Thursday 19 December 2013 (Canberra) – Today’s federal government consultation paper on amendments to the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Code demonstrates a genuine commitment to improving efficiency in regulation of the agriculture sector, without compromising human health, safety or environmental outcomes.
“Minister Joyce should be commended for acting so swiftly to implement the government’s election commitments in this area,” said Matthew Cossey, Chief Executive Officer of CropLife Australia, today.
“Although we acknowledge that the APVMA is currently carrying out its own regulatory reform process, the government’s amendments to the code will better enable farmers to access the tools they need to farm productively and sustainably. It is absolutely vital that agchem regulation is commensurate with risk as the costs of unnecessary regulation are unfairly borne by farmers and consumers.
“An inefficient regulator is a problem for protecting human health and the environment, as well as for agricultural productivity. The government’s proposed amendments remove a number of unnecessary processes and duplication, which will allow the APVMA to respond more promptly to address areas of actual risk.
“The recently released ABARES Review of Selected Regulatory Burdens on Agriculture and Forestry Businesses confirms the importance of the amendments proposed in the government’s consultation paper today. ABARES has highlighted the need for an efficient regulator and a regulatory framework that does not create unnecessary cost burdens that will stifle innovation.
“It is vital that any regulation in this space facilitates farmers’ access to targeted, safe and effective chemistry. According to a Deloitte Access Economics report released by CropLife Australia last month, 68 per cent of the total value of Australian crop production, or $17.6 billion of Australian agricultural output, can be attributed to the use of crop protection products.
“The agricultural chemical sector creates 9,250 full time equivalent jobs across Australia and makes multiple contributions to the economy in areas including exports, manufacturing and trade.
“It is crucial for the crop protection industry and the farmers, workers and communities it supports that the regulatory system protects human health and the environment without adding unnecessary and untargeted processes. The amendments proposed in today’s consultation paper are a step in the right direction.
“The consultation paper prioritises the protection of human health and the environment, and it is clear that the proposed amendments will serve to enhance the efficiency of processes aimed at protecting workers, communities and the environment,” concluded Mr Cossey.
Contact: Jessica Lee (Manager – Public Affairs) Ph: 02 6230 6399 Mob: 0410 491 261
This Deloitte Access Economics study, commissioned by CropLife Australia, details a conservative analysis of the positive impacts of the crop protection industry on the Australian economy; not only in raising crop values, but as an important job creator.
The data presented in this landmark study demonstrates the crucial role of crop protection products in the current and continued success of Australian agriculture, as well as the importance of the plant science industry to the Australian economy as a whole. This is particularly significant in a public policy sense as chemical crop protection products are some of the most tightly regulated products in Australia; undergoing a rigorous registration process before they can be developed, sold or used.
Report foreword from Matthew Cossey, Chief Executive Officer, CropLife Australia
Tuesday 5 November 2013 (Canberra) – The recently released ABARES Review of Selected Regulatory Burdens on Agriculture and Forestry Businesses has confirmed the importance of the federal government’s commitment to funding a minor use and specialty crops program and highlights the urgency of implementing the program as soon as possible.
“CropLife Australia has been advocating on behalf of the plant science industry for government to address a number of inconsistencies in, and market failures caused by, the regulation of agricultural chemicals and biotech crops. ABARES has confirmed that there are simple, effective ways available to address these inconsistencies, which are damaging Australia’s agricultural productivity,” said Matthew Cossey, CEO of CropLife Australia, today.
“In particular, the ABARES report shows that the minor use and specialty crops program, to which the Coalition government commendably committed $8 million during the recent election campaign, is a vital initiative for improving the productivity, sustainability and diversity of Australian cropping.
“In relation to the registration process for agricultural chemicals, the report highlights the importance of an efficient regulator and a low cost regulatory framework. It further reinforces the importance of the Coalition’s election commitment to unwind the unnecessary red tape in the agchem registration system.
