monaro—Parliamentary Secretary) [5.46 p.m.], in reply: I thank members who contributed to the debate: the member for Coffs Harbour, the member for Maitland, the member for Hawkesbury, the member for Granville, the member for Barwon, the member for Wollondilly, the member for Goulburn and the member for Burrinjuck. The Exotic Diseases of Animals Amendment Bill 2008 amends the Exotic Diseases of Animals Act 1991. The 1991 Act is the main instrument for dealing with exotic disease outbreaks in animals in New South Wales and provides for the detection, containment and eradication of certain serious diseases affecting livestock and other animals.

The amendments will improve the operation of the Act and will facilitate faster and more effective responses to emergency disease outbreaks such as equine influenza, foot and mouth disease, and avian influenza. The amendments will minimise the impacts upon industry and the community of any future disease outbreaks. In response to a number of issues raised by the member for Coffs Harbour, I point out that the best way to minimise the impact of diseases on all businesses in New South Wales is to ensure that we respond quickly and effectively. This amending legislation will improve the effectiveness of responses to animal disease emergencies. A number of members commented on the national cost sharing deed, which provides a framework for dealing with what is considered to be an emergency response to an animal disease. The document is publicly available.

The national costs sharing deed is a nationally agreed framework. This legislation is intended to be consistent with the deed. I am a little surprised by some of the comments made by members opposite who appeared not to have examined those provisions. The member for Coffs Harbour and a number of other members outlined hardships encountered by people as a result of equine influenza. Every member on the Government side of the House sympathises with people who have had hardship imposed upon them by equine influenza. It was a very serious event and required a very stringent program to totally eradicate the disease from New South Wales. I will deal with that matter in more detail later when I address more specific comments made by Opposition members.

As I said, the cost sharing deed is a national agreement that has been entered into by livestock industries and the Commonwealth, State and Territory governments. Partners involved in the process of developing the agreement include farmers' representatives from the National Farmers Federation [NFF]. The federation was involved in developing the deed and would have represented the views of constituent bodies throughout the process. The deed outlines how the costs of managing outbreaks of emergency animal diseases will be shared between government and livestock industry parties. As it stands, the New South Wales Exotic Diseases of Animals Act 1991 applies only to certain exotic diseases. The current provisions of the Act cannot be used to manage major outbreaks of serious endemic diseases—for example, anthrax—that might fall within the definition of "emergency animal diseases" under the national cost sharing deed. Extending the emergency powers under the Act to apply to outbreaks of animal diseases that are declared to be emergency animal diseases will benefit livestock owners and the broader community. It will allow the Act to cover a wider range of serious animal diseases that could have significant adverse impacts on agriculture and the economy.

The bill establishes two classes of compensable diseases. Class B will include all existing compensable diseases and align the compensation provisions in the Act with a national cost sharing deed, which, as I said, the National Farmers Federation, amongst others—particularly industry groups—was involved in developing. This will help to ensure that New South Wales receives its full entitlement to reimbursement for the cost of combating an emergency animal disease outbreak in accordance with the deed. Class A is intended to include animal diseases for which early reporting is critical. The compensation provisions for these diseases are more flexible to encourage early reporting. Class A could include what are known as category 1 animal diseases under the deed, which include rabies, Nipah virus and other animal diseases that present significant public health risks. A number of Opposition members referred to comments from the New South Wales Farmers Association about the class A diseases. It is interesting that on 10 March the Minister for Primary Industries received a letter from Jock Lawrie of the New South Wales Farmers Association that said:

The Association has considered and is comfortable with the intended outcome of the proposed changes.

Until today we had not received advice from the New South Wales Farmers Association about concerns it has with the Act. The concerns have now been outlined. The association wants to see provided on the public record a list of diseases for classes A and B, the decision criteria for each class and the proposed compensation arrangements for each class. Class A diseases could include animal diseases listed under category 1 of the nationally agreed Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement—the cost sharing deed. Diseases listed under category 1 are the ones that may severely impact on human health, and include rabies and Nipah virus.

For the information of members of the Opposition—noting that several members repeated the same thing—known diseases are listed on the Animal Health Australia website. One would think that some members of the Opposition before they came into House with all their righteous indignation would go and do a bit of homework and find out these things. Class B diseases could include the remaining diseases listed under the nationally agreed Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement.

In regard to the request by the association to have decision-making criteria for each class provided on the public record, the diseases are those covered by the nationally agreed Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement. The compensation arrangements are detailed in the bill and are consistent with the national agreement, which I have mentioned several times. The association has said that it cannot support new section 59 until further clarification on the public record is provided for the wording of section 69A (3) regarding the waiving of fees. At present no fees are charged, and any proposed fees will be spelt out in a new regulation. Part of developing new regulations will be consulting with key stakeholders.

