Nationals call for Senate inquiry into decision to resume US beef imports
Last week it was announced biosecurity controls on US beef would be lifted, including beef sourced from Canada or Mexico and slaughtered in the US.
Nationals leader and Shadow Agriculture Minister David Littleproud says the Coalition wants the Senate inquiry to provide transparency around the decision.
It wants to get cross-party support from the Greens to launch an inquiry by the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee.
Mr Littleproud said the government's decision to allow all US beef imports for the first time since 2019 was about "getting Anthony Albanese a meeting with President Trump without looking at the proper scientific reasons nor process".
He said an inquiry was necessary after it was revealed an Inspector-General of Biosecurity review released in March called for independent scientific advice on import risk assessments.
The Inspector-General of Biosecurity is an independent, statutory officer appointed by the government, a role held by former agriculture veterinarian Lloyd Klumpp.
Dr Klumpp's March review found the federal Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) "should review the role of the scientific advisory group focusing on … expanding the group's role to provide technical oversight for non-regulated import risk analyses".
He also found import risk analyses were "more developed and consistent in plant biosecurity compared to animal biosecurity".
His review noted that if the scientific advisory group provided more high-level technical oversight it would address concerns raised by stakeholders involved with imports and achieve trade outcomes that aligned with the Biosecurity Act, thus safeguarding Australia's biosecurity status.
Mr Littleproud accused the government of ignoring its own independent biosecurity advice, despite DAFF accepting that recommendation.
He said, in a briefing, the government was unable to offer any information about its import protocols or how the department would mitigate biosecurity risk.
"On the day they announced they're going to allow this beef to come in, they had not done the work to provide the [biosecurity] protocol on the way in which that beef could be bought in this country," Mr Littleproud said.
"They could not tell me the traceability model that they would have for these cattle that originated in Mexico," he said.
"That says to me the department is catching up on the [government's] deal."
Labor's Agriculture Minister Julie Collins was contacted for comment.
Over the weekend Prime Minister Anthony Albanese accused the Nationals of politicising biosecurity.
"The agency that looked at this, the department, independently of government, this wasn't a political decision," Mr Albanese said.
"They looked at it [and] said they've satisfied the requirements."
The Greens were contacted for comment. A spokesperson said they're yet to see the proposed inquiry details.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
SBS Australia
an hour ago
- SBS Australia
'A distraction': Palestinians in Australia say statehood recognition isn't enough
For Palestinian-Australian Mussa Hijazi, Australia's announcement that it intends to recognise a Palestinian state is a "distraction" from the realities on the ground in the Palestinian territories. The Canberra-based lawyer, who was born in Australia and grew up in the Occupied West Bank, described Monday's announcement by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as a "symbolic move". "I think the recognition itself is probably important from a symbolic point of view, but to be honest, it's not what we've been calling for the last two years, or indeed for the last 57 years, or for 77 years since 1948," he told SBS News. 'We're not marching for recognition' "We haven't been marching for recognition. We have been marching and calling out for an end to the genocide that is taking place in Palestine." "All this is doing in the meantime is creating a distraction from what is happening on the ground," he said. The Israeli government, backed by the United States, fiercely denies the charge and says it is fighting to defeat Hamas and to bring back Israeli hostages still held in Gaza. The conflict escalated in October 2023 when Hamas militants attacked southern Israel, killing 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostage, according to Israeli tallies. Israel's subsequent military campaign has since killed more than 61,000 people in Gaza, according to the Palestinian enclave's health authorities. When announcing the decision on Monday, Albanese said that recognition of Palestinian statehood would hinge on a guarantee that Hamas, the Palestinian political and militant group that de facto governs Gaza and which Australia has proscribed as a terror group, played no role in its future government. Hijazi said there were "conditions" placed on the recognition that are unlikely to be met, and there were more "meaningful" actions the government could take. "So, apparently, that [recognition] is going to achieve something? However, stopping the supply of weapon