Commonwealth of Australia Explanatory Memoranda Commonwealth of Australia Explanatory Memoranda[Index] [Search] [Download] [Bill] [Help]
2022-2023-2024
THE PARLIAMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
AGRICULTURE (BIOSECURITY PROTECTION) LEVIES BILL 2024
AGRICULTURE (BIOSECURITY PROTECTION) CHARGES BILL 2024
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
(Circulated by authority of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry,
Senator the Hon. Murray Watt)
AGRICULTURE (BIOSECURITY PROTECTION) LEVIES BILL 2024
AGRICULTURE (BIOSECURITY PROTECTION) CHARGES BILL 2024
GENERAL OUTLINE
The Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies Bill 2024 and the Agriculture (Biosecurity
Protection) Charges Bill 2024 (the Imposition Bills) along with the Agriculture (Biosecurity
Protection) Levies and Charges Collection Bill 2024 (the Collection Bill) are a package of
Bills that would provide for the imposition, collection and administration of the new
biosecurity protection levy and charge (the BPL).
The BPL is one component of the larger 2023-24 Budget measure 'Strengthened and
Sustainably Funded Biosecurity System' which would implement the Government's election
commitment to sustainably fund Australia's biosecurity system. The BPL will generate
revenue to contribute around six per cent of the costs of a sustainably funded biosecurity
system. It will supplement much larger contributions from taxpayers and importers, that
between them will contribute more than nine out of every ten dollars needed to fund our
biosecurity system. The Bills enable BPL to be payable by producers of agricultural, forestry
and fisheries goods and products, whether produced for domestic or overseas markets.
Producers derive significant benefits from Australia's biosecurity system, including through
prevention of pests and diseases entering Australia, maximisation of trade opportunities, and
sustainable access to premium overseas markets. Without strong and sustainably funded
biosecurity, our biodiversity would be at risk, jobs would be lost and producers would
experience lower production and higher costs. The BPL would ensure that, in addition to the
large and direct contributions from importers and taxpayers, those that directly benefit from
Australia's strong biosecurity make a modest and direct contribution to ensure the biosecurity
system is sustainably funded every year in the future.
The Imposition Bills would:
• impose a new levy or charge, or enable the imposition of such a levy or charge,
known as the BPL, to be payable by certain producers of agricultural, forestry and
fisheries products within Australia; and
• provide for the rate of BPL to be specified or worked out in accordance with
regulations to ensure that the rate can be set, and where appropriate, be changed to
account for existing circumstances; and
• enable the specification of the relevant levy or charge payer for the BPL; and
• set out other matters relating to how the imposition provisions apply.
CONSULTATION
The development of the biosecurity protection levies legislation has been informed by
extensive consultation with industry groups, current agricultural levy payers and their
collection agents, and the public.
Consultation on this legislation also occurred with relevant Commonwealth agencies during
the development of the Bills, including the Attorney-General's Department, the Department
1
of Finance, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Department of the Prime
Minister and Cabinet and The Treasury.
FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT
The Imposition Bills would provide for a modest six per cent contribution by producers to the
costs of the Commonwealth biosecurity system. The BPL was estimated in the 2023-24
Budget to increase receipts by $153.0 million over the 3 years from 2024-25. This amount
compares to the estimated $2.3 billion contribution from importers and the general public
over those three years.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The Office of Impact Analysis published the Impact Analysis for the Biosecurity Protection
Levy on its website on 12 May 2023 in the document titled Biosecurity sustainable funding
submission.
STATEMENT OF COMPATIBILITY WITH HUMAN RIGHTS
Each Imposition Bill is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or
declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights
(Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.
The full statement of compatibility with human rights for each Imposition Bill is attached to
this explanatory memorandum.
2
ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS AND COMMONLY USED TERMS
BPL Biosecurity Protection Levy
Collection Act Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies
and Charges Collection Act 2024
Charges Act Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection)
Charges Act 2024
Levies Act Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies
Act 2024
Legislation Act Legislation Act 2003
3
AGRICULTURE (BIOSECURITY PROTECTION) LEVIES BILL 2024
NOTES ON CLAUSES
Part 1--Preliminary
Section 1 Short title
1. Section 1 would provide for the short title of the proposed Act to be the Agriculture
(Biosecurity Protection) Levies Act 2024 (the Levies Act).
Section 2 Commencement
2. Section 2 of the proposed Act would provide for the commencement of each
provision of the proposed Act, as set out in the table in subsection 2(1).
3. Item 1 in the table would provide that the whole of the proposed Act will commence
as follows:
• if this Act receives the Royal Assent before 1 July 2024--on 1 July 2024;
• if this Act receives the Royal Assent on or after 1 July 2024--on a single day
to be fixed by Proclamation.
4. However, if the provisions do not commence within the period of 6 months
beginning on the day this Act receives the Royal Assent, they commence on the day
after the end of that period.
5. A note to subsection 2(1) would state that the table relates only to the provisions of
the proposed Act as originally enacted and it will not be amended to deal with any
later amendments of the proposed Act.
6. Subsection 2(2) would provide that any information in column 3 of the table is not
part of the proposed Act. Information may be inserted in column 3 of the table, or
information in it may be edited, in any published version of the proposed Act. This
would allow information to be inserted in column 3 to assist the reader after
commencement.
Section 3 Simplified outline of this Act
Biosecurity protection levies on products or goods subject to an existing levy
7. Section 3 of the proposed Act would set out a simplified outline of the proposed Act.
The simplified outline would explain that the biosecurity protection levy is imposed
on a product or goods on which an existing levy is imposed by:
• the old levy law; or
• regulations made for the purposes of Part 2 or 4 of the Primary Industries
(Excise) Levies Act 2024.
4
8. The regulations would set out the rate of the BPL. The BPL would generally be
payable by the person liable to pay the existing levy.
Other biosecurity protection levies
9. The outline would further explain that regulations may also impose a biosecurity
protection levy in relation to:
• animal products, plant products, fungus products or algal products that are
produce of a primary industry; or
• goods that are for use in the production or preparation of nursery products for
sale or for use in the commercial production of other goods.
10. The regulations would also set out:
• any exemptions from the biosecurity protection levy; and
• the rate of the biosecurity protection levy; and
• the person who is liable to pay the biosecurity protection levy (the levy payer).
Section 4 Definitions
11. Section 4 of the proposed Act would provide the definitions used in the proposed
Act.
Term Definition
algae means macroalgae, microalgae or cyanobacteria, and
includes seaweeds. This definition would also include the
singular of algae which is "alga".
algal product means an alga, or any part of an alga, or anything produced
by an alga, or anything wholly or principally produced
from, or wholly or principally derived from, an alga.
animal means any member, alive or dead, of the animal kingdom
(other than a human being).
animal product means an animal, or any part of an animal, or anything
produced by an animal, or anything wholly or principally
produced from, or wholly or principally derived from, an
animal.
aquaculture means propagating, rearing, keeping or breeding aquatic
vertebrates or aquatic invertebrates.
