Tomato Brown Rugose Fruit Virus

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (15:17): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking a question of the Minister for Primary Industries on the topic of biosecurity.

Leave granted.

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI: According as to the PIRSA website, the outbreak of tomato brown rugose virus was confirmed in Virginia on 14 August. We understand the first businesses received quarantine orders within days. The brown rugose fruit virus, one of the several exotic tobamoviruses, is listed on the Australian government's list of National Priority Plant Pests. The testing methods to confirm presence or absence of tomato brown rugose virus—namely, the PCR or ELISA testing methods—are similar for confirmation of xylella fastidiosa, which is No.1 on the National Priority Plant Pests list.

When it comes to exotic disease, being able to ramp up testing capacity rapidly when required is an important aspect of biosecurity preparedness. In fact, on the DAFF website, under questions and answers back in 2019 on brown tomato rugose virus, it stated that the virus was an emerging biosecurity risk to the Australian tomato and capsicum production industries in Australia.

On the Australian government's Outbreak: Animal and Plant Pests and Diseases website, it states that other so-called emerging biosecurity risks include highly pathogenic avian influenza, foot-and-mouth disease and lumpy skin. My questions to the minister are:

1. Given that tomato brown rugose virus has been an emerging biosecurity risk since 2019, why didn't South Australia have its own laboratory testing facility?

2. Why did it take three months for the government to establish its own accredited testing facility for South Australian growers?

3. Considering the huge delays for the return of testing results for the tomato brown rugose fruit virus that we are currently seeing, what is the government's level of preparedness regarding laboratory capacity for other emerging biosecurity risks, possibly at short notice?

4. Has the minister's department audited their capacity to respond to other emerging biosecurity risks and, if so, when?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries) (15:20): I thank the honourable member for her question. The first part of her first question she would have to refer to her colleagues who were in government in 2019. As I remember correctly, it was a Liberal government that we had here in 2019 so—

The Hon. N.J. Centofanti interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —in terms of the first couple of years, they would need to ask their own Liberal colleagues. Secondly, there is a list of diseases—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Secondly, there is a list of priority diseases. If I remember correctly, it is around about 40 to 43, something like that. That may not be quite exact but it is around about those sorts of numbers. They are diseases or viruses that are agreed nationally—agreed nationally, not just agreed by the Leader of the Opposition in this place, who clearly is an expert on all of these matters—in terms of what those priorities are.

Obviously any of these diseases could enter through any particular point. I am sure even those opposite, even the Leader of the Opposition in this place, wouldn't expect that every single one of those would have facilities in every single state and territory. It is a matter of prioritisation based on risk, and a risk matrix, as I understand it, is what is used to determine the prioritisation of these various diseases.

In terms of establishing the laboratory here, she should also be aware that there is an accreditation process which involves the federal Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. So, as soon as it became clear that there were going to be delays by sending to interstate labs and that the testing would need to be quite large in number, we started that process. We started that process and were able to get accreditation here in South Australia.

The member opposite obviously thinks that these things can happen in a split second or overnight. The accreditation process she should understand; after all, she used to be a vet. Surely she should understand that accreditation has a process and that accreditation takes some time to achieve. In this case, it involved visits from the federal department. It involved visits from the federal department—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —and it involved demonstrating meeting the criteria that is needed. After all, that is what accreditation is, as those opposite should understand. In terms of being able to set up a lab, I think it has been an important step forward.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! Sit down. Has everybody finished? Minister, can you conclude your answer so we can move on, please.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: It has been an important step forward to have the laboratory up and running, to have it accredited here in South Australia, and I would like to suggest that those opposite would be well served to not undermine the hard work of those at SARDI who are working so hard—as I understand it, on double shifts—to be able to provide this testing service. Yes, we want it done more quickly. Of course we do. We are well aware of what this means for the producers. We are well aware of how difficult it is.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: We are well aware of how difficult it is. In regard to the particular example that I believe the honourable member referred to, I can advise, since you referred to last Friday, that my adviser spoke with Mr Emmanuel Cafcakis on Friday the 22^nd at 2.06pm and at 4.31pm, and Paul Cafcakis, Emmanuel's son, if that is the right way around, on that same day, Friday, at 4.19pm and on Monday 25 November at 5.39pm, all about testing issues and challenges.

The Hon. N.J. Centofanti: Can I ask a supplementary?

The PRESIDENT: No.