THE State Government has been forced to delay its proposed Biosecurity Levy until January 1 next year in the face of opposition from livestock industry stakeholders to funding additional animal health programs.
In last week's budget, it was announced the levy would start a year later than the original date with a three-year phase-in period from 2011-2012 to 2013-2014.
The budget figures showed an estimated deficit of $500,000 for the 2010-11 financial year and a budgeted annual deficit of $240,000 for the 2011-2012 year for PIRSA's Biosecurity Cost Recovery from the delay.
It is unclear where this money will come from.
Stakeholders from the sheep, cattle, pig, alpaca and horse industries believe their financial contribution to the State's economy has not been recognised. They also say the public benefit of food safety and food security will not be fully-valued in the independent cost-benefit analysis commissioned by the government.
Stock Journal understands the proposed model calls for close to 100 per cent cost-recovery on previously government-funded animal health programs from industry by 2014.
South Australian Sheep Advisory Group chairman Ian Pfeiffer said the sheep industry remained opposed to a biosecurity fee in any shape or form to recover costs for Biosecurity SA, despite being part of the policy transition group looking at it.
"We would like to think all industries were on a level playing field, but agriculture is not being treated the same," he said.
"Money is being taken away from agriculture to direct revenue to other parts of the State."
Mr Pfeiffer said agriculture provided food security to SA and was a large employer, however because it was regionally-based, the sector was being left out of the mainstream benefits normally delivered by government.
"The Enough is Enough campaign shows that the farming community is at wits end in respect of taking all the hits and financial contributions previously made by government," he said.
"Farmers will buck and say we have had enough and this (Biosecurity Levy) could be the trigger."
Mr Pfeiffer said a mandatory levy put at risk voluntary industry funds, such as the Sheep Industry Fund, which contributed $2 million a year support for animal health programs. It could also compromise future levels of biosecurity.
"If the funds are depleted, industry will have to decide going forward what programs it supports and which are realising market benefits. This opens up the industry to more diseases," he said.
Agriculture Minister Michael O'Brien said the government proposed to introduce the biosecurity levy to parliament later this year after further extensive public consultation with industry stakeholders.
He said independent consultants were being asked in the benefit-cost analysis to identify the beneficiaries of the animal health program, the suggested cost allocation between industry and government and the amount each industry sector should be making as a contribution to the cost of the program. The biosecurity levy is intended to cover the costs of the animal health program which included disease surveillance and reporting, advisory and diagnostic services, emergency disease preparedness and prevention and compliance.
*Full report in Stock Journal, June 16 issue, 2011.
Email a friend