Legislative Council Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Tomato Brown Rugose Fruit Virus Tomato Brown Rugose Fruit Virus The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI Legislative Council Leader of the Opposition Tomato Brown Rugose Fruit Virus The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (14:25): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking a question of the Minister for Primary Industries about the tomato brown rugose fruit virus. Leave granted. The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI Legislative Council Leader of the Opposition The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI: On 12 November in this place, the minister gave a lengthy explanation of the considerations for compensation for the tomato brown rugose fruit virus and noted that signatories to the Emergency Plant Pest Response Deed (EPPRD) were able to access owner reimbursement costs to offset some of the loss associated with the incursion and loss of income. The minister also explained that as the fresh tomato industry was not a signatory to that deed affected growers could not access owner reimbursement costs, that there is capacity for compensation in South Australia but that this was being discussed at a federal level. SA Tomato, as a nursery and plant propagation business, is covered under the EPPR Deed. They have suffered through loss of trade resulting from the need for quarantine to the point where the business has recently had no option but to close indefinitely. I understand that as a result of the response plan agreed by the national management group on 21 November last year the framework for owner reimbursement costs was agreed. The subsequent assessment and approval process is a responsibility of the state jurisdiction, in this case the Department of Primary Industries. Yet despite this process being approved in November and the urgent need for this business to receive the assistance agreed and funded by their levies, they have not yet been paid. So my questions to the minister are: 1.	Why has it taken so long to organise payment of owner reimbursement costs to SA Tomato, given the business has been subject to section 9 orders since 16 August 2024 and is covered by the EPPR Deed? 2.	What is the process for payment of owner reimbursement costs to SA Tomato? 3.	When does the minister believe that this payment will be made? 4.	Has the minister personally contacted Oriana and Peter Petsios, the owners of SA Tomato, to check on their welfare? The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN Legislative Council Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development Minister for Forest Industries The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries) (14:27): I thank the honourable member for her question. Being a plant nursery, SA Tomato is represented by Greenlife Industry Australia, which is a signatory to the national Emergency Plant Pest Response Deed. Because they are a signatory to the deed, SA Tomato qualifies for the payment of owner reimbursement costs under the agreed national response plan for tomato brown rugose fruit virus and these costs have been written into and agreed within the national plan. Consistent with that national response plan, an independent assessor has been appointed, has met with the business and commenced an assessment of the claim. The assessor is talking with Greenlife Industry Australia for assistance in the verification process that is required for the claim. Once the assessor's report is submitted to PIRSA we will be able to ensure, with the help of Plant Health Australia, that it complies with the agreed national claim criteria. Once that is verified the claim can be paid by the South Australian government, with costs then recovered through the normal cost share process across all national affected parties.