5
biosecurity means biosecurity protection levy imposed by Part 2 and
protection levy biosecurity protection levy imposed by regulations made for
the purposes of Part 3.
existing levy This would be a signpost definition to draw the reader's
provision attention to subsection 7(1) which relates to the imposition
of biosecurity protection levy.
fishing means the catching, capturing or harvesting of aquatic
vertebrates or aquatic invertebrates. This term has been
defined to specifically include all aquatic animals obtained
in one of the specified ways.
forest operations means the growing, harvesting or processing of wood.
fungus means any member, alive or dead, of the fungi kingdom,
and includes yeasts, mushrooms and truffles. This definition
would also include the plural of fungus which is "fungi".
fungus product means a fungus, or any part of a fungus, anything produced
by a fungus, or anything wholly or principally produced
from, or wholly or principally derived from, a fungus.
nursery products includes trees, shrubs, plants, seeds, bulbs, corms, tubers,
propagating material and plant tissue cultures, grown for
ornamental purposes or for producing fruits, vegetables,
nuts or cut flowers and foliage.
old levy law means the following:
(a) the Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Act 1999
(including that Act as continued in operation under
item 2 of Schedule 4 to the Primary Industries
(Consequential Amendments and Transitional
Provisions) Act 2024);
(b) regulations made under the Primary Industries
(Excise) Levies Act 1999 (including those
regulations as continued in operation under that
item);
(c) the National Residue Survey (Excise) Levy Act 1998
(including that Act as continued in operation under
that item).
plant means any member, alive or dead, of the plant kingdom.
plant product means a plant, or any part of a plant, or anything produced
by a plant, or anything wholly or principally produced from,
or wholly or principally derived from, a plant.
produce of a means products that result from any of the following:
primary industry (a) agriculture or the cultivation of land;
6
(b) the maintenance of animals for commercial
purposes;
(c) soilless growing systems, including hydroponics,
aeroponics and aquaponics;
(d) controlled environment cropping, including
vertical farming, indoor farming and protected
cropping;
(e) forest operations;
(f) fishing;
(g) aquaculture;
(h) hunting or trapping;
(i) picking or harvesting from the wild;
(j) horticulture;
(k) viticulture;
(l) the cultivation of fungi or algae;
(m) any other primary industry activity.
product means an animal, plant, fungus or algal product, whether or
not any operations have been performed in relation to the
product.
property of any kind This would be a signpost definition to draw the reader's
belonging to a State attention to subsection 13(2).
Secretary means the Secretary of the Department.
Section 5 Crown to be bound
12. Section 5 of the proposed Act would provide that the Act would bind the Crown in
right of each of the States, of the Australian Capital Territory and of the Northern
Territory. However, it would not bind the Crown in the right of the Commonwealth.
Section 6 Application of this Act in external Territories
13. Subsection 6(1) of the proposed Act would provide that subject to subsection (2),
this Act and the regulations do not extend to the external Territories.
14. Subsection 6(2) would provide that the regulations may extend this Act, and any
provisions of the regulations, to an external Territory that is prescribed by the
regulations. This would enable the regulations to extend the Act and any provisions
of the regulations to external Territories on a case-by-case basis.
7
Part 2--Biosecurity protection levies on products or goods subject to an existing levy
Overview
15. Part 2 of the proposed Act would impose BPL on products or goods in relation to
which an existing levy is imposed by an existing levy provision.
Section 7 Imposition of biosecurity protection levy
16. Subsection 7(1) of the proposed Act would provide that the biosecurity protection
levy is imposed on a product or goods, or on a transaction, act or thing in relation to
a product or goods, if:
• levy on the product or goods, or on the transaction, act or thing in relation to
the product or goods, is imposed by a provision (the existing levy provision) of:
o the old levy law; or
o regulations made for the purposes of Part 2 or 4 of the Primary
Industries (Excise) Levies Act 2024; and
• the existing levy provision is prescribed by regulations made under this Act for
the purposes of this paragraph.
17. The effect of subsection 7(1) would be to impose BPL on products or goods, or on a
transaction, act or thing in relation to a product or goods subject to an existing levy
under the old levy law (as defined in section 4 of the proposed Act); or regulations
made for the purposes of Part 2 or 4 of the Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Act
2024; and the existing levy provision prescribed by regulations made under this Act.
18. Subsection 7(1) would clarify that if BPL is imposed on a product or goods, or on a
transaction, act or thing in relation to a product or goods, it would be imposed in
accordance with the existing levy provision, unless prescribed differently by
regulations made under subsection 7(3).
19. Subsection 7(2) would provide that subsection 7(1) applies separately in relation to
each existing levy provision.
20. Subsection 7(3) would provide that this section does not apply in relation to an
existing levy provision to the extent prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of
this subsection.
21. Section 4 would define the old levy law as the Primary Industries (Excise) Levies
Act 1999 (including that Act as continued in operation under item 2 of Schedule 4 to
the Primary Industries (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions)
Act 2024; regulations made under the Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Act 1999
(including those regulations as continued in operation under that item); and the
National Residue Survey (Excise) Levy Act 1998 (including that Act as continued in
operation under that item).
8
Duty of excise
22. Subsection 7(4) would provide that this section would impose biosecurity protection
levy only so far as that levy is a duty of excise within the meaning of section 55 of
the Constitution.
23. The purpose of section 7 would be to ensure that a BPL would be imposed, where
appropriate, on products or goods subject to a levy under an existing levy provision;
and where the existing levy provision would be prescribed by regulations made
under this Act. The regulations would be a disallowable legislative instrument under
the Legislation Act, which would ensure appropriate Parliamentary oversight. The
regulations would also not be exempt from sunsetting under that Act.
24. The levy on the product or goods, or on the transaction, act or thing in relation to a
product or goods, would be imposed by an existing levy provision which includes
the old levy law; or regulations made for the purposes of Part 2 or 4 of the Primary
Industries (Excise) Levies Act 2024. The Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Act
2024 is due to commence on 1 January 2025.
9
Part 3--Other biosecurity protection levies
Overview
25. Part 3 of the proposed Act would authorise the regulations made under the Act to
impose BPL in relation to one or more specified products or goods in the
circumstances prescribed by the regulations.
Section 8 Imposition of biosecurity protection levy
Products that are produce of a primary industry
26. Subsection 8(1) of the proposed Act would provide that the regulations may impose
a biosecurity protection levy in relation to one or more specified products in the
circumstances prescribed by the regulations.
27. A note to subsection 8(1) would explain that products may be specified by name, by
inclusion in a specified class, or in any other way.
28. Subsection 8(2) would provide that the products must be produce of a primary
industry.
Goods connected with nursery products
29. Subsection 8(3) would provide that the regulations may impose a biosecurity
protection levy in relation to one or more specified goods:
• that are for use in the production or preparation of nursery products:
o for sale; or
o for use in the commercial production of other goods; and
• in the circumstances prescribed by the regulations.
30. A note to subsection 8(3) would explain that goods may be specified by name, by
inclusion in a specified class, or in any other way.
Duty of excise
31. Subsection 8(4) would clarify that section 8 authorises the imposition of a
biosecurity protection levy only so far as that levy is a duty of excise within the
meaning of section 55 of the Constitution.
32. Section 8 would provide an alternative means to impose BPL in relation to a product
or goods than imposition under section 7. Section 8 would permit the regulations to
impose a BPL on products or goods that may or may not be subject to an existing
levy under the Primary Industries legislation.
10
33. The regulations would be a disallowable legislative instrument under the Legislation
Act, which would ensure appropriate Parliamentary oversight. The regulations
would also not be exempt from sunsetting under that Act.
Section 9 Exemptions from biosecurity protection levy
34. Section 9 of the proposed Act would provide for the regulations made under the
proposed Act to specify exemptions from a BPL under Part 3.
35. The effect of this section would be to allow the regulations to provide for
circumstances under which a BPL would not be imposed in relation to one or more
specified products or goods. For example, an exemption may be applied to a BPL in
circumstances where a producer is growing less than a certain amount of product.
Section 10 Relationship with Part 2
36. Section 10 of the proposed Act would provide that Part 2 does not limit this Part.
37. The purpose of section 10 would be to clarify that section 7 is not the only means by
which BPL may be imposed in relation to a product or goods that is subject to the
imposition of a levy under the Primary Industries legislation. Section 8 would also
enable the imposition of a BPL in relation to such a product or goods.
38. Parts 2 and 3 of the proposed Act would work together to enable the most efficient
and effective imposition of the BPL, whether by reference to existing levy
provisions or by establishing entirely new imposition arrangements.
11
Part 4--Rate of biosecurity protection levy
Overview
39. Part 4 of the proposed Act would provide for matters relating to the rate of a BPL.
Section 11 Rate of biosecurity protection levy
40. Subsection 11(1) of the proposed Act would provide that the rate of a biosecurity
protection levy is the rate specified in, or worked out in accordance with, the
regulations. Section 11 would operate in conjunction with section 18, which would
contain the regulation-making power. It is intended that the regulations would
generally prescribe the rate of a BPL.
41. Subsection 11(2) would provide that different rates of the same biosecurity
protection levy may be prescribed by the regulations for different kinds of products
or goods. This would allow for different rates of BPL to be imposed on individual
products or goods.
42. Subsection 11(3) would clarify that subsection 11(2) does not limit the operation of
subsection 11(1), which provides that the rate of a levy imposed under Part 2 or 3 is
the rate specified in, or worked out in accordance with, the regulations made under
the Act.
43. Subsection 11(4) would provide that subsection 11(2) does not limit the operation of
subsection 33(3A) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, which relates to where an Act
confers a power to make, among other instruments, regulations, with respect to
particular matters.
44. Subsection 11(5) would provide that the rate of a biosecurity protection levy may be
expressed to be nil; or zero; or $0 or 0 cents per unit of measure; or 0% of the sale
price of a product or goods. This would allow for PBL to be imposed with a rate set
to nil or zero if required. It would also provide certainty for industry and the
Commonwealth that a mechanism to reduce the rate of BPL to nil or zero is
available. A reason for setting the BPL rate to nil could include the cost of collection
of the BPL exceeding the revenue raised from the BPL.
12
Part 5--Levy payer
Overview
45. Part 5 of the proposed Act would provide for the levy payer.
Section 12 Levy payer
Biosecurity protection levy imposed by Part 2
46. Subsection 12(1) of the proposed Act would provide that subject to subsection (2), a
biosecurity protection levy imposed by Part 2 is payable by the person liable to pay
the levy imposed by the existing levy provision.
47. Subsection 12(2) would provide that in relation to a particular biosecurity protection
levy, the regulations may prescribe the levy is payable by the person prescribed by
the regulations.
Biosecurity protection levy imposed by regulations made for the purposes of Part 3
48. Subsection 12(3) would provide that a biosecurity protection levy imposed by
regulations made for the purposes of Part 3 is payable by the person prescribed by
the regulations.
49. Allowing the regulations to prescribe the BPL payer for each levy would enable
arrangements to be made for the relevant levy to be paid by the most appropriate
person in the circumstances. For example, the levy payer could be the owner of the
good or product at a point in time or the grower of the product, or another relevant
person in the industry.
13
Part 6--Other matters
Overview
50. Part 6 of the proposed Act would provide for other matters, including: that the Act
would not impose levy on State property; the exclusion of net GST from the price of
products or goods or amounts paid for products or goods; the treatment of
partnerships, trusts and unincorporated bodies or associations; and the making of
regulations under the proposed Act.
Section 13 Act does not impose levy on property of a State
51. Section 13 of the proposed Act would provide that this Act does not authorise the
imposition of a tax on property of any kind belonging to a State.
52. Subsection 13(2) would provide that property of any kind belonging to a State has
the same meaning as in section 114 of the Constitution. Section 114 of the
Constitution provides that the Commonwealth may not impose any tax on property
of any kind belonging to a State.
53. Subsection 13(3) would provide that for the purposes of this section, assume that a
reference in section 114 of the Constitution to a State includes a reference to the
Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory.
54. The effect of section 13 would be that the Act would not impose a tax on property of
any kind belonging to a State (including the Australian Capital Territory and the
Northern Territory) to ensure the Act is not inconsistent with section 114 of the
Constitution.
Section 14 Net GST not included in price of product or goods or amount paid for
product or goods
55. Section 14 of the proposed Act would provide a contrary intention to section 177-12
of the A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 (GST Act). Subsection
177-12(1) of the GST Act provides that, in any Act, unless the contrary intention
appears, a reference to a price relating to a supply, or a proposed supply, is taken to
include the net GST (if any) that is, or would be, payable by an entity making the
supply.
56. This section would ensure that BPL is not paid on amounts of GST. For example, if
the sale price of a product was $4.40 including GST, the BPL would be calculated
on a sale price of $4.00 as the GST exclusive value.
Section 15 Treatment of partnerships
57. Subsection 15(1) of the proposed Act would provide that the Act and the regulations
apply to a partnership as if it were a person, but with the changes set out in this
section.
14
58. Subsection 15(2) would provide that an obligation that would otherwise be imposed
on the partnership, by this Act or the regulations, is imposed on each partner instead,
but may be discharged by any of the partners.
59. Subsection 15(3) would provide that if this Act or the regulations would otherwise
permit something to be done by the partnership, the thing may be done by one or
more of the partners on behalf of the partnership.
60. Subsection 15(4) would provide that for the purposes of this Act and the regulations,
a change in the composition of a partnership would not affect the continuity of the
partnership.
61. Under this section, an obligation to pay BPL that would otherwise be imposed on a
partnership would instead be imposed on each partner in the partnership, and any of
the partners can discharge that obligation by paying the amount of BPL.
Section 16 Treatment of trusts
62. Subsection 16(1) of the proposed Act would provide that the Act and the regulations
apply to a trust as if it were a person, but with the changes set out in this section.
Trusts with a single trustee
63. Subsection 16(2) would provide that if the trust has a single trustee, an obligation
that would otherwise be imposed on the trust by this Act or the regulations is
imposed on the trustee instead; and if this Act or the regulations would otherwise
permit something to be done by the trust, the thing may be done by the trustee.
Trusts with multiple trustees
64. Subsection 16(3) would provide that if the trust has 2 or more trustees, an obligation
that would otherwise be imposed on the trust by this Act or the regulations is
imposed on each trustee instead but may be discharged by any of the trustees; and if
this Act or the regulations would otherwise permit something to be done by the trust,
the thing may be done by one or more of the trustees on behalf of the trust.
65. Under this section, an obligation to pay BPL that would otherwise be imposed on a
trust would be imposed on the trustee or on each of the trustees of the trust instead.
The trustee or any one or more of the trustees can discharge that obligation by
paying the amount of BPL.
Section 17 Treatment of unincorporated bodies or associations
66. Subsection 17(1) of the proposed Act would provide that this Act and the regulations
apply to an unincorporated body or association as if it were a person, but with the
changes set out in this section.
67. Subsection 17(2) would provide that an obligation that would otherwise be imposed
on the body or association by this Act or the regulations is imposed on each member
of the body's or association's committee of management instead, but may be
discharged by any of the members.
15
68. Subsection 17(3) would provide that if this Act or the regulations would otherwise
permit something to be done by the body or association, the thing may be done by
one or more of the members of the body's or association's committee of
management on behalf of the body or association.
