HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2016-12-06 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Biological Control (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 29 November 2016.)

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (17:26): I rise to speak on behalf of the opposition on the Biological Control (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2016. The bill specifically amends the definition of a living organism to include viruses and subviral agents. This amends South Australia’s Biological Control Act 1986 and is a part of mirroring legislation to be implemented by all states based on the commonwealth’s Biological Control Act 1984.

The legislation was passed by the states and Northern Territory parliaments to establish a uniform and equitable system applicable throughout Australia, ensuring that biological control programs which have been identified as being in the public interest could proceed without the interruption of litigation. This is in relation to two significant viruses that are currently being assessed for national release, that is, the next rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (RHDVI) and the koi herpesvirus to control European carp. The amendments are required before applications are made to the minister for the release to proceed.

The opposition has been advised that this bill must be passed by December 2016—that is why I am very happy to be dealing with it this afternoon—to enable the proposed biological control agents for rabbits and carp to be considered. The bill addresses the issue that has arisen about the classification of viruses and subviral agents that are deemed as living organisms and the possible legal implications that surround agent or target organism declarations made under the biological control acts.

The amendments maintain consistency with the mirroring legislation in other jurisdictions and the commonwealth to address a sovereign risk. From our understanding, they do not affect the original intent or scope of the act. These amendments clarify biological control programs which use viruses and subviral agents covered by the South Australian Biological Control Act 1986. In the past, legal challenges have been present concerning biocontrol viruses. In 1985, it was estimated that Salvation Jane, a dominant pasture weed, was present in over 30 million hectares in Australia. This weed had cost the wool and meat industries $125 million each year by 2002.

Like rabbits and European carp, Salvation Jane is an introduced species which requires biological control. However, during the 1980s, legal challenges arose around some of the viruses used to control Salvation Jane, stalling the CSIRO’s work for eight years. A suite of agents was eventually introduced to control the weed in South Australia in 1999, and it certainly has been noticed in recent times that Salvation Jane is nowhere near as prevalent as it once was. I can recall as a young boy coming to Adelaide some very purple hills in the Adelaide Hills and in some other parts of the state where you would see quite significant infestation of Salvation Jane and, of course, now it is not there.

In the 1950s, the first myxomatosis virus was released to control rabbits in Australia. The virus reduced an estimated population from 600 million to 100 million in just two years. However, as is evolution, rabbits have developed an immunity against myxomatosis which, in turn, unfortunately continues to devastate Australia’s agricultural industry, creating an estimated damage of some $206 million a year.

When I think about rabbits, it is interesting that in the 1930s, when my father was at Norwood High School and staying with friends of the family, he used to trap rabbits in the Parklands to help feed that family. It is hard to imagine that rabbits were living in the Adelaide Parklands and plentiful enough that a young boy from the country could trap them to help feed the family that he was staying with, so rabbits were very widespread. After World War II, my father took up the farm he had bought from his grandfather's estate, and rabbits had infested that property tremendously. I recall conversations he had with me around the benefit of myxomatosis and how it gave him the opportunity to run a profitable farming business.

Partial genetic immunity to the virus now means that only 50 per cent of infected rabbits die from myxomatosis. As I said, I recall as a young boy seeing rabbits infected with myxomatosis. I was born in 1960, so in the mid to late 1960s there were still quite a lot of rabbits affected by what we called 'myxy', but now only about 50 per cent of rabbits die. This has resulted in the need for alternative strains. The rabbit calicivirus, also known as haemorrhagic disease, is a viral disease that affects only European rabbits. Since 1995, the calicivirus has spread across the vast majority of Australia.

RHD, as it is known, (the haemorrhagic disease) can be released only at certain times of the year, as it does not affect kittens and younger rabbits. Initial results also demonstrated that its effects were lower in wetter areas. Additionally, unlike myxomatosis, people can have their pet rabbits vaccinated against RHD by their local vet. RHDV-K5, a new Korean strain of the calicivirus, is present in many locations within Australia. However, this strain has not yet been formally introduced as a biological control method.

RHDV-K5 has the benefit of being effective in cool, wet and other regions of Australia where the original calicivirus was not present. The new strain of the calicivirus is also considered one of the most humane methods of pest control, with an official release anticipated for 2017. I note that in the comments I just made, it says that people can have their pet rabbits vaccinated against RHD by their local vet.

Mr David Speirs, the member for Bright, was contacted by some of his constituents concerned about the availability of vaccines for pet rabbits, so I want to warn the minister that I will ask a question in relation to pet rabbits. I am probably not someone who would keep a rabbit as a pet, but I know they are quite widely kept as pets, so I want to make sure that we are not releasing a virus that is going to wipe out the family pet and that, if it can be vaccinated, the vaccine is widely available so that vets can use it.

Another great beneficiary of this legislation is the River Murray, one of the primary sources of South Australia’s drinking water. Unfortunately, this source is infested with introduced carp, which currently make up some 80 to 90 per cent of the Murray-Darling Basin’s fish biomass, which would be a particularly large volume of fish. Not only do they pollute the water in plague proportions but they have also devastated native fish numbers. Like Salvation Jane and rabbits, carp have also had an overwhelming negative economic impact, estimated to be up to $500 million per year.

The introduction of the koi—I hope I am pronouncing it properly—herpes is estimated to significantly reduce European carp numbers by some 70 to 80 per cent. The carp virus only affects carp and is a naturally occurring strain. Thirty-three countries have released the virus, and it has been present since the late 1990s. These notes that I am reading from have been provided to me. I am assuming that it has been present in those other 33 countries since the late 1990s, or at least some of those 33 countries.