“The government’s current plan to increase the efficiency of the APVMA will better enable farmers to access the tools they need to farm productively and sustainably. It is absolutely vital that agchem regulation is commensurate with risk as the costs of unnecessary regulation are unfairly borne by farmers and consumers.
“The overlaps and inconsistencies between state laws governing the use of agricultural chemicals are also identified in the report as an area of concern. The Council of Australian Governments (COAG) has been developing a national framework to harmonise control of use laws, but has made little progress over the past five years.
“This report offers some hope for the reinvigoration of COAG’s work towards a nationally harmonised regulatory system for agricultural chemical use, something CropLife has been advocating for over several years now.
“The report has also confirmed that the uncertain path to market for GM crops continues to impose an unnecessary burden on farmers and the plant science industry through inconsistent regulation and lengthy, unscientific decision-making.
“Although it is state moratoria on the use of GM crops causing the uncertainty, the report notes that the federal government could play a coordinating role in negotiating for a shorter, well-defined regulatory path to market for tested and approved GM crops.
“This report does not cover the field in identifying areas for increased regulatory efficiency, but it has confirmed the importance of improvement along the lines of a number of CropLife’s key priority areas.
“The federal government has often emphasised that improving agricultural productivity is one of its core economic goals. This report sets out a clear, objective analysis of the heavy and unnecessary regulatory burdens carried by Australian agribusiness and the farming sector. It also illustrates a simple path to alleviating some of those burdens. A more productive, sustainable agricultural sector is now at the government’s fingertips.
“In particular, it is vital that the government’s minor use program gets up and running as soon as possible, to improve responsible chemical usage; to significantly assist in addressing the challenges of weed and pest resistance problems; and to ensure that Australian food producers develop environmentally friendly, sustainable, integrated crop management systems through access to the latest chemistry.” Mr Cossey concluded.
Contact: Jessica Lee (Manager – Public Affairs) Ph: 02 6230 6399 Mob: 0410 491 261
CropLife is fortunate to have been able to provide input to the draft National Code of Practice through the National Industry Reference Group. Our members are committed to developing responses to best manage the security risks of chemicals consistent with the principles agreed with the Government. To this end, CropLife seeks to ensure that proposed responses are:
– nationally coordinated and nationally consistent;
– built on existing industry and government arrangements; and
– developed in partnership between government and industry.
CropLife’s submission in respect of the APVMA’s ‘Draft Operational Notice – Data requirements for herbicides used in genetically modified crops’ raises a number of concerns, including:
CropLife has for many years advocated for reform of agricultural chemicals regulation and has been actively engaged with the Government to assist it develop a package of reforms that deliver on commitments to reduce red tape and improve the efficiency of the agricultural chemicals regulator. Despite our considerable efforts, CropLife remains disappointed that the package of reforms introduced in the Bill:
On top of failing to provide any genuine reform of agricultural chemical regulation to deliver greater efficiency, CropLife is disappointed with the inclusion of additional tests that reduce certainty for applicants and increase complexity within a regulatory system that is already excessively complex and difficult to navigate.
CropLife Australia – Senate Submission.pdf
Attachment A_Senate Submission.pdf
Attachment B_Senate Submission.pdf
Attachment C_Senate Submission.pdf
Attachment D_Senate Submission.pdf
Attachment E_Senate Submission.pdf
Attachment F_Senate Submission.pdf
Whilst CropLife fully supports the need for agricultural chemical regulatory reform in Australia, it is both concerned and disappointed that, despite numerous representations, submissions and reviews over many years, several critical reforms to improve agricultural chemical regulation remain ignored and unaddressed. These missing critical reforms, and the lack of any serious attempt to investigate and document the costs and benefits associated with the reform package that has been presented seriously question the commitment of the Government to providing the efficiency improvements long sought by the agricultural chemical industry.
CropLife’s submission urgently recommends that:
These recommendations, along with the proposals recommended by CropLife throughout our submission are not minor in nature. To ensure that the package operates as intended, CropLife urges the Government to consider delaying commencement of these reforms as it is critical that they be subject to proper accountability and transparency procedures in advance of their implementation.