FRUIT FLY

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (15:16): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries another question about fruit fly.

Leave granted.

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: I noted earlier the question by the Hon. Stephen Wade and acknowledge the interest of the Hon. John Dawkins MLC, the member for Chaffey and Senator Ann Ruston on this very important issue for the Riverland region.

Further to the minister's answer earlier on the New South Wales and Victorian cost recovery, I understand that Victoria is expecting its citrus industry to contribute at least 70 per cent of the cost of its fruit fly protection program from July. Last November Victoria also declared that Queensland fruit fly was no longer endemic. A Victorian newspaper, TheWeekly Times, conducted a poll and found that 93 per cent of its readers expected the Victorian government to do more to prevent fruit fly.

Honourable members most likely know from previous questions and debate that there are fruit fly roadblocks at Yamba, east of Renmark, Ceduna, Oodla Wirra and near Pinnaroo in the Mallee. There has been recent debate about whether random roadblocks in Blanchetown should have been in operation during the Easter holidays, preceding the recent outbreaks in Woodville and Kilburn. A random roadblock was subsequently operational in Blanchetown over the ANZAC Day period and saw 627 vehicles checked with 99 (which is roughly one in six) carrying fruit fly host material.

I note in particular the March detection of fruit fly in Woolworths peaches and the significant issue that raises in the supply chain. My questions are:

1. Will the minister tell the parliament about all the current confirmed detections and outbreaks at this point in time and how many other outbreaks are presently under investigation and what explanation the department has at this stage for the sudden number of outbreaks?

2. Will the government establish a new and permanent fruit fly inspection station at Bordertown, given recent poor levels of compliance?

3. Will the minister guarantee that funding structures for fruit fly protection will remain as is or increase in the forward estimates?

4. Will the minister immediately conduct a formal and transparent review of the commercial importation arrangements for produce, given the Woolworths detection, and then table the findings?

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for State/Local Government Relations) (15:18): I thank the honourable member for his most important questions. In relation to the recent Kilburn outbreak I do have some details around that. My understanding is that a female Mediterranean fruit fly was trapped in Kilburn in a permanent fruit fly surveillance trap—that was one female—and nine single males were then detected in a trap in Woodville on 22 April. The first one was found on 17 April.

Both detections are triggers for what we call an eradication response according to national protocols. The response undertaken was to establish a quarantine zone around the detection sites. All properties have been provided with advice on detection, the eradication process and the quarantine arrangements, via leafleting. Eradication will be undertaken by spot baiting to reduce the wild population and either maintaining the bait spotting or, alternatively, using sterile Mediterranean fruit flies in the quarantine area for a 10-12 week period after the last wild fly is detected.

The quarantine will then remain in place for one generation, plus 28 days or 12 weeks, from when the last wild fly was detected, whichever is the longer, and at this time of the year it is expected the quarantine will be in place at least until December. The national protocol stipulates arrangements for monitoring and responding to fruit flies. These detections have no impact on commercial growers. However, residents obviously must remain vigilant by not removing fruit or vegetables out of the quarantine areas, disposing of fruit and vegetables in green waste and council refuse bins, and reporting any unusual signs in fruit and vegetables.

The successful eradication of our fruit fly is very critical to our fruit fly free status. Biosecurity mitigation strategies include the Ceduna quarantine station, where all vehicles from WA (this infestation is from WA) are stopped and inspected; hosts produce importer registration; inspection and audit of importers; an extremely successful community awareness program; quarantine signage; and disposal bins at entry points to the state, including the Adelaide Airport and the Central Bus Depot. Eradication programs are very labour intensive, and activities are funded from PIRSA's biosecurity fund, the cost of eradication being around $250,000, I am advised.

We use a lot of different monitoring for fruit fly—traps and so on. We have roadblock activities and a wide range of biosecurity measures. These are the most recent outbreaks in our state, but also a month or so ago, maybe a little later, larvae was found in a peach that was imported through one of the major supermarket chains, and a protocol was undertaken and put in place to deal with that.

In terms of increased funding and roadblocks, I have talked about the Bordertown roadblock ad nauseam in this place, so how we conduct our roadblocks is on the record, how some are permanent and some are random—and they are random for a reason. It is a bit like random breath testing stations: we shift them from time to time, so that people are unaware, in order to determine whether there have been breaches.

We also use the roadblocks as an opportunity to inform and educate people, and we are very pleased that in the last holidays the number of breaches per inspection was down. I will have to check that figure, but I think the last school holiday break showed that, so that is very pleasing. These measures are working. We shift and move our resources around where they are monitored and assessed to be needed, and we will continue to do that. We have no plans to expand these provisions. They are working; they maintain our current protection status very well. If the industry wants an extension of our programs or strategies, given that the current ones are effective, we would have to ensure that there is coinvestment from industry. If they want the expanded programs, they are going to have to help meet some of those costs.

Currently, here in South Australia, the South Australian government funds 100 per cent of the biosecurity around fruit fly. The industry does not contribute, and it has indicated in the past that it is not prepared to contribute. In some other areas, industries such as fisheries contribute almost 100 per cent to all of the biosecurity measures. It is quite different with fruit fly. The government is happy to continue this commitment. It is a very important commitment to the industry and to the state. As I have said, the current strategies are currently working. They keep us protected, and we have no plans to extend or expand that, other than within our current budgetary means, within the foreseeable future.

While I am on my feet, in relation to the questions I was asked about the forestry board, I am advised that the chair of the forestry board receives $258 per four-hour session and receives an attraction and retention allowance of $50,000 per annum. Members receive $206 per four-hour session, with an allowance of $5,000 per annum. That is what I have been advised so far.