❓ A member of parliament questions the Minister for Agriculture and Food regarding the Agricultural Produce Commission Amendment Bill 2019, focusing on potential overlap with federal levies, consultation sufficiency, and compliance provisions related to document production.
AnsweredQoN 917Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE
COMMISSION AMENDMENT BILL 2019
917. Hon ROBIN SCOTT to the Minister for Agriculture and
Food:
I wish to ask a follow-up question
to the question I asked the minister last week about the proposed changes to
the Agricultural Produce Commission Act 1988.
(1) Will the minister acknowledge that broadacre
farmers already pay substantial levies to federal bodies, such as the Grains Research and Development
Corporation, for marketing and research and development functions?
(2) If yes to
(1), what distinct broadacre marketing or broadacre research and development
functions would a state-based body perform, as separate from its existing
federal counterpart?
(3) When
broadacre exports are worth in excess of $6 billion annually, does the minister
believe that consultation with one representative body is sufficient?
(4) Will the
minister concede that according to the compliance provisions in part 3A of the
bill, an authorised officer could direct that a farmer produce his own
documents before the officer in the farmer's own home?
COMMISSION AMENDMENT BILL 2019
917. Hon ROBIN SCOTT to the Minister for Agriculture and
Food:
I wish to ask a follow-up question
to the question I asked the minister last week about the proposed changes to
the Agricultural Produce Commission Act 1988.
(1) Will the minister acknowledge that broadacre
farmers already pay substantial levies to federal bodies, such as the Grains Research and Development
Corporation, for marketing and research and development functions?
(2) If yes to
(1), what distinct broadacre marketing or broadacre research and development
functions would a state-based body perform, as separate from its existing
federal counterpart?
(3) When
broadacre exports are worth in excess of $6 billion annually, does the minister
believe that consultation with one representative body is sufficient?
(4) Will the
minister concede that according to the compliance provisions in part 3A of the
bill, an authorised officer could direct that a farmer produce his own
documents before the officer in the farmer's own home?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question.
(1)–(3) It
may well be the case that broadacre farmers do not vote in favour of
establishing a producers' committee or a levy under the act. We are
simply aiming at giving the industry the option to do so should they wish to
avail themselves of a mechanism that has proved very useful for other
agricultural sectors.
I say again that this can only go
forward; it would translate into a levy only if a producer made an application
to the Agricultural Produce Commission and, if it goes to a vote, affected
producers vote in favour of establishing a producers' committee. This
is not something that we are going to be imposing; this is something that
simply will be a facilitation.
(4) No. A
direction to produce a relevant document as defined in proposed part 3A must be
given in writing, and an authorised officer is not given power to enter any
premises, let alone a dwelling. For this reason, although a written direction
to produce a relevant record may require that the record be produced ''at
a place specified'' or ''by the means specified'', this will
not authorise a direction that ''a farmer produce his own documents
before the officer in the farmer's own home''.
(1)–(3) It
may well be the case that broadacre farmers do not vote in favour of
establishing a producers' committee or a levy under the act. We are
simply aiming at giving the industry the option to do so should they wish to
avail themselves of a mechanism that has proved very useful for other
agricultural sectors.
I say again that this can only go
forward; it would translate into a levy only if a producer made an application
to the Agricultural Produce Commission and, if it goes to a vote, affected
producers vote in favour of establishing a producers' committee. This
is not something that we are going to be imposing; this is something that
simply will be a facilitation.
(4) No. A
direction to produce a relevant document as defined in proposed part 3A must be
given in writing, and an authorised officer is not given power to enter any
premises, let alone a dwelling. For this reason, although a written direction
to produce a relevant record may require that the record be produced ''at
a place specified'' or ''by the means specified'', this will
not authorise a direction that ''a farmer produce his own documents
before the officer in the farmer's own home''.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.