The federal government has allocated some $15 million over 2½ years for the National Carp Control Plan. I think it has been talked about and described in the media at times as 'carpageddon'. For the first release of the carp herpesvirus to be effective, action plans will need to be in place to deal with the expected mass of dead carp. Irrigators, pipelines and other outlets need to be considered, and fail-safe practices will need to be in place to prevent the accumulation of dead and rotting carp. It is hoped that this biologically managed virus can be released in the latter part of 2018.

These amendments will ensure that our primary producers have a pristine environment and that vital waterways are supported and protected from further introduced species damage, financially and physically. These amendments are necessary in order for decisive discussion, research and investigations to take place. Implementing strategic plans that outline when and where human intervention needs to be is vitally important to getting this biological management right. I believe, and the opposition believes, that the introduction of this new calicivirus for rabbits and the herpesvirus for the European carp will bring a positive change to our South Australian environment, if done right.

I have a couple of questions in relation to the carp. It is not the little goldfish we have in a bowl. There are fish that are often kept in domestic situations, bright orange ones, about six to eight or 10 inches long, that we see in household ponds rather than in an aquarium or a fish bowl in the house. I have always thought that they were a member of the carp family, so I am just wondering if the minister is able to give me any information.

I assume there is not just one species of carp. This is the European carp. Does it only affect European carp, or is it the fact that it will affect all carp? They are in the River Murray and we want to take them out of there; they are non-native and I accept that, but is there any risk of this virus, if it happened to be brought into a domestic situation, killing off my aunt's golden carp in her garden pond? Not that I have any aunts still alive; I just use that as an example. I am not sure; I am interested to know whether there is any likelihood of that escaping. With those few words, the opposition commends the bill to the chamber.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Employment, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation, Minister for Manufacturing and Innovation, Minister for Automotive Transformation, Minister for Science and Information Economy) (17:37): I thank the honourable member for his contribution and his second reading speech. I think I can answer the questions that were raised, and I appreciate that he foreshadowed some of the issues that he was going to raise so that we can get answers and make sure we have an efficient resolution to this important bill.

In relation to the virus for rabbits, I am advised that the Korean strain, the K5 strain, has a vaccine that is reasonably readily available in Australia for vets to use. In relation to the question about the carp, I am informed that it is a different strain, so it will not affect anyone's auntie's goldfish.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clause 1.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: I have a couple of questions now we have the minister's adviser here. The first one is: do they know the actual cost of getting your rabbit vaccinated at the vet? They are available. We have a new dog in our family, and vets are not cheap places to visit anymore, so I just wonder whether there is any indication of what it costs to get your rabbit vaccinated.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: We do not know the exact cost offhand, but my advice is that it will be very similar to the existing cost. I agree that vets are expensive and I am grateful that the majority of my pets are chooks, which are very low maintenance animals and have low veterinary costs.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: You probably administer the first aid to the chooks yourself, too, I would think, minister. I have a quick question around carp control. I know there is a plan in place but is the minister, or perhaps his adviser, able to update the chamber? I know it is in the early stages but are we still looking at releasing the carp virus in 2018? Is that still the intended release date? If the carp are not eliminated but significantly reduced in the Murray that is something that will happen in my lifetime, where they have gone from being introduced or escaping into the river and doing damage, and to see that river returned to somewhere where it was by getting rid of them will be a significant achievement for this nation.

So, from a personal interest point of view, I am interested to know if we are still on schedule for somewhere around 2018. Is the minister or his adviser able to give us any idea of the likely program to be put in place and how quickly it can be done? If the estimation is 80 per cent to 90 per cent fish biomass in the river, is it one million tonnes, five million tonnes? I ask this from a personal interest point of view because we have the opportunity to ask those few questions.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: I am advised that the plan still needs to develop and take into full consideration the risks and it needs to go through approval processes, so 2018 is still what is intended but in all likelihood, if it is 2018, it will be towards the end of that year. In terms of how quickly this will take effect and how much change we will see in the Murray River it will depend on exactly how the plan looks and how it is implemented. As that goes through the stages, I am happy to make sure that the honourable member is given an update as to how the plan will look and what the expected time line is.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: There is one question the minister may have missed. My notes state that about 80 per cent to 90 per cent of the fish biomass in the Murray-Darling is carp. Do you have any guesstimation of what volume 80 per cent to 90 per cent of the fish biomass is? Is it one million tonnes or 10 million tonnes? I am just interested.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: Again, I do not have advice on hand for this but I am happy to take it away and see if we can find an answer reasonably quickly as to how many thousands of B-doubles it would be in terms—I assume when you say the volume that is the sort of thing you are talking about?

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: Yes. I do not want to prolong things but given that the minister is going to get some more information for me I would like to know if, assuming that they die and float to the surface, we are going to remove them from the river because they will be pretty unpleasant and it would be a biological disaster. What is their likely use: are they going to landfill, be turned into fertiliser or cat food or whatever? I do not expect you to answer now but it would be interesting to know what the thinking is. I suspect minister Bignell is more responsible for this. I see his adviser in the gallery so perhaps I should get a briefing from his agency rather than ask you these questions.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: It is good that the questions are on Hansard because it makes it a lot easier to understand what questions the honourable member wants answered, particularly what happens once the virus has had the desired effect. I am advised that we will be part of that pretty involved planning process but I will make sure that the questions you have now put on Hansard are looked at and that when there is an answer a briefing is provided as soon as possible.

Clause passed.

Remaining clauses (2 to 12) and title passed.

Bill reported without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Employment, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation, Minister for Manufacturing and Innovation, Minister for Automotive Transformation, Minister for Science and Information Economy) (17:45): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

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