Wednesday, 13 November 2024

Agriculture and Food Safety Legislation Amendment Bill 2024

Council’s amendments

Message from Council relating to following amendments considered:

1. Insert the following New Division to follow clause 27 –

‘Division 3 – Licensing

27A Fit and proper person

In section 16(2)(b) of the Meat Industry Act 1993 omit “, or an associate of the person”.’.

2. Clause 30, page 17, lines 17 to 21, omit all words and expressions on these lines.

3. Clause 30, page 17, line 22, omit “(e)” and insert “(d)”.

4. Clause 30, page 17, line 26, omit “(f)” and insert “(e)”.

Ros SPENCE (Kalkallo – Minister for Agriculture, Minister for Community Sport, Minister for Carers and Volunteers) (10:58): I move:

That the amendments be agreed to.

In doing so I have just a few brief remarks as to why the government is supporting these amendments. Ensuring the suitability of seafood safety licensees protects public health, industry reputation and the sustainability of other seafood businesses. The inclusion of the fit and proper person assessment into the Seafood Safety Act 2003 was driven by the policy intent to, firstly, strengthen the ability of PrimeSafe to ensure the suitability of those who hold seafood licences and protect the integrity of the industry; and secondly, to provide consistency between the Meat Industry Act 1993 and the Seafood Safety Act, which are both administered by PrimeSafe. The removal of proposed section 14(3)(d) in the bill, regarding consideration of the business associations of associates, will address concerns about freedom of association. Removal of the corresponding existing clause in the Meat Industry Act will support the policy intent of consistency between the legislation, and it will not adversely impact PrimeSafe’s consideration of licensees’ suitability.

We are comfortable that the other proposed new sections 14(3)(a), (b) and (c), in clause 30 of the bill, do provide sufficient powers to enable PrimeSafe to remove unsuitable seafood licensees and keep them out of the industry, as PrimeSafe already relies upon similar clauses to do so for meat industry licensees under the Meat Industry Act. With those few words, the government is supporting these amendments.

Emma KEALY (Lowan) (11:00): I rise today to support these amendments; they are amendments that the Liberals and Nationals put forward in the upper house. I would like to acknowledge the good work of the minister and her office in trying to work through a sensible outcome that would ensure that the licensing requirements meet the needs of the sector while ensuring that we do not cast the net too widely so that associates of business associates have to be deemed of good repute for a seafood licence to be approved or in consideration of suspension of a commercial seafood licence. This is something that is very, very important. It is unusual to have the additional element of an assessment of a fit and proper person to include an assessment of whether business associates’ associates are of good repute. Given that there is some question over what that line might be – for whether someone is of good repute or not of good repute – it is very, very important. It is not consistent with the interpretation of standard practice in legislation around a fit and proper person test. I will note that there are some regulations associated with legislation which include a fit and proper person test, which do have reference to an assessment of associates being of good repute. However, I am pleased that we could all agree that associates of business associates needing to be of good repute was far too much. It is certainly a bar that the Labor Party themselves do not hold up for their own business associates, and it is something we should never hold at a higher level for others than we do for ourselves. We should all seek to be fair in how we apply legislation.

The amendment will take two elements into account. One, it will remove the reference to associates of business associates needing to be of good repute in order to be issued a seafood licence or in consideration of a suspension of a seafood licence. These amendments are also mirrored in the Meat Industry Act 1993. This will ensure consistency between the seafood industry and the meat industry. I understand that this is where the aspects around good repute and an assessment of associates of business associates were lifted from, and therefore it is consistent to have those two aspects of licences to be similar in how they operate. It should make for a more practical interpretation of those aspects of licensing going forward.

I would also like to note one particular aspect on which we did ask a question of the government in the upper house, and that was in relation to the definition of ‘relevant position’, which is at page 19 of the bill, where it states:

relevant position, in relation to a seafood business, means –

…

(b) any other person associated or connected with the ownership, administration or management of the business or its operations …

We did seek clarity around whether this would apply to a skipper, for example, or a crew member, such as a deckhand, of a seafood operation, given that the skipper would have management of the operation of a boat when they are going out to harvest fish. There was clarity given in the response – and I see the Minister for Agriculture is nodding her head – that that would only be deemed applicable if the licensee was the skipper of that boat. I think that will provide a good point of reference for any opportunity where there is consideration by the department or the authorised body or if there is an appeal through VCAT or other processes. It is on the parliamentary record that there is not an intent that crew members and skippers will be captured by the aspects of the legislation that relate to the fit and proper person test, as we are amending the bill today.

We know that there are a lot of fabulous businesses in our beachside communities, our oceanside communities, that have a very important job. Their job is to make sure we have fish and beautiful seafood on our table. It is something we all enjoy, particularly in the lead-up to Christmas. I encourage all Victorians to ensure that they buy Victorian-harvested seafood and support our fishermen and women and make sure that they have a very big spread of lovely seafood. I cannot help but say that even though my electorate of Lowan has many geographical areas, it does not contain a seaside landscape. However, we do have yabbies, so I might include them in my comments for today, because we will certainly have some yabbies on our Christmas table.

Again, I am very appreciative that there has been a level of goodwill which is rarely seen in the Parliament in that this was an aspect of an amendment that the Liberals and Nationals flagged during our contributions to the debate. It was something that the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee actually picked up on as well in their considerations. I am pleased that our amendment put forward in the upper house was not opposed, and it is very pleasing that it appears that it will also be supported. We should see more of this, because there are very, very good brains in all corners of the upper and lower houses. No matter what party we represent, we have something to contribute and we are engaged with stakeholders, and I am very proud that I have been able to stand up for our stakeholders and deliver some very important amendments for the seafood and the meat industry. I commend the amendments to the house.

Motion agreed to.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: A message will now be sent to the Legislative Council informing them of the house’s decision.