parts or armoured steel to Israel, apparently, will not make a difference?" he said. "The reality is, if we and everyone else did that, if we stopped the export of arms to Israel, this would stop." Will recognising Palestinian statehood lead to change on the ground? Dr Jessica Genauer, a senior lecturer in international relations at Flinders University, agreed that the decision to recognise Palestinian statehood was largely symbolic. "This decision is symbolically important, and it indicates a shift in momentum in the international arena around galvanising support to ensure that the humanitarian crisis ongoing in the Gaza Strip is addressed," Genauer told SBS News. While Genauer says the recognition of Palestinian statehood was significant in showing there's an increase in support to end the conflict, she says it won't directly lead to a change in Gaza. "It's significant, but it doesn't have a lot of practical implications," she said. "It's not going to have a mechanism to create an immediate tangible effect on the ground in terms of, for example, a truck being able to get through into the Gaza Strip or a cessation of hostilities." The Australia Palestine Advocacy Network (APAN) said on Monday that the recognition of statehood was being used as a distraction. "Recognition without decisive action is an insult to Palestinians, and nothing but a veneer that allows Israel to continue brutalising Palestinians with no consequences," APAN president Nasser Mashni said. More than 140 of 193 UN member states already recognise Palestine. Source: SBS News "Australia must stop enabling apartheid and genocide by cutting all military ties, imposing sanctions akin to those we've placed on Russia, and standing up for Palestinian self-determination in their historic homeland." But Genauer can't see Australia imposing any of these calls — including sanctions. She says the Albanese government is still taking a centrist approach and is unlikely to impose extra limitations on Israel, especially if other countries are not doing so. "I don't think the Australian government [is] necessarily wanting to take steps that we don't see other partners taking." Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu criticised plans by Australia and other countries to recognise a Palestinian state on Monday. "To have European countries and Australia march into that rabbit hole, just like that, fall right into it and buy this canard is disappointing, and I think it's actually shameful," Netanyahu said, adding that it wouldn't change Israel's position. More than 140 of 193 UN member states already recognise Palestine. Genauer says a public sentiment shift may have also been behind the recognition. "I think that this doesn't represent a massive shift in policy or approach for the Australian government," Genauer said. "The Albanese government is going to follow what they see to be a majority opinion within the Australian domestic population." Australia will recognise a Palestinian state at the 80th session of the UN General Assembly in September. Credit: LUKAS COCH/AAPIMAGE Earlier this month, a poll by DemosAU suggested a shift in Australians' views on Palestinian statehood. The survey of more than 1,000 people found that 45 per cent of respondents supported Australia recognising a Palestinian state before a negotiated peace agreement, with 23 per cent opposed. Levels of support were highest among those aged 18-34 at 57 per cent, while people aged 55 and above were more likely to be opposed, at 28 per cent. It marked an increase in support since May 2024, when a separate poll from the same firm found 35 per cent of Australians supported recognition of a Palestinian state, with 22 per cent opposed. On 3 August, tens of thousands of people marched across Sydney's Harbour Bridge in opposition to the war — Australia's largest protest since it began. Organisers said around 300,000 people participated in the protest, while NSW Police put the figure lower, at 90,000. Pro-Palestinian protesters marched across the Sydney Harbour Bridge earlier this month. Source: AAP / Ayush Kumar / SOPA Images / Sipa USA No real change without UN recognition In order for a country to be formally recognised in the United Nations, it needs to pass through the UN Security Council. The State of Palestine is currently a non-member observer state, a de facto recognition of statehood granted by the General Assembly in 2012. "Even though Australia might recognise Palestine as a state, this is not the same thing as Palestine getting that important international recognition as a state in the United Nations," Genauer said. Should Palestine be formally recognised as a state in the United Nations, it would mean they would have access to channels and mechanisms of support that they wouldn't have as a territory or non-member observer, Genauer says. The move would also come with questions about what the internationally recognised borders of that state would be. "That gets into the heart of the dispute in the entire conflict between Israelis and Palestinians — resolving or addressing that question would be incredibly significant