69. Under this section, an obligation to pay BPL that would otherwise be imposed on an
unincorporated body or association would be imposed on each member of the body's
or association's committee of management instead. Any one or more members of the
body's or association's committee of management can discharge that obligation by
paying the amount of BPL.
Section 18 Making of regulations
70. Section 18 of the proposed Act would enable the Governor-General to make
regulations prescribing matters: required or permitted by the Act to be prescribed by
the regulations; or necessary or convenient to be prescribed for carrying out or
giving effect to the Act.
71. The Act would establish a framework that provides for BPL to be imposed in
relation to different products and goods by the regulations. Due to the number of
products or goods on which BPL would be imposed, it would be necessary and
appropriate for certain details of levy rates to be included in the regulations rather
than in the Act.
72. By providing for certain BPL settings to be located in the regulations, rather than
split between the Act and the regulations, the proposed Act would increase
accessibility for industry in understanding BPL settings and would provide the
necessary flexibility for rates of BPL to be adjusted where necessary and
appropriate.
73. The regulations would be a disallowable legislative instrument under the Legislation
Act, which would ensure appropriate Parliamentary oversight. The regulations
would also not be exempt from sunsetting under that Act.
Other instruments
74. Subsection 18(2) would provide that the regulations may make provision in relation
to a matter by conferring on the Minister or the Secretary a power to make a
legislative instrument.
75. It is considered appropriate to enable the regulations to confer a power to make
legislative instruments on the Minister or the Secretary to allow for matters of detail
that are subject to frequent change to be included in other legislative instruments.
Incorporation of other instruments
76. Subsection 18(3) would provide that despite subsection 14(2) of the Legislation
Act 2003, the regulations may make provision in relation to a matter by applying,
adopting or incorporating, with or without modification, any matter contained in an
instrument or other writing as in force or existing from time to time.
16
77. Subsection 14(2) of the Legislation Act 2003 provides that, unless the contrary
intention appears, a legislative instrument may not make provision in relation to a
matter by applying, adopting, or incorporating any matter contained in an instrument
or other writing as in force or existing from time to time.
78. Subsection 18(3) would therefore provide a contrary intention to subsection 14(2) of
the Legislation Act. That is, the incorporation of certain documents by reference
would not be limited to the instrument or other writing as at the date of
incorporation.
79. It is considered appropriate to enable the incorporation of documents as they exist
from time to time because the documents that would be referred to may include
technical reference materials or production standards that are updated as required.
80. It is intended that where the regulations would incorporate such documents, they
would either be freely or publicly available, or they would be documents required in
the ordinary course of doing business in the particular industry. For example, the tea
tree oil levy is imposed with reference to the ISO standard for tea tree oil production.
In Australia, industry practice requires tea tree oil to conform to this standard, so
access to the standard is already an industry requirement.
81. In order to comply with paragraph 15J(2)(c) of the Legislation Act, the explanatory
statements for the regulations that apply, adopt or incorporate any matter contained
in an instrument or other writing as in force or existing from time to time would
contain a description of the relevant incorporated material and indicate how it may
be obtained.
No limit on subsection (1)
82. Subsection 18(4) would provide that subsections (2) and (3) do not limit subsection
(1) (which would enable the Governor-General to make regulations under the
proposed Act).
17
AGRICULTURE (BIOSECURITY PROTECTION) CHARGES BILL 2024
NOTES ON CLAUSES
Part 1--Preliminary
Section 1 Short title
1. This section would provide for the short title of the proposed Act to be the
Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Charges Act 2024 (the Charges Act).
Section 2 Commencement
2. Section 2 would provide for the commencement of each provision of the proposed
Act, as set out in the table in subsection 2(1).
3. Item 1 in the table would provide that the whole of the proposed Act commences as
follows:
• if this Act receives the Royal Assent before 1 July 2024-- on 1 July 2024;
• if this Act receives the Royal Assent on or after 1 July 2024-- on a single day
to be fixed by Proclamation.
4. However, if the provisions do not commence within the period of 6 months
beginning on the day this Act receives the Royal Assent, they commence on the day
after the end of that period.
5. A note to subsection 2(1) would state that the table relates only to the provisions of
the proposed Act as originally enacted and it will not be amended to deal with any
later amendments of the proposed Act.
6. Subsection 2(2) would provide that any information in column 3 of the table is not
part of the proposed Act. Information may be inserted in column 3 of the table, or
information in it may be edited, in any published version of the proposed Act. This
would allow information to be inserted in column 3 to assist the reader after
commencement.
Section 3 Simplified outline of this Act
Biosecurity protection charges on products subject to an existing charge
7. Section 3 would set out a simplified outline of the proposed Act. The simplified
outline would explain that the biosecurity protection charge is imposed on a product
on which existing charge is imposed by:
• the old charge law; or
• regulations made for the purposes of Part 2 of the Primary Industries
(Customs) Charges Act 2023.
18
8. The regulations would set out rate of the BPL. The BPL is generally payable by the
person liable to pay the existing charge.
Other biosecurity protection charges
9. The outline would further explain that regulations may also impose biosecurity
protection charge in relation to animal products, plant products, fungus products or
algal products that are produce of a primary industry.
10. The regulations would also set out:
• any exemptions from the biosecurity protection charge; and
• the rate of the biosecurity protection charge; and
• the person who is liable to pay the biosecurity protection charge (the charge
payer).
Section 4 Definitions
11. Section 4 would provide the definitions used in the proposed Act.
Term Definition
algae means macroalgae, microalgae or cyanobacteria, and
includes seaweeds.
This definition would also include the singular of algae
which is "alga".
algal product means an alga, or any part of an alga, or anything
produced by an alga, or anything wholly or principally
produced from, or wholly or principally derived from, an
alga.
animal means any member, alive or dead, of the animal kingdom
(other than a human being).
animal product means an animal, or any part of an animal, or anything
produced by an animal, or anything wholly or principally
produced from, or wholly or principally derived from, an
animal.
aquaculture means propagating, rearing, keeping or breeding aquatic
vertebrates or aquatic invertebrates.
biosecurity protection means biosecurity protection charge imposed by Part 2;
charge and biosecurity protection charge imposed by regulations
made for the purposes of Part 3.
19
existing charge This would be a signpost definition to draw the reader's
provision attention to subsection 7(1) which is the imposition of
biosecurity protection charge.
fishing means the catching, capturing or harvesting of aquatic
vertebrates or aquatic invertebrates. This term has been
defined to specifically include all aquatic animals obtained
in one of the specified ways.
forest operations means the growing, harvesting or processing of wood.
fungus means any member, alive or dead, of the fungi kingdom,
and includes yeasts, mushrooms and truffles. This
definition would also include the plural of fungus which is
"fungi".
fungus product means a fungus, or any part of a fungus, or anything
produced by a fungus, or anything wholly or principally
produced from, or wholly or principally derived from, a
fungus.
old charge law means the following:
(a) the Primary Industries (Customs) Charges Act
1999 (including that Act as continued in operation
under item 2 of Schedule 4 to the Primary
Industries (Consequential Amendments and
Transitional Provisions) Act 2024);
(b) regulations made under the Primary Industries
(Customs) Charges Act 1999 (including those
regulations as continued in operation under that
item);
(c) the National Residue Survey (Customs) Charges
Act 1998 (including that Act as continued in
operation under that item).
plant means any member, alive or dead, of the plant kingdom.
plant product means a plant, or any part of a plant, or anything produced
by a plant, or anything wholly or principally produced
from, or wholly or principally derived from, a plant.
produce of a primary means products that result from any of the following:
industry (a) agriculture or the cultivation of land;
(b) the maintenance of animals for commercial
purposes;
(c) soilless growing systems, including hydroponics,
aeroponics and aquaponics;
(d) controlled environment cropping, including vertical
farming, indoor farming and protected cropping;
(e) forest operations;
20
(f) fishing;
(g) aquaculture;
(h) hunting or trapping;
(i) picking or harvesting from the wild;
(j) horticulture;
(k) viticulture;
(l) the cultivation of fungi or algae;
(m) any other primary industry activity.
product means an animal, plant, fungus or algal product, whether
or not any operations have been performed in relation to
the product.
property of any kind This would be a signpost definition to draw reader's
belonging to a State attention to subsection 13(2).
