Biosecurity shock as crossbench declares intention to vote down levy

The National Farmers Federation confirmed via X (formerly Twitter) that it had been told by members of the crossbench, including the Greens and independent senators David Pocock (Canberra) and Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania), that they were planning to oppose the bill to implement the levy.

The levy has attracted significant criticism from the agriculture sector, unhappy with the proposed funding model.

The legislation was due to appear in front of the Senate today but was delayed.

The crossbench opposition to the proposal would mean the government would not have the numbers to pass the bill to bring in the BPL.

The bill is due to be tabled once again on the morning of May 15, but at present it is unclear as to whether that will take place or the government will withdraw it.

Greens support was critical for the government's plans of getting the bill through the Senate.

With the Coalition and Greens both against the levy, with 31 Coalition Senators and 11 Greens Senators the ALP, even with full support from the rest of the crossbench, would only get to 34 votes, well short of the 42 against.

Greens agriculture spokesperson Peter Whish-Wilson said his party supported bolstering biosecurity measures but not the proposed funding model.

"The Greens support significant and new biosecurity funding that ensures Australia has robust threat abatement measures in place to safeguard our communities, the environment and industry into the future - and we congratulate the Agricultural Minister for raising significant additional revenue from some key biosecurity risk creators," Senator Whish-Wilson said.

"But the Bill the government has brought parliament to specifically tax farmers in this regard is poor policy in both principle and design and should be rejected.

"The fact this new proposed levy has zero buy-in from the agricultural sector speaks for itself - consultation on it was rushed and inadequate.

"The Greens have consulted with stakeholders including the minister's office, listened to farmers, attended Senate hearings into this legislation and feel strongly a different approach is needed, and we will work constructively with the government and farmers to achieve this."

He challenged the government to look at taxing big business to raise the revenue.

"To put things in perspective, if Labor accepted the Greens' offer on doubling the tax on gas corporations to pass the Albanese government's PRRT changes, we would raise $500m a year, ten times the annual amount that Labor is seeking from a tax on hard working farmers," Senator Whish-Wilson said.

"Labor doesn't have the guts to tax the fossil fuel corporations posting billions in profit to fund their policies and instead is looking to farmers to foot the bill."

He also questioned whether the major supermarkets could have a bigger role to play.

"It's reasonable farmers are asking why they should pay a levy when the food and fibre they produce passes up through a supply chain that numerous other interests benefit from - like the profiteering supermarket duopoly who rake in huge profits and who don't have to contribute a cent," he said.

"We know farmers are doing it tough - they are already being forced by the supermarket duopoly to accept rock bottom prices for the food they produce while that duopoly makes off like bandits charging premiums and padding profit margins.

"Labor should be taxing the fossil fuel industry and the supermarket duopoly - not farmers."

The Greens won lavish praise from grower groups after the announcement.

"We'd like to thank and acknowledge the Australian Greens and agriculture spokesperson Senator Peter Whish-Wilson for their leadership and support, in listening to Australian farmers and the concerns we've raised, to ultimately opposing the biosecurity tax and scrap it," Grain Producers Australia chairman Barry Large said.

"Along with other other Senators including David Pocock and the Coalition members we're thankful that they've taken time to listen and be pragmatic to take time to understand the details on why this proposal is fundamentally flawed and needed to be voted against," he said.

He said the Senators' decision to oppose the bill followed an overwhelming vote against it in the lower house where independent MPs joined with minor parties, the Greens and the Coalition in voting it down.