Federal budget 2023: Farmers ‘must share biosecurity burden’

Agriculture Minister Murray Watt has defended slugging farmers to pay for the country’s overhauled biosecurity system.

Agriculture Minister Murray Watt. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Gary Ramage

Agriculture Minister Murray Watt has defended slugging farmers to pay for the country’s overhauled biosecurity system, saying taxpayers, importers and producers need to share the burden to finance a scheme from which they all benefit.

Farmers have accused the government of giving with one hand and taking with the other after Tuesday’s budget implemented long-awaited reform of the model used to fund bio­security measures.

Producer advocacy groups, including the National Farmers Federation, said the “new tax” was unfair because farmers were not “risk creators” when it came to biosecurity.

Seeking to ease outrage, Senator Watt broke down the funding share at an industry breakfast on Wednesday, saying it was about “locking in a fairer system”.

“After great consideration, we decided that a mixed funding model was the fairest approach and that’s why the cost of our ­sustainable biosecurity funding measures will be shared, with ­taxpayers, importers, inter­national travellers and producers all contributing,” Senator Watt said.

“We have come to the view that funding biosecurity is also a shared responsibility between taxpayers, those who create risk and those who receive benefits from the biosecurity system.”

Senator Watt said importers would contribute 48 per cent of funding ($363m, up from $318m) through increased fees, taxpayers would pay for 44 per cent ($350m up from $202m) and farmers would cover 6 per cent ($48m).

Under the scheme, a grass-fed beef producer would pay an extra 50c a head, cotton producers an extra 22c a bale and honey producers 0.5c a kilogram.

Senator Watt said the extra funding, which will amount to an additional $1bn, was necessary to ensure biosecurity was given a stable, sustainable funding model, something for which farming advocacy groups have long been lobbying.

The government is also wary of the threat posed by foot-and-mouth disease and lumpy skin disease, both of which are present in Indonesia.

Farmers already contribute towards biosecurity through their own on-farm systems and membership fees to organisations such as Plant Health Australia and Animal Health Australia, as well as levies to deal with existing disease outbreaks.

NFF president Fiona Simson said being forced to pay further levies was disappointing.

She criticised the structure of the funding arrangement.

“The move to have farmers foot the bill is a bitter pill to swallow,” she said.

“We’re already significant fin­ancial contributors.

“What’s more, we bear the cost of managing historical pest and disease incursions and face the enormous threats posed by pests and diseases on our doorstep,” Ms Simson said.

“It’s extremely disappointing to have to continue waiting for a meaningful contribution from risk creators.”

AgForce president Georgie Somerset said the scheme would mean higher food prices.

“Farmers are already a significant contributor to this system and so the move to have them foot even more of the bill is dis­appointing to say the least,” Ms Somerset said.

GrainGrowers chief executive Shona Gawel said the government should “reconsider such a short-sighted decision”.