Secretary means the Secretary of the Department
Section 5 Crown to be bound
12. Section 5 of the proposed Act would provide that the Act binds the Crown in right of
each of the States, of the Australian Capital Territory and of the Northern Territory.
However, it would not bind the Crown in right of the Commonwealth.
Section 6 Application of this Act in external Territories
13. Subsection 6(1) of the proposed Act would provide that subject to subsection (2),
this Act and the regulations made under the Act do not automatically extend to the
external Territories.
14. Subsection 6(2) would provide that the regulations may extend this Act, and any
provisions of the regulations, to an external Territory that is prescribed by the
regulations. This would enable the regulations to extend the Act and any provisions
of the regulations to external Territories on a case-by-case basis.
15. Subsection 6(3) would provide that each biosecurity protection charge does not
apply to products exported to an external Territory.
21
Part 2--Biosecurity protection charges on products subject to an existing charge
Overview
16. Part 2 of the proposed Act would impose BPL on a product that is exported from
Australia, or on the export of a product from Australia, on which an existing charge
is imposed by an existing charge provision.
Section 7 Imposition of biosecurity protection charge
17. Subsection 7(1) of the proposed Act would provide that the biosecurity protection
charge is imposed on a product that is exported from Australia, or on the export of a
product from Australia, if:
• charge on the product that is exported from Australia, or on the export of the
product from Australia, is imposed by a provision (the existing charge
provision) of:
o the old charge law; or
o regulations made for the purposes of Part 2 of the Primary Industries
(Customs) Charges Act 2024; and
• the existing charge provision is prescribed by regulations made under this Act
for the purposes of this paragraph.
18. The effect of subsection 7(1) is to impose the BPL on products or export subject to
an existing charge under the old charge law (as defined in section 4 of the proposed
Act) or regulations made for the purposes of Part 2 of the Primary Industries
(Customs) Charges Act 2024 if the existing charge provision is prescribed by
regulations made under this Act.
19. Subsection 7(1) would clarify that if BPL is imposed on products or export, it would
be imposed in accordance with the existing charge provision, unless prescribed
differently by regulations made under subsection 7(3).
20. Subsection 7(2) would provide that subsection (1) applies separately in relation to
each existing charge provision.
21. Subsection 7(3) would provide that section 7 does not apply in relation to an existing
charge provision to the extent prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of this
subsection.
22. Section 4 would define the old charge law as the Primary Industries (Customs)
Charges Act 1999 (including that Act as continued in operation under item 2 of
Schedule 4 to the Primary Industries (Consequential Amendments and Transitional
Provisions) Act 2024; regulations made under the Primary Industries (Customs)
Charges Act 1999 (including those regulations as continued in operation under that
22
item); and the National Residue Survey (Customs) Charges Act 1998 (including that
Act as continued in operation under that item).
Duty of customs
23. Subsection 7(4) would provide that section 7 imposes biosecurity protection charge
only so far as that charge is a duty of customs within the meaning of section 55 of
the Constitution.
24. The purpose of section 7 would be to ensure that a BPL would be imposed, where
appropriate, on products or export subject to a charge under an existing charge
provision; and where the existing charge provision would be prescribed by
regulations made under this Act. The regulations would be a disallowable legislative
instrument under the Legislation Act, which would ensure appropriate Parliamentary
oversight. The regulations would also not be exempt from sunsetting under that Act.
25. The charge on the product that is exported from Australia, or on the export of the
product from Australia would be imposed if charge is imposed by an existing charge
provision which includes the old charge law; or regulations made for the purposes of
Part 2 of the Primary Industries (Customs) Charges Act 2024 and the existing
charge provision is prescribed by regulations made under this Act. The Primary
Industries (Customs) Charges Act 2024 is due to commence on 1 January 2025.
23
Part 3--Other biosecurity protection charges
26. Part 3 of the proposed Act would authorise the regulations made under the Act to
impose BPL in relation to one or more specified products in the circumstances
prescribed by the regulations.
Section 8 Imposition of biosecurity protection charge
27. Subsection 8(1) of the proposed Act would provide that the regulations may impose
a biosecurity protection charge in relation to one or more specified products in the
circumstances prescribed by the regulations.
28. A note to subsection 8(1) would explain that products may be specified by name, by
inclusion in a specified class, or in any other way.
29. Subsection 8(2) would provide that the products must be produce of a primary
industry.
No biosecurity protection charge on imported products
30. Subsection 8(3) would provide that the regulations must not impose a biosecurity
protection charge on the import of products into Australia.
Duty of customs
31. Subsection 8(4) would clarify that section 8 authorises the imposition of a
biosecurity protection charge only so far as that charge is a duty of customs within
the meaning of section 55 of the Constitution.
32. Section 8 would provide an alternative means to impose BPL in relation to a product
than imposition under section 7. Section 8 would permit the regulations to impose
BPL on specified products that may or may not be subject to an existing charge
under Primary Industries legislation.
33. The regulations would be a disallowable legislative instrument under the Legislation
Act, which would ensure appropriate Parliamentary oversight. The regulations
would also not be exempt from sunsetting under that Act.
Section 9 Exemptions from biosecurity protection charge
34. This section would provide that the regulations may provide for exemptions from a
biosecurity protection charge under Part 3.
35. This section would allow the regulations to provide for circumstances under which a
BPL would not be imposed in relation to one or more specified products. For
example, an exemption may be applied to BPL in circumstances where a producer is
growing less than a certain amount of product.
24
Section 10 Relationship with Part 2
36. Section 10 would provide that Part 2 does not limit the operation of this Part.
37. The purpose of section 10 would be to clarify that section 7 is not the only means by
which BPL may be imposed in relation to a product or export that is subject to the
imposition of a charge under the Primary Industries legislation. Section 8 may also
enable the imposition of a BPL in relation to such a product.
38. Parts 2 and 3 of the proposed Act would work together to enable the most efficient
and effective imposition of the BPL, whether by reference to existing charge
provisions or by establishing entirely new imposition arrangements.
25
Part 4--Rate of biosecurity protection charge
Overview
39. Part 4 of the proposed Act would provide for matters relating to the rate of a BPL.
Section 11 Rate of biosecurity protection charge
40. Subsection 11(1) would provide that the rate of a biosecurity protection charge is the
rate specified in, or worked out in accordance with, the regulations. Section 11(1)
would operate in conjunction with section 18, which would provide for the making
of regulations. It is intended that the regulations would generally prescribe the
methodology used to determine the rate of BPL.
41. Subsection 11(2) would provide that different rates of the same biosecurity
protection charge may be prescribed by the regulations for different kinds of
products. This would allow specific BPL charge rates to be set for individual
products.
42. Subsection 11(3) would clarify that subsection 11(2) does not limit the operation of
subsection 11(1), which would provide that the rate of a biosecurity protection
charge imposed is the rate specified in, or worked out in accordance with, the
regulations.