for Palestinians on the ground," Genauer said. The decision would also mean questions about the government would be ignited, including what the governance structures would be and how a centralised government would operate. But there's still a big obstacle in the way of that — the United States. On the UN council, the five countries that are permanent members have veto power: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. That means they can reject any resolution of the Security Council, regardless of the level of support from other members. While Genauer says that four of those countries are likely to let the recognition of Palestinian statehood pass — France, the United Kingdom, China and Russia — the US will likely still veto the vote. In April last year, the US wielded its veto power to block the United Nations from recognising a Palestinian state. It was the sole country of the 15-member council to vote against it — two countries abstained, while the remaining 12 voted in favour of it. But she does say that she can see that shifting in the future, which could lead to formal recognition. "The US is the only country that is applying a veto to that recognition. If there's a change of administration in the United States ... or if there's a real U-turn in policy from the Trump presidency, all the other pieces are in place for Palestine to get recognised as a state. "We are one small, but very important, step away." But despite UN obstacles, Australia's decision still carries weight. "Australia is a very strong and important middle power in the international arena," Genauer said. "The decisions that we make do matter and provide weight and support to an international direction."
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Sue Hickey speaker move shocks Tas parliament
The Liberal Government was blindsided when the Greens and Labor installed Sue Hickey as speaker in 2018
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
Victorian underquoting laws: Expert calls on Allan government to release review
The Victorian Greens said they would this week introduce a bill to parliament requiring the reserve price of a property to be disclosed before auction day, in a bid to stop buyers unwittingly forking out thousands of dollars on inspection reports for homes they can't realistically afford. The REIV is calling on the government to start fresh consultation on how to improve fairness in the property sector. The peak real estate lobby group is also now backing mandatory pre-auction disclosure of reserve prices by sellers, in a significant policy pivot announced on Monday. Premier Jacinta Allan earlier this month. Credit: Eddie Jim 'Reserve price disclosure isn't just backed by consumer advocates, even the Real Estate Institute of Victoria and leading property industry figures support it,' said Greens public and affordable housing spokeswoman Gabrielle de Vietri. 'With the public and industry on board, Labor has no excuse to delay.' Premier Jacinta Allan said she would seek advice on that proposal and also the merits of a model that would result in those selling their home providing prospective buyers with a free pest and building inspection documents. 'We are open to looking at what we can do to make the property market fairer for everyone,' Allan said. She described underquoting as a 'pretty shabby practice, which is why we're cracking down on it and made it illegal'. Enzo Raimondo, pictured in 2014 when he led the REIV. Credit: Fairfax Raimondo said he couldn't disclose the recommendations made by him and his property market review co-author, consumer advocate Carolyn Bond, due to a confidentiality agreement. But he confirmed the 2022 report did include recommendations he believed would reduce the prevalence of underquoting. 'We spent months on it. We interviewed consumers, we interviewed industry groups, we interviewed agents, and there's some, I think, excellent recommendations on the issue of reserve price [disclosure],' he said. 'It's odd that the review, which is meant to assist, hasn't been released … I can only speak for myself and not the other panel members, but I was certainly disappointed that it wasn't released and at least debated openly on what should occur.' When asked if there was any reason not to make the report public, Allan said the report was a cabinet document, and she was more focused on 'acting now, leading the nation in cracking down on illegal underquoting'. Raimondo said the review received fairly consistent feedback from the public that agents were providing price guides that were off the mark. He said while agents would use the excuse that they're not property valuers, they generally worked in the same sector for a long period and should know their market. The use of three comparable properties to justify price guides was being manipulated by agents and the criteria around this needed to be tightened up, Raimondo said. 'In Victoria, it's not a bad system. It's just that it's not being used correctly,' he said. Start the day with a summary of the day's most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
