Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee, , 6:26:29 to 6:39:36
Examination of the EU Deforestation Regulation's impact on Australian beef and timber exports, including Australia's low-risk status and geolocation compliance tools.
Topics: EU free trade agreement, Beef exports, Trade policy, Forestry
Speakers: Dr Jared Greenville, Hon Matthew Canavan, Tina Hutchison, Hon Malarndirri McCarthy, Unknown Speaker
>> That's our understanding, Senator. It was um delayed a number of times, but is now due to come in in December 2026.
uh we have been designated a low-risk country. Is that correct?
>> Correct.
>> Uh so what will our exporters have to do come December to export to the EU?
So there are a range of things it as you're aware Senator it is a businessto business arrangement. So the um the onus is on the European importers to demonstrate when asked that the goods that they're selling in the market um have not uh come from deforested areas. Um so there is a range of requirements. the EU since they first um uh brought this into uh or made made this requirement have provided guidance um over the course of the last couple of years and we've been working with our industries in relation to that but I'll ask Dr. Greenville uh for more specific information. Thank you.
>> Good afternoon senators. Uh Jerry Greenville, first assistant secretary of trade and international division. Um that's right as Madison has has noted. So the arrangements businessto business and being classified as a low-risk um country means that around 1% of EU importers will be potentially subject to