Flaws in Australia's biosecurity system exposed in new report
Australia's biosecurity system remains under strain with slow responses to outbreaks a new report warns, as the peak farming advocacy body laments a “missed opportunity”.
The nation’s biosecurity system remains under strain and hampered by slow decision-making and delayed responses to outbreaks.
These are the warnings in another major review of Australia’s complex biosecurity systems – one of many reviews the farm sector say are piling up with little real action taken by governments.
The National Farmers Federation has described the joint state, territory and federal governments response to the Intergovernmental Agreement on Biosecurity as a “missed opportunity”.
The report was finalised in January but only released to the public this week, along with the governments’ response.
The independent reviewer’s report analysing the Intergovernmental Agreement on Biosecurity, pointed out multiple threats to Australia’s biosecurity systems.
Report author Dr Michele Allan wrote that throughout the review she heard from stakeholders that “Australian biosecurity system is under continual strain with a reported increase in occurrence and complexity of outbreaks”.
“Added to this are issues with the speed of decision-making, cost sharing, and funding concerns that need to be addressed … responses to outbreaks can be delayed which ultimately increases the costs to all parties.”
Further, she wrote there was a decreased focus on prevention and preparedness.
Sheep Producers Australia chief executive Bonnie Skinner said progress on many of commitments from previous reviews has been “slow and unclear”.
“For example, the Craik Review called for a National Framework for Cost Sharing of Biosecurity Activities to be finalised and made public — but this remains unavailable,” she said.
“Reviews identify where improvements are needed, but without timely implementation of recommendations, clear accountability, and transparent reporting these processes risk eroding efficiency and stakeholder confidence.”
Ms Skinner said SPA would like to see key reforms recommended by the Inspector-General of Biosecurity implemented, with the remit of the IGB expanded to provide broader independent oversight of the biosecurity system.
NFF president David Jochinke said “biosecurity risks are increasing, farmers are looking for ambitious reform and certainty, instead, we’ve been left with a missed opportunity”.
He said farmers needed governments and industry to work together to take “urgent action to address outstanding biosecurity review recommendations, and expedited implementation of the National Biosecurity Strategy”.
The governments agreed to six of the seven recommendations put forth by Dr Allan.
The outlier, of which they agreed to in principle, involved consideration of delaying any potential future reviews of biosecurity cost sharing until recommendations from previous reviews, and work scheduled in the National Biosecurity Strategy Action Plan ‘Sustainable Investment’ priority, had been implemented or finalised.
It is understood the governments wants to move faster on issues than proposed by the reviewer.
One recommendation from the Action Plan was to establish a new national Biosecurity Capability and Investment Forum, with action due March this year.
The Weekly Times understands this forum will now be finalised by the end of the year.
“Over the last 12 months, the National Biosecurity Committee has progressed reforms to ensure the resilience and sustainability of the system. This work is overseen by state and territory agriculture ministers, and agriculture and biosecurity agency heads,” a Labor Government spokesperson said.
How the 2025 ‘scrap the tax’ fight united farmers
