Question Time AU

General Debate

Agriculture Industry

House of Representatives · Monday 10 February 2025

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

The debate centred on a motion moved by the Australian Labor Party highlighting government achievements in market access, biosecurity, workforce stability, and climate resilience for the agricultural sector. Opposition members from the National Party and Liberal National Party criticised the government for policies they argued harmed farmers, including the cancellation of the agricultural visa, biosecurity levies, restrictions on live sheep exports, and water buybacks. Labor members defended their record, citing restored trade relations, investments in irrigation and TAFE, and proactive climate planning. The motion was supported by Labor members who emphasised food security and industry growth, while opposition speakers focused on perceived regulatory burdens and economic impacts on rural communities.

Outcome

The motion was agreed to.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Opened the debate

Repacholi moved the motion to acknowledge government achievements in the agriculture, fisheries, and forestry sectors. Repacholi highlighted 169 market access wins since July 2022, including opening 22 new markets and restoring trade with China. Repacholi noted over $1 billion invested in biosecurity to protect against threats like avian influenza. Repacholi emphasised workforce improvements through the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme, which grew from 8,000 to over 27,000 workers. Repacholi also cited climate investments, including $1.1 billion in the Natural Heritage Trust and $519.1 million from the Future Drought Fund, to support long-term resilience.

Opposition response

McCormack criticised the government for removing the Soils Advocate position and imposing a biosecurity levy on farmers. McCormack argued that the removal of 450 gigalitres of water from the Murray-Darling system would harm regional communities and food production. McCormack opposed the ban on live sheep exports, claiming it would replace high-welfare Australian standards with inferior practices. McCormack stated that changes to the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme increased costs for farmers and reduced remittances for workers. McCormack asserted that the government's policies were driven by ideology rather than industry needs.