General Subjects > Flowers and Foliage Now

Regulatory threats to seed exchanges and plant movements

(1/51) > >>

Maggi Young:

Do we feel strongly about keeping plants growing and flowering?

Australian growers will be aware of continuing regulations being imposed on the importation of seed etc.  Now Western Australia is proposing yet another layer of regulation - and cost -  on gardeners, amateur and professional alike.

As Marcus Harvey of Tasmania says:
"Some people get terribly troubled by conflict but  this is a very important issue for all Australian gardeners. And it does have a sting in the tail for overseas specialist organizations like the SRGC. From now on any WA members must pay the Western Australian government $56 to receive their seeds DESPITE them already being inspected and cleared at the Federal level."
 
This is an article by Marcus  online:
http://gardendrum.com/2013/08/21/western-australias-new-plant-import-fees/

Further notes from Marcus:

The decision to charge home gardeners – Western Australia- Marcus Harvey

The decision to charge home gardeners $56, for what in the most part are simple
inspections, is short-sighted and monumentally unfair to home gardeners because it
effectively prices them out of the import process. I have set out detailed reasons why this is
a bad decision and why it needs to be reversed.

Massive Price Hike on Gardeners
This fee charge leaps from zero to $56 with immediate effect, with no warning and no
gradual introduction. This is massive slug (a 500% increase) on those who have no choice but to use the system. By point of comparison NO other state imposes a similar inspection fee on home gardeners. Even the Federal agency (DAFF),which has the central and far more
complex task of defending Australia's national borders, charges less for the same block of
inspection time.

Fails to discriminate between Amateur Gardeners and Professional Horticulturalists
This fee applies equally to both amateur gardeners pursuing a hobby and professional
horticulturalists who are businessman. This is a grossly unfair situation. Professional
horticulturists can achieve economies of scale by importing large volumes thus reducing the
impact of the fee and they can also claim such costs as a tax deduction. The home gardener
(whose purchases in most cases would not even exceed $56) can do neither and is left facing a very disproportionate impact.

Unreasonable Fees Will Undermine Biosecurity
An "onside" gardening public is a powerful force for good in maintaining strong biosecurity.
However when fees are perceived as unfair and unreasonable civil disobedience will
inevitably follow resulting in increased illegal importations. Such activities will undermine
the State's biosecurity not improve it. This is a perverse and counterproductive outcome for
a fee increase that, to quote the department, "is essential to protect Western Australia's
borders".

Most of the hard work has been done already
All plants imported into WA arise either from quality assurance schemes or have passed
through quarantine protocols that the State proscribes. These processes were established to
achieve efficiencies and high standard biosecurity outcomes. They are paid for by the
exporters and the biosecurity agencies in those exporting states. It is therefore staggering
that the WA's Department of Agriculture and Food, which it already greatly benefits from
this arrangement, seeks to extract a further massive fee from a system to which it
contributes no additional services.

Tax on Gardening is an Attack on Positive Community Values
Gardening is widely regarded as a social good. It is strongly correlated with positive health
outcomes, community engagement and pro-environmental behavior. This recent price slug
on gardeners is in effect a tax on positive community values and diminishes a powerful force
for social good.

Unjustifiable Interference in the Free Market
Massive fee increases inevitably lead to price rises and a reduction in the range of products
on offer to the market. Smaller specialists are forced out, consumers are compelled to
purchase from a limited range of suppliers and oligopolistic behaviour is favoured. In this
scenario gardeners and the gardening market in WA are unjustifiably worse off when
compared with any other Australian state and this raises the question of undue interference
on free trade.

Narrow Focus leads to Poor Outcomes
This recent fee increase is at best, either a fund-raising exercise, or at worst, a "backdoor"
deterrent. Whatever it is it appears have little to do with simple cost recovery. Perhaps if the department was more adequately funded then it would be less focused on itself and be
more proactive in producing good policy outcomes for all of the stakeholders and not just
the chosen few? Perhaps if it actively sought more internal efficiencies it would not have to
gouge its clients? For example, what about abandoning the WA approved list, which is
extraordinarily inefficient, and opt for the ready-made federally funded system with a locally determined prohibited list (as all the other states do)?

Biosecurity benefits EVERYONE and Gardeners should not be asked to pay a
Disproportionate Price
Biosecurity benefits EVERYONE and the gardening community should not be made pay a
disproportionate price to continue to pursue their interests. Their activities are miniscule in
comparison to other stakeholders, like for example, agribusiness and large-scale horticulture. I have heard that the department is entering into special arrangements with
exporters in other states to reduce the impact. This is just another dreadful example of cost
shifting onto a group who already pay most of the present costs associated with export to
your state. These are bad decisions because they are highly unfair and inequitable. West
Australian gardeners and the garden community should not be treated as cash cows. Nor
should their right to fair treatment be completely ignored and as such be delegitimized.

--------------------------
As another Australian member says :

It may not be affecting you directly at this stage but if it goes un-protested there it could easily be adopted by other states which would spell the end of bringing seeds into Australia, which could also affect groups which have seed exchanges such as the AGS, SRGC, NZAGS and NARGS.

It has been suggested that an online petition could be started by the Aussies to protest this and letters written to Australian  parliamentary representatives.

These measures, and others like them around the world, will seriously impact the legitimate exchange of garden seed between gardeners around the world - be aware of what regulations may be being mooted in YOUR area, and organisations like ours will be  the poorer for them.

Maggi Young:
The European Union  is working on regulations that, while allowing some limited leeway for amateur gardeners, might still end up having a draconian effect on the likes of our Seed Exchanges.
The proposals from this Spring(all 147 pages of them!) are shown here :
 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_consumer/pressroom/docs/proposal_aphp_en.pdf 

There's a more simple explanation here : http://www.realseeds.co.uk/seedlaw.html   and here :
http://www.naturalnews.com/040214_seeds_european_commission_registration.html


A petition, such as has been suggested for the Western Australia situation,  has been raised for the EU  :
http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/We_dont_accept_this_Let_us_keep_our_seeds_EU

arillady:
I have just posted a link to this thread on facebook where it will certainly reach more people. I hope this helps more than it might bring scammers out.

Neil:
All it will mean is it will go underground,

Maggi Young:

--- Quote ---All it will mean is it will go underground
--- End quote ---


That is one of the daft things about these draconian regulations made  with no regards to legitimate things like the organised seed exchanges - organisations like SRGC, AGS, NZAGS, NARGS and so on will be closed down and some people will  move to "underground" attempts and end up as law breakers.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page