43. Subsection 11(4) would provide that subsection (2) does not limit subsection 33(3A)
of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, which relates to where an Act confers a power to
make, among other instruments, regulations, with respect to particular matters.
44. Subsection 11(5) would provide that the rate of a biosecurity protection charge, may
be expressed to be nil; or zero; or $0 or 0 cents per unit of measure; or 0% of the sale
price of a product or goods. This would allow for BPL to be imposed with a rate set
to nil or zero if required. It would also provide certainty for industry and the
Commonwealth that a mechanism to reduce the rate of the BPL to nil or zero is
available. A reason for setting a BPL rate to nil could be the cost of collection of the
BPL exceeding the revenue raised from the BPL.
Part 5--Charge payer
Overview
45. Part 5 of the proposed Act would provide for the charge payer.
Section 12 Charge payer
Biosecurity protection charge imposed by Part 2
46. Subsection 12(1) of the proposed Act would provide that subject to subsection (2), a
biosecurity protection charge imposed Part 2 is payable by the person liable to pay
the charge imposed by the existing charge provision.
26
47. Subsection 12(2) would provide that in relation to a particular biosecurity protection
charge, the regulations may prescribe the charge is payable by the person prescribed
by the regulations.
Biosecurity protection charge imposed by regulations made for the purposes of Part 3
48. Subsection 12(3) would provide that a biosecurity protection charge imposed by
regulations made for the purposes of Part 3 is payable by the person prescribed by
the regulations.
49. Allowing the regulations to prescribe the charge payer for each BPL charge would
enable the relevant charge to be paid by the most appropriate person in the
circumstances. For example, the charge payer could be the owner of the good or
product at a point in time, or the grower of the product, or another relevant person in
the industry.
27
Part 6--Other matters
Overview
50. Part 6 of the proposed Act would provide for other matters, including that: the Act
would not impose charge on State property; the exclusion of net GST from the price
of products or goods or amounts paid for products or goods; the treatment of
partnerships, trusts and unincorporated bodies or associations; and the making of
regulations under the Act.
Section 13 Act does not impose charge on property of a State
51. Subsection 13(1) of the proposed Act would provide that this Act does not authorise
the imposition of a tax on property of any kind belonging to a State.
52. Subsection 13(2) would provide that property of any kind belonging to a State has
the same meaning as in section 114 of the Constitution. Section 114 of the
Constitution provides that the Commonwealth may not impose any tax on property
of any kind belonging to a State.
53. Subsection 13(3) would provide that for the purposes of this section, assume that a
reference in section 114 of the Constitution to a State includes a reference to the
Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory.
54. The effect of section 13 would be that the Act would not impose a tax on property of
any kind belonging a State (including the Australian Capital Territory and the
Northern Territory) to ensure that the Act is not inconsistent with section 114 of the
Constitution.
Section 14 Net GST not included in the price of product or goods or amount paid
for product or goods
55. Section 14 would provide a contrary intention to section 177-12 of the A New Tax
System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 (GST Act). Subsection 177-12(1) of the
GST Act provides that, in any Act, unless the contrary intention appears, a reference
to a price relating to a supply, or a proposed supply, is taken to include the net GST
(if any) that is, or would be, payable by an entity making the supply.
56. This section would ensure that BPL is not paid on amounts of GST. For example, if
the sale price of a product was $4.40 including GST, the BPL would be calculated
on a sale price of $4.00 as the GST exclusive value.
Section 15 Treatment of partnerships
57. Subsection 15(1) of the proposed Act would provide that this Act and the regulations
apply to a partnership as if it were a person, but with the changes set out in this
section.
58. Subsection 15(2) would provide that an obligation that would otherwise be imposed
on the partnership by this Act or the regulations is imposed on each partner instead
but may be discharged by any of the partners.
28
59. Subsection 15(3) would provide that if this Act or the regulations would otherwise
permit something to be done by the partnership, the thing may be done by one or
more of the partners on behalf of the partnership.
60. Subsection 15(4) would provide that for the purposes of this Act and the regulations,
a change in the composition of a partnership would not affect the continuity of the
partnership.
61. Under this section, an obligation to pay BPL that would otherwise be imposed on a
partnership would instead be imposed on each partner in the partnership, and any of
the partners could discharge that obligation by paying the amount of BPL.
Section 16 Treatment of trusts
62. Subsection 16(1) of the proposed Act would provide that this Act and the regulations
apply to a trust as if it were a person, but with the changes set out in this section.
Trust with a single trustee
63. Subsection 16(2) would provide that if the trust has a single trustee, an obligation
that would otherwise be imposed on the trust by this Act or the regulations is
imposed on the trustee instead; and if this Act or the regulations would otherwise
permit something to be done by the trust, the thing may be done by the trustee.
Trusts with multiple trustees
64. Subsection 16(3) would provide that if the trust has 2 or more trustees an obligation
that would otherwise be imposed on the trust by this Act or the regulations is
imposed on each trustee instead but may be discharged by any of the trustees; and if
this Act or the regulations would otherwise permit something to be done by the trust,
the thing may be done by one or more of the trustees on behalf of the trust.
65. Under this section, an obligation to pay BPL that would otherwise be imposed on a
trust would be imposed on the trustee or on each of the trustees of the trust instead.
The trustee or any one or more of the trustees could discharge that obligation by
paying the amount of BPL.
Section 17 Treatment of unincorporated bodies or associations
66. Subsection 17(1) of the proposed Act would provide that this Act and the regulations
apply to an unincorporated body or association as if it were a person, but with the
changes set out in this section.
67. Subsection 17(2) would provide that an obligation that would otherwise be imposed
on the body or association by this Act or the regulations is imposed on each member
of the body's or association's committee of management instead, but may be
discharged by any of the members.
68. Subsection 17(3) would provide that if this Act or the regulations would otherwise
permit something to be done by the body or association, the thing may be done by
29
one or more of the members of the body's or association's committee of
management on behalf of the body or association.
69. Under this section, an obligation to pay BPL that would otherwise be imposed on an
unincorporated body or association would be imposed on each member of the body's
or association's committee of management instead. Any one or more members of the
body's or association's committee of management could discharge that obligation by
paying the amount of BPL.
Section 18 Making of regulations
70. Section 18 of the proposed Act would enable the Governor-General to make
regulations prescribing matters required or permitted by the Act to be prescribed by
the regulations; or necessary or convenient to be prescribed for carrying out or
giving effect to the Act.
71. The Act would establish a framework that provides for charges to be imposed in
relation to different products by regulations. Due to the number of products on
which charge is to be imposed, it is necessary and appropriate for certain details of
charges to be included in the regulations rather than in the Act.
72. By providing certain biosecurity protection charge settings to be located in the
regulations, rather than split between the Act and the regulations, the proposed Act
would increase accessibility for industry in understanding charge settings and would
provide the necessary flexibility for rates of BPL to be adjusted where necessary and
appropriate.
73. The regulations would be a disallowable legislative instrument under the Legislation
Act, which would provide for appropriate Parliamentary oversight. The regulations
would also not be exempt from sunsetting under that Act.
Other instruments
74. Subsection 18(2) would provide that the regulations made under the Act may make
provision in relation to a matter by conferring on the Minister or the Secretary a
power to make a legislative instrument.
75. It is considered appropriate to enable the regulations to confer a power to make
legislative instruments on the Minister or the Secretary to allow for matters of detail
that are subject to frequent change to be included in other legislative instruments.
