HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2020-04-08 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Bills

Plant Health (Pest Affected Plants) Amendment Bill

Introduction and First Reading

Ms BEDFORD (Florey) (10:32): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Plant Health Act 2009. Read a first time.

Second Reading

Ms BEDFORD (Florey) (10:32): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

It is my honour to introduce the Plant Health (Pest Affected Plants) Amendment Bill 2020 to the house today. This bill amends the Plant Health Act 2009 by introducing a defence for a person who declares and hands over a pest, or a plant or a plant-related product affected by pest, to an inspector or destroys or disposes of the item at a quarantine station.

I have been forced to have this bill drafted because of the approach adopted under the minister's so-called zero tolerance policy on behalf of several of my constituents who, in endeavouring to do the right thing in handing over plant matter at the quarantine station, have been fined along with many hundreds of others in this state also intending to do the right thing. Under this policy, the legal standing of which is questioned, the minister has instructed inspectors in his department to issue significant fines to travellers presenting at the Yamba quarantine station and at other temporary quarantine points, even if those travellers freely declare and surrender fruit prohibited in the Riverland fruit fly protection area.

Like many in the community, I have been shocked by a heavy-handed enforcement approach which now very clearly has resulted and is continuing to result in grossly unfair outcomes. Protecting our fruit fly free status is, of course, vitally important and not underestimated by anyone involved in this process at all, but it does not need to come with costly fines handed out to pensioners, self-funded retirees and others on low or fixed incomes trying to do the right thing.

Travellers should be encouraged to continue to do the right thing and declare their fruit at the Yamba quarantine station, just as they are at Adelaide Airport, rather than be penalised with a whopping $375 fine in the mail a few days later after being grilled in interrogation rooms in a way that can only be described as deliberately intended to intimidate and then be told that it was a warning. The surprise at receiving a fine after such an event or series of events has added to the perplexity and anxiety and caused the bill to be brought to the house today.

The minister says this policy is in accordance with legal advice, but he has not released the legal advice. I for one would like to know how it is a policy direction from the minister to inspectors to adopt zero tolerance in all cases is a lawful direction from the minister. I would also like to know how a policy direction for zero tolerance to expiation review officers in the minister's department is a lawful direction. These officers, exercising power granted to them under legislation, should be exercising their own judgement first and foremost, not simply abiding by directions from the minister that appear to have no formal standing in the statute book.

Public concern about the minister's zero tolerance approach has been mounting in recent months, with regular media reports about travellers who justifiably feel they have been unfairly treated as part of what they see as really a revenue-raising operation. Reportedly, waste bins have been overflowing on multiple occasions. On some approaches, it appears waste bins have not been installed at all.

Signage ahead of the Yamba station, which is several kilometres in from the border and the only location on departmental maps illustrating places to dispose of fruit that lies within the Riverland protection area, is very wordy and difficult to read when travelling at 100 km/h. I note also the upgrade of the Yamba station and the amount the government has estimated in increased revenue for this financial year are strangely in alignment.

I myself have been approached by constituents seeking assistance with fines, but to no avail. Neither the minister nor the department has been willing to consider their very reasonable circumstances. Both of the constituents I have attempted to assist in having expiations reconsidered and withdrawn are retirees with limited means for whom the $370 fine is significant and who do not have the financial means to risk taking the matter to court.

One constituent, fined for having an apple in her possession at the Yamba quarantine station, is a diabetic who, quite reasonably, needs to keep sugary foods on her person in case of an imbalance in her blood sugars. Fining people who are trying to do the right thing by declaring and surrendering fruit at the quarantine station seems entirely counterproductive and sends the wrong message. What does it really do to protect Riverland growers from the fruit fly risk?

An answer from the minister to recent questions I asked reveals the Yamba station collected 13,057 kilograms of host material in the calendar year 2019, since zero tolerance was implemented, compared with 27,009 kilograms in the calendar year 2018. I am sure the minister will tout this as evidence his zero tolerance approach is working, but it could just as easily be suggested this means more people are simply avoiding declaring fruit to avoid the inevitable fine.

The real question is: what benefit is this delivering to the Riverland growers? Ultimately, fruit is being seized as a proxy for protecting the fruit fly status of the Riverland. A legitimate question to ask is whether the policy is more about being for show than changing outcomes. If the minister or the department had been reasonable in waiving fines, where there were reasonable grounds to do so and where we have evidence this has been done, there would be no need for this bill at all.

Given the extra $5 million in revenue the Treasurer has already banked in his Mid-Year Budget Review, the public has a right to know if tough fines are just a way of paying for the increased expenditure of the minister's zero tolerance policy, including the upgrade to the Yamba quarantine station, which is, unfortunately, in the minister's own electorate. The bill will put an end to the unfair fruit fly fines being foisted on South Australians under this current regime. It will do so in a way that allows the fight to maintain our fruit fly free status be continued unimpeded because it is very important work, which we all recognise. I commend the bill to the house.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Pederick.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT