‘We should not take a backwards step': Littleproud on Australian biosecurity laws
The National Party says Australia's biosecurity should not be used as a bargaining tool for the removal of US tariffs.
The Albanese Government is reportedly considering amending rules, making it easier for the US to export beef to Australia, as long as it can be done safely.
Last year, Australia sent almost 400,000 tonnes of beef to America, worth more than $4 billion.
Nationals Leader David Littleproud says "we should not take a backwards step and concede biosecurity protocols that are protecting the agricultural industry".
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
4 hours ago
- The Age
‘Progressive patriot' prime minister faces his call to arms
'In today's Australia, the new default should be that patriotism is a love of country that is democratic and egalitarian. It is something that includes those of different races and backgrounds,' he wrote in this masthead a couple of weeks ago. 'With his political authority unquestioned, Albanese has an opportunity to craft a nation-building agenda. The significance is more than just national. At the moment, parties of the centre-left are struggling to find compelling alternatives to Trumpist populism.' Albanese's defiance of America doesn't come out of nowhere. It rings a Labor bell. It resonates with the decision by Labor's celebrated wartime leader, John Curtin, to defy Australia's great and powerful friend of his time, Britain. 'I'm conscious about the leadership of John Curtin, choosing to stand up to Winston Churchill and say, 'No, I'm bringing the Australian troops home to defend our own continent, we're not going to just let it go',' Albanese said last year as he prepared to walk the Kokoda Track, where Australia and Papua New Guinea halted Imperial Japan's southward march of conquest in World War II. Defiance of allies is one thing. Defeat of the enemy is another. In a moment of truth-telling, the Chief of the Defence Force, Admiral David Johnston, this week said that Australia now had to plan to wage war from its own continental territory rather than preparing for war in far-off locations. 'We are having to reconsider Australia as a homeland from which we will conduct combat operations,' Johnston told a conference held by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. 'That is a very different way – almost since the Second World War – of how we think of national resilience and preparedness. We may need to operate and conduct combat operations from this country.' He didn't spell it out, but he's evidently contemplating the possibility that China will cut off Australia's seaborne supply routes, either because it's waging war in the Taiwan Strait or South China Sea, or because it's seeking to coerce Australia. 'The chief of the defence force is speaking truth,' says Professor Peter Dean, co-author of the government's Defence Strategic Review, now at the US Studies Centre at Sydney University. 'There's a line in the Defence Strategic Review that most people overlook – it talks about 'the defence of Australia against potential threats arising from major power competition, including the prospect of conflict'. And there's only one major power posing a threat in our region.' History accelerates week by week. Trump, chaos factory, wantonly discards America's unique sources of power and abuses its allies. China's Xi Jinping and Russia's Vladimir Putin are emboldened, seeing America's credibility crumbling. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, alarmed at the rising risks, this week declared a campaign to make Britain 'battle ready' to 'face down Russian aggression'. Loading Starmer plans to enlarge the army, commission up to a dozen new nuclear-powered submarines jointly built with Australia under AUKUS, build six new munitions factories, manufacture 7000 long-range weapons, renew the nuclear warheads on Britain's strategic missiles, and put new emphasis on drones and cyberwar as war evolves daily on the battlefields of Ukraine. Starmer intends to increase defence outlays to the equivalent of 2.5 per cent of GDP with an eventual target of 3 per cent. Ukraine's impressive drone strike on Russia's bombers this week knocked out a third of Moscow's force, with AI guiding the drones to their targets. The Australian retired major-general Mick Ryan observes that Ukraine and Russia are upgrading and adapting drone warfare weekly. 'The Australian government has worked hard to ignore these hard-earned lessons and these cheaper military solutions,' he wrote scathingly in this masthead this week, 'while building a dense bureaucracy in Canberra that innovative drone-makers in Australia cannot penetrate in any reasonable amount of time.' At the same time, the FBI charged two Chinese researchers with attempting to smuggle a toxic fungus into the US. It's banned because it can cause mass destruction of crops. A potential bioweapon, in other words. What would John Curtin do today? 'Curtin, like Albanese, was from the left of the Labor Party,' says Dean. 'He was not an internationalist, he was very domestic focused.' Indeed, he was an avowed Marxist who believed that capitalism was in its late phase and bound to fail, leading to world peace. He abandoned his idealism when confronted by the reality of World War II. 'He realised that a leader has to lead for his times. He had to bend his interests from the domestic sphere to the international.' Curtin famously wrote that, after Britain's 'impregnable fortress' of Singapore fell to the Japanese in just a few days, Australia looked to America as its great and powerful friend. 'Albanese can't repeat that,' observes Dean, 'because there's no one else to turn to.' 'A modern John Curtin,' says the head of the National Security College at ANU, Rory Medcalf, 'would take account of the strategic risk facing the unique multicultural democratic experiment of Australia. He'd unite the community and bring the trade unions, industry, the states and territories together in a national effort. 'It's certainly not about beating the drums of war, but we do need a much more open conversation about national preparedness. Australia might be directly involved in war, but, even if we aren't, we will be affected indirectly [by war to our north] because of risks to our fuel security, risks to the normal functioning of the economy and risks to the cohesion of our society. Is there scope to use national cabinet' – which includes the states and territories – 'to talk about these issues?' And the defence budget? Albanese is dismissive of calls to peg spending by set percentages of GDP. Apply that to any other area of the budget and you'd be laughed out of the room. The prime minister prefers to decide on capability that's needed, then to fund it accordingly. How big a gun do you need, then find money to pay for it. Medcalf endorses this approach of deciding capability before funding, but says that risk should come before both. 'And if you look at risk first, it will push spending well above 2 per cent of GDP and much closer to 3 or 4 per cent.' Regardless of what the Americans say or do. Do they turn out to be dependable but demanding? Or uselessly absent? 'Australia will need to spend more either way,' says Medcalf. 'The only future where we don't need to increase our security investment is one where we accept greatly reduced sovereignty in a China-dominated region.'
Herald Sun
11 hours ago
- Herald Sun
‘We should not take a backwards step': Littleproud on Australian biosecurity laws
The National Party says Australia's biosecurity should not be used as a bargaining tool for the removal of US tariffs. The Albanese Government is reportedly considering amending rules, making it easier for the US to export beef to Australia, as long as it can be done safely. Last year, Australia sent almost 400,000 tonnes of beef to America, worth more than $4 billion. Nationals Leader David Littleproud says "we should not take a backwards step and concede biosecurity protocols that are protecting the agricultural industry".
Sky News AU
12 hours ago
- Sky News AU
‘Whitlam-esque': Zoe McKenzie blasts Labor's divisive tax hike on super accounts, slams Tasmanian opposition for triggering early election
Victorian Liberal MP Zoe McKenzie has lambasted Labor for continuing to advance its plan to hike taxes on superannuation accounts and impose levies on unrealised gains whilst hammering the Tasmanian opposition for sending punters to a winter election. Labor's plan to raise taxes on superannuation accounts over $3 million to 30 per cent and to target unrealised capital gains has sent shockwaves throughout the political and business arena, with financial doyens accusing the government of discarding decades of precedent. The Coalition was previously in talks with the Albanese government to revise certain elements of the legislation, chiefly the concept of taxing unrealised gains, however shadow Treasurer Ted O'Brien officially confirmed on Thursday the LNP would oppose the bill. Yet, former Reserve Bank board members Donald McGauchie and Roger Corbett, in addition to a litany of major Liberal Party donors, have pressed the Coalition to remain at the negotiating table and to secure what it deems crucial exemptions for illiquid assets including farms and small businesses. Ms McKenzie, an outspoken moderate who holds one of the Liberal's last outer-suburban seats, railed against the policy, but did not address if the Coalition would resume talks with Labor to modify the legislation. 'I think this is a terrible piece of policy and a terrible precedent for the future, Labor is effectively saying that they will tax money in your pocket, and you do not yet have this money,' she told Sky News on Saturday. The Member for Flinders echoed criticism from industry magnates in relation to the controversial concept of taxing unrealised gains, stating, 'you may have it in the future, you may not have it in the future, but you will be taxed on it'. 'You may incur a loss in the figure, and you won't get that tax back and that's the principle that we must fight here, because once it's started, it could go anywhere,' indicating that the tax could be extended to a range of other assets including real estate and stocks. 'This is a devilish tax and should be fought by the Coalition parties most stridently, this government is very good at speaking liberal-light in terms of their economic narrative, but it is utterly Whitlam-esque in terms of its impact on the Australian economy'. While the Coalition has vowed to fight the legislation, the bill is expected to pass both houses of parliament unopposed, with the Greens joining with Labor in the Senate despite lobbying for the policy to be levied on those with super accounts over $2 million. 'The point is they're going after money no one yet has, these are paper profits, these are family businesses, these are farms held in super funds that people may well have to liquidate just to pass a putative profit that may not exist when finally realised in years to come," Ms McKenzie said. 'They will need the Greens support in the Senate and as you know, the Greens are pushing to lower that threshold from three million to two million. So, it gives the Australian people a very clear indication of what might happen when Labor and the Greens run the show for the next three years'. The shadow assistant minister then turned her attention to the ongoing political chaos in Tasmania. Liberal Premier Jeremy Rockliff lost a no-confidence motion in parliament on Thursday, with the speaker casting the deciding vote, resulting in the state heading to it's second election in as little as 14 months. Ms McKenzie savaged Tasmanian Labor leader Dean Winter for sending the state to a snap winter poll and argued the opposition parties had collectively torpedoed a popularly elected government. 'I think the Tasmanian people would be very disappointed with what's happened this week, basically holding an elected government hostage, so it looks like they will be going back to a mid-winter election. We've all done them and they're horrendous," she said. 'I'm sure the people of Tasmania will not be grateful for being dragged back to the polls so soon after a federal election and indeed just 14 months after a state election." Tasmanians will have to wait until next Tuesday to find out when they will return to the polls, with the parliament scrambling to draft emergency legislation to fund government services of which are due to be tabled on the same day. Independent MPs including Craig Garland have called on the beleaguered Premier to resign, with Mr Rockliff guaranteeing he would not sell off state-owned assets to pay down debt if he won the election, of which served as a key factor in sparking the political row.