Incorporation of other instruments
76. Subsection 18(3) would provide that despite subsection 14(2) of the Legislation Act
2003, the regulations may make provision in relation to a matter by applying,
adopting or incorporating, with or without modification, any matter contained in an
instrument or other writing as in force or existing from time to time.
77. Subsection 14(2) of the Legislation Act provides that, unless the contrary intention
appears, a legislative instrument may not make provision in relation to a matter by
30
applying, adopting, or incorporating any matter contained in an instrument or other
writing as in force or existing from time to time.
78. Subsection 18(3) would therefore provide a contrary intention to subsection 14(2) of
the Legislation Act. That is, the incorporation of certain documents by reference
would not be limited to the instrument or other writing as at the date of
incorporation.
79. It is considered appropriate to enable the incorporation of such documents as they
exist from time to time because the documents that would be referred to may include
technical reference materials or production standards that are updated as required.
80. It is intended that where the regulations would incorporate such documents, they
would either be freely or publicly available, or they would be documents required in
the ordinary course of doing business in the particular industry. For example, the tea
tree oil levy is imposed with reference to the ISO standard for tea tree oil production.
In Australia, industry practice requires tea tree oil to conform to this standard, so
access to the standard is already an industry requirement.
81. In order to comply with paragraph 15J(2)(c) of the Legislation Act, the explanatory
statements for the regulations that apply, adopt or incorporate any matter contained
in an instrument or other writing as in force or existing from time to time would
contain a description of the relevant incorporated material and indicate how it may
be obtained.
No limit on subsection (1)
82. Subsection 18(4) would provide that subsections (2) and (3) do not limit subsection
(1) (which would enable the Governor-General to make regulations under the
proposed Act).
31
STATEMENT OF COMPATIBILITY WITH HUMAN RIGHTS
Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011
AGRICULTURE (BIOSECURITY PROTECTION) LEVIES BILL 2024
The Bill is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the
international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny)
Act 2011.
GENERAL OUTLINE
The Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies Bill 2024 and the Agriculture (Biosecurity
Protection) Charges Bill 2024 (the Imposition Bills) along with the Agriculture (Biosecurity
Protection) Levies and Charges Collection Bill 2024 (the Collection Bill) are a package of
Bills that would provide for the imposition, collection and administration of the new
biosecurity protection levy and charge (the BPL).
The BPL is one component of the larger 2023-24 Budget measure 'Strengthened and
Sustainably Funded Biosecurity System' which would implement the Government's election
commitment to sustainably fund Australia's biosecurity system. The BPL will generate
revenue to contribute around six per cent of the costs of a sustainably funded biosecurity
system. It will supplement much larger contributions from taxpayers and importers, that
between them will contribute more than nine out of every ten dollars needed to fund our
biosecurity system. The Bills enable BPL to be payable by producers of agricultural, forestry
and fisheries goods and products, whether produced for domestic or overseas markets.
Producers derive significant benefits from Australia's biosecurity system, including through
prevention of pests and diseases entering Australia, maximisation of trade opportunities, and
sustainable access to premium overseas markets. Without strong and sustainably funded
biosecurity, our biodiversity would be at risk, jobs would be lost and producers would
experience lower production and higher costs. The BPL would ensure that, in addition to the
large and direct contributions from importers and taxpayers, those that directly benefit from
Australia's strong biosecurity make a modest and direct contribution to ensure the biosecurity
system is sustainably funded every year in the future.
The Bill would:
• impose a new levy, or enable the imposition of such a levy, known as the Biosecurity
Protection Levy (BPL) to be payable by certain producers of agricultural, forestry and
fisheries products within Australia; and
• provide for the rate of BPL to be specified or worked out in accordance with
regulations to ensure that the rate can be set, and where appropriate, be changed to
account for existing circumstances; and
• enable the specification of the relevant levy payer for the BPL; and
• set out other matters relating to how the imposition applies.
32
Human rights implications
The Bill engages the following rights:
• the right to an adequate standard of living - Article 11(1) of the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR); and
• the right to health - Article 12(1) of the ICESCR.
Right to an adequate standard of living, in particular, the right to adequate food
The Bill engages the right to an adequate standard of living under Article 11(1) of the
ICESCR. This includes the right to adequate food, clothing, water and housing, and to the
continuous improvement of living conditions. States Parties have an obligation to ensure the
availability and accessibility of the resources necessary for the progressive realisation of this
right. Article 4 of the ICESCR provides that these rights may be subject to permissible
limitation only where those limitations are provided by law and are for the purpose of
promoting the general welfare in a democratic society.
The imposition of the biosecurity protection levy will result in sustainable funding and
expenditure on a strong biosecurity system which would directly benefit Australian
producers, industry and individuals. By avoiding or reducing the impacts of exotic pests and
diseases, an effective biosecurity system would support the sustainability, profitability and
competitiveness of Australia's agriculture, fisheries and forestry industries and support
stronger food security.
The imposition of biosecurity protection levy is reasonable and proportionate to the objective
of improving the standard of living of levy payers because it enhances their individual
productivity, access to markets, environmental health through better functioning ecosystems
and profitability. The activities intended to be funded by the levy are expected to provide
long-term benefits for individual levy payers, industry as a whole, and the Australian public
that exceed the cost to individuals.
The Bill promotes the right to an adequate standard of living as it is intended to impose a levy
to raise revenue to support controls and measures to manage and minimise the risk of pests,
weeds and diseases entering Australia, while facilitating trade and the movement of plants,
animals, people and products. This would increase beneficial farming, fisheries and forestry
technologies and practices to help communities to achieve greater productivity, sustainability,
climate resilience, and food security.
The Bill equally promotes the right to adequate food as provided by Article 11. The United
Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (UNCESCR) has stated
(General Comment No. 12: The Right to Adequate Food (Art. 11) (May 1999)), that the right
to adequate food should 'not be interpreted in a narrow or restrictive sense which equates it
with a minimum package of calories, proteins and other specific nutrients', but implies it
should be free from adverse substances and accessible, both economically and physically.
The right to food is promoted by the Bill to the extent that the levy is specifically imposed to
contribute to funding the costs of biosecurity protection to manage the risk of pests and
diseases entering Australia. A strong biosecurity system is critical to protecting Australia's
economy, environment and standard of living. It can also prevent or lessen the impact of
these pests and disease on human, animal and plant health.
33
The Bill promotes the right to adequate food by providing for the imposition of levies that are
intended to contribute to the costs of an effective biosecurity system which supports the
sustainability, profitability and competitiveness of Australia's agriculture, fisheries and
forestry industries.
The imposition of the BPL represents a reasonable and proportionate contribution by
individual levy payers to the biosecurity system.
Summary
The Bill is compatible with the right to an adequate standard of living, including food,
clothing, water and housing, under Article 11(1) of the ICESCR because it positively engages
and promotes that right.
Right to health
Article 12 of the ICESCR recognises the right of all individuals to enjoy the highest
attainable standards of physical and mental health. This includes the application of measures
for the prevention, treatment, and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational, and other
diseases (Article 12(2)).
The UNCESCR has stated (General Comment No. 14: The Right to the Highest Attainable
Standard of Health (Art. 12) (2000)) that health is a fundamental human right indispensable
for the exercise of other human rights and that the right to health is not to be understood as
the right to be healthy, but rather entails 'the right to a system of health protection which
provides equality of opportunity for people to enjoy the highest attainable level of health'.
The right may be understood as encompassing the prevention and reduction of the
population's exposure to harmful substances such as harmful chemicals or other detrimental
environmental conditions that directly or indirectly impact upon human health (at [15]).
The Bill engages and promotes the right to health by imposing biosecurity protection levy to
support a strong and sustainable biosecurity system which will prevent or reduce harm to
human health. The biosecurity activities intended to be funded by the BPL are expected to
reduce the risk of harmful pests and diseases entering Australia and support access to food
which is nutritionally adequate and safe for the Australian and international community.
In summary, the Bill takes positive steps to promote the right to health through funding
biosecurity protection measures which will support and underpin the sourcing and availability
of safe food as well as improving, monitoring and managing new and emerging food safety
and security risks.
Summary
The Bill is compatible with the right to health under Article 12 of the ICESCR because it
positively engages and promotes that right.
34
Conclusion
The Bill is compatible with the human rights outlined above because it engages and promotes
those rights.
(Circulated by authority of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry,
Senator the Hon. Murray Watt)
35
STATEMENT OF COMPATIBILITY WITH HUMAN RIGHTS
Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.
AGRICULTURE (BIOSECURITY PROTECTION) CHARGES BILL 2024
This Bill is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the
international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny)
Act 2011.
Overview of the Bill
GENERAL OUTLINE
The Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies Bill 2024 and the Agriculture (Biosecurity
Protection) Charges Bill 2024 (the Imposition Bills) along with the Agriculture (Biosecurity
Protection) Levies and Charges Collection Bill 2024 (the Collection Bill) are a package of
Bills that provide for the imposition, collection and administration of the new biosecurity
protection levy and charge (the BPL).
The BPL is one component of the larger 2023-24 Budget measure 'Strengthened and
Sustainably Funded Biosecurity System' which would implement the Government's election
commitment to sustainably fund Australia's biosecurity system. The BPL will generate
revenue to contribute around six per cent of the costs of a sustainably funded biosecurity
system. It will supplement much larger contributions from taxpayers and importers, that
between them will contribute more than nine out of every ten dollars needed to fund our
biosecurity system. The Bills enable BPL to be payable by producers of agricultural, forestry
and fisheries goods and products, whether produced for domestic or overseas markets.
Producers derive significant benefits from Australia's biosecurity system, including through
prevention of pests and diseases entering Australia, maximisation of trade opportunities, and
sustainable access to premium overseas markets. Without strong and sustainably funded
biosecurity, our biodiversity would be at risk, jobs would be lost and producers would
experience lower production and higher costs. The BPL would ensure that, in addition to the
large and direct contributions from importers and taxpayers, those that directly benefit from
Australia's strong biosecurity make a modest and direct contribution to ensure the biosecurity
system is sustainably funded in the future.
The Bill would:
• impose a new charge, or enable the imposition of such a charge, known as the
Biosecurity Protection Levy (BPL) to be payable by certain producers of agricultural,
forestry and fisheries products within Australia; and
• provide for the rate of BPL to be specified or worked out in accordance with
regulations to ensure that the rate can be set, and where appropriate, be changed to
account for existing circumstances; and
• enable the specification of the relevant charge payer for the BPL; and
• set out other matters relating to how the imposition applies.
36
Human rights implications
The Bill engages the following rights:
• the right to an adequate standard of living - Article 11(1) of the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR); and
• the right to health - Article 12(1) of the ICESCR.
Right to an adequate standard of living, in particular, the right to adequate food
The Bill engages the right to an adequate standard of living under Article 11(1) of the
ICESCR. This includes the right to adequate food, clothing, water and housing, and to ensure
the continuous improvement of living conditions. States Parties have an obligation to ensure
the availability and accessibility of the resources necessary for the progressive realisation of
this right. Article 4 of the ICESCR provides that these rights may be subject to permissible
limitation only where those limitations are provided by law and are for the purpose of
promoting the general welfare in a democratic society.
The imposition of the biosecurity protection charge will result in sustainable funding and
expenditure on a strong biosecurity system which would directly benefit Australian
producers, industry and individuals. By avoiding or reducing the impacts of exotic pests and
diseases, an effective biosecurity system would support the sustainability, profitability and
competitiveness of Australia's agriculture, fisheries and forestry industries and support
stronger food security.
The imposition of biosecurity protection charge is reasonable and proportionate to the
objective of improving the standard of living of charge payers because it enhances their
individual productivity, access to markets and environmental health through better
functioning ecosystems and profitability. The activities intended to be funded by biosecurity
protection charges are expected to provide long-term benefits for individual charge payers,
industry as a whole, and the Australian public that exceed the cost to individuals.
The Bill promotes the right to an adequate standard of living as it is intended to impose a
charge to raise revenue to support controls and measures to manage and minimise the risk of
pests, weeds and diseases entering Australia, while facilitating trade and the movement of
plants, animals, people and products. This would increase beneficial farming, fisheries and
forestry technologies and practices to help communities to achieve greater productivity,
sustainability, climate resilience and food security.
The Bill promotes the right to adequate food as provided by Article 11. The United Nations
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (UNCESCR) has stated (General
Comment No. 12: The Right to Adequate Food (Art. 11) (May 1999)), that the right to
adequate food should 'not be interpreted in a narrow or restrictive sense which equates it with
a minimum package of calories, proteins and other specific nutrients', but implies it should be
free from adverse substances and accessible, both economically and physically.
The right to food is promoted by the Bill to the extent that the charge is specifically imposed
to contribute to funding the costs of biosecurity protection to manage the risk of pests and
diseases entering Australia. A strong biosecurity system is critical to protecting Australia's
economy, environment and standard of living. It can also prevent or lessen the impact of
these pests and diseases on human, animal and plant health.
37
The Bill promotes the right to adequate food by providing for the imposition of charges that
are intended to contribute to the costs of an effective biosecurity system which supports the
sustainability, profitability and competitiveness of Australia's agriculture, fisheries and
forestry industries.
The imposition of the biosecurity protection charge represents a reasonable and proportionate
contribution by individual charge payers to the biosecurity system.
Summary
The Bill is compatible with the right to an adequate standard of living, including food,
clothing, water and housing, under Article 11(1) of the ICESCR because it positively engages
and promotes that right.
Right to health
Article 12 of the ICESCR recognises the right of all individuals to enjoy the highest
attainable standards of physical and mental health. This includes the application of measures
for the prevention, treatment, and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational, and other
diseases (Article 12(2)).
The UNCESCR has stated (General Comment No.14 The Right to the Highest Attainable
Standard of Health (Art. 12 (2000)) that health is a fundamental human right indispensable
for the exercise of other human rights and that the right to health is not to be understood as
the right to be healthy, but rather entails 'right to a system of health protection which
provides equality of opportunity for people to enjoy the highest attainable level of health'.
The right may be understood as encompassing the prevention and reduction of the
population's exposure to harmful substances such as harmful chemicals or other detrimental
environmental conditions that directly or indirectly impact upon human health (at [15]).
The Bill engages and promotes the right to health by imposing biosecurity protection charge
to support a sustainable biosecurity system which will prevent or reduce harm to human
health. The measures intended to be funded by the BPL system are expected to support access
to food which is nutritionally adequate and safe for the Australian and international
community.
In summary, the Bill takes positive steps to promote the right to health through funding
biosecurity protection measures which will support and underpin the sourcing and availability
of safe food as well as improving, monitoring and managing new and emerging food safety
and security risks.
Summary
The Bill is compatible with the right to health under Article 12 of the ICESCR because it
positively engages and promotes that right.
38
Conclusion
The Bill is compatible with the human rights outlined above because it engages and promotes
those rights.
(Circulated by authority of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry,
Senator the Hon. Murray Watt)
39