The member for Coffs Harbour mentioned equipment being auctioned by the Department of Primary Industries. He suggested that was an indication of waste by this Government and asked for comments on that. The national deed contains provisions that deal with the recovery of some of the costs of equipment and other things that are purchased. Selling that equipment is consistent with the national agreement, which, as I have said several times, is a Commonwealth-State agreement involving industry as well.

Further, for compensation to be payable under the Exotic Diseases of Animals Act 1991, a disease must be declared to be an emergency animal disease to which the compensation provisions of the Act apply. The bill amends the Exotic Diseases of Animals Act to establish two categories of eligibility for compensation. First, for animals and equipment that have been destroyed for the purposes of controlling the disease and, secondly, for animals that have died of an emergency animal disease. The second category of eligibility under the amendment Act will be consistent with the eligibility criteria in the national cost sharing deed, with compensation payable firstly for animals and equipment that have been destroyed for the purposes of controlling the disease and, secondly, for animals that have died of an emergency animal disease, but only if it is certified that the animal would have been compulsorily destroyed under the Act had the animal not died. The member for Hawkesbury made a rather interesting contribution to the debate.

Mr Paul Pearce: That is a very polite term.

Mr STEVE WHAN: It is a polite term. He called it an ill thought out bill. I say that his contribution could only be described as ill thought out. He suggested that requiring people to report diseases was a slight on veterinary practitioners. I find that quite an incredible comment. Does he also think it is a slight on doctors that there are notifiable diseases in humans—diseases that are notifiable to protect the overall health of the community? Most doctors would comply with the notification requirements, as most vets would. If the requirement is set out then it is very clear to people what they have to do. Does the member for Hawkesbury also think it is a slight on teachers and specified workers that they have to report child abuse, which, of course, is notifiable?

The member for Hawkesbury gets himself all worked up into mock indignation on behalf of people when he clearly does not understand the facts of the matter. It is quite insulting to all the people involved. I am sure that if any of the people he has referred to read what he said they would cringe at his statements. His usual practice is to slag off at someone politically rather than make a sensible contribution to the debate. In the one sentence he called this legislation a knee-jerk reaction and slow off the mark. One has to wonder about that. Do Opposition members come up with a list of quotes they want to use and just roll them all into their contributions at the same time?

The member for Hawkesbury said that the purpose of the bill was to claw back money after the equine influenza outbreak. He spoke scathingly about the cost of the outbreak and said that the bill was about the Government clawing back costs. Again he is completely wrong in what he said. This legislation is for future incidents, not for the equine influenza outbreak. He also referred derogatorily to the current Federal Government. He conveniently ignored the fact that the Federal Minister announced only recently that the Government would not ask industry to contribute around $80 million, the amount that might otherwise have been owed. That is an example of the member's complete ignorance of the topic or blatant dishonesty. I will leave the people who read his comments to determine which it is.

I am amazed that the member for Hawkesbury constantly sings the praises of the former Federal Government. He did it several times in this debate in regard to the response to equine influenza, but he was very critical of the State Government. He talked about how quickly the former Federal Government had responded and how it had provided assistance. He seems to ignore the fact that the recent Callinan report shows overwhelmingly that it was failure by the former Federal Government that allowed the disease to enter New South Wales in the first place, because of the rundown of quarantine services. If the member for Hawkesbury has not got the ability to put aside his political allegiance to John Howard and all those cronies who were in Canberra and to give credit where it is due then it shows him to be a pretty small person. A number of people have seen that already in his performance in this place. He criticised lines on a map and the equine influenza response in New South Wales.

No-one is saying that the response to equine influenza in New South Wales was perfect. That is why we must keep looking at how we can improve our performance. However, we did eradicate it and most people are extremely grateful for that, particularly those involved in the thoroughbred and racing industry. No-one denies that people were inconvenienced and that some experienced hardship. It was an extremely tough time. Members on this side of the House extend their sympathy to those affected. It was particularly difficult for the people who through no fault of their own were stranded away from home with their horses for a long time. That would have been very difficult to deal with and we have great sympathy for them.

The member for Hawkesbury said that he has some sympathy for the quarantine facility's inability to contain the disease. Yet again he is making excuses for the former Federal Government. He said that equine influenza could not be contained once an infected horse was brought into Australia. The experience in Victoria proves him absolutely wrong. Equine influenza infected horses were contained at the Spotswood facility in Victoria and the virus did not escape from there and infect other horses. Once again he is trying to make a political point without having facts to support it.

One of the things that astounded me the most—and I am sure the member for Barwon raised an eyebrow—was that the member for Hawkesbury said he was outraged about the provisions in the bill dealing with the destruction of animals. He was appalled that the bill provides that animals can be destroyed before the symptoms of a disease are evident. He appears to be under the misapprehension that this bill applies only to equine influenza. It applies to many diseases and in some cases it is critical that infected animals can be destroyed in order to control a disease. If, heaven forbid, foot and mouth disease broke out in Australia and the member for Hawkesbury had drafted the relevant legislation there would be no provision allowing for the destruction of an animal before the symptoms appeared and we would not be able to control the disease.

Members would have seen reports of disease outbreaks in the United Kingdom. The authorities created large buffer zones by destroying large herds of animals surrounding the affected areas. Unfortunately, that must be done in those circumstances. If avian influenza broke out in Australia and we took the approach favoured by the member for Hawkesbury and did not destroy birds that had no symptoms of the disease, that disease could kill humans—thanks to the member for Hawkesbury. I am sure that if he had taken the time to understand the legislation he would not have made that statement. It annoys me that he feigns outrage and indignation and says what a terrible government this State has when it is implementing eminently sensible measures.

The member for Granville referred to the Callinan report and highlighted the letter the Government received from the New South Wales Farmers Association. His was a sensible contribution. The member for Barwon complimented the work done by vets and others in tackling equine influenza. I agree with him; he is right in paying that compliment. Many people worked extremely hard to combat the equine influenza outbreak and they deserve our congratulations. The Government does not hesitate to congratulate vets in private practice, the staff of the Department of Primary Industries, members of rural lands protection boards and many others in the community who well deserve our thanks.

The member for Barwon referred to the amendments the New South Wales Farmers Association requested. The member for Wollondilly, in his positive contribution to the debate, referred to the importance of biosecurity. I am not sure why the member for Goulburn made a contribution. She spoke at length about ovine Johne's disease. She is perfectly entitled to take one side of what was a very vigorous and controversial debate, and it was particularly controversial within the sheep industry. Sheep producers in the New England area had a diametrically opposite view to that held by producers in the electorates of Goulburn and Burrinjuck. The debate was vigorous and controversial. However, that does not mean the member for Goulburn is justified in expressing outrage and saying that the Government's response was terrible.

The member for Mount Druitt was the Minister for Agriculture at the time, and my father was his chief of staff. The Government eventually followed the New South Wales Farmers Association's suggestion, but it was a very difficult decision and I do not believe that criticism in hindsight is appropriate. There was clearly stark division in the industry. I am intrigued by the member's comments because this bill does not deal with ovine Johne's disease. The member for Goulburn said that we needed a response but that this was the wrong one. However, she has not offered any alternative amendments, although she did talk again about the list of diseases, which, as I said, is on the Internet.

The member for Murray-Darling talked about the different responses in Victoria and New South Wales. Victoria was in the reasonably good position of not actually having an outbreak of equine influenza to address. As a result, it could implement strong measures. We had to deal with an outbreak and, as I said, no-one is suggesting that that did not cause hardship. Country race meetings were cancelled and I saw the hardship that caused in Queanbeyan. At times I had difficulties with the way Queanbeyan was treated by racing authorities during the recovery process. Of course, we hope that will not happen again, and legislation such as this will help us to avoid it.

The national cost sharing deed details the mechanisms by which livestock industries contribute their share of the emergency response costs. Industries may raise funds from their members voluntarily through levies established under Commonwealth legislation. This bill does not impose levies on livestock producers; only the Commonwealth is empowered to do that. The amendments will allow fees to be charged to individual landholders or livestock owners for services that they may choose for their own benefit such as vaccination or obtaining a movement permit. Fees will be set out in the regulations and, as I said, consultation will be undertaken.

The Opposition has declared its outrage that this has been a knee-jerk response but that it has also been far too slow. Members opposite have also talked about the need to delay the bill. The member for Goulburn suggested that this was the wrong response altogether. If there were an outbreak of a serious disease in the cattle and sheep industry in her electorate—and I sincerely hope there is not—I suspect her producers might not agree with her. Members have suggested that the amendments be delayed, but they have not offered any alternatives. The bill was passed on the voices in the upper House and the Opposition offered no amendments. It did not even call for a division. Although Opposition members expressed hostility and outrage, this bill is important and well thought through, and no-one denies the need for it. These are sensible and timely amendments. I commend the bill to the House.

Question—That this bill be now agreed to in principle—put.

The House divided.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

Bill agreed to in principle.


Bill declared passed and returned to the Legislative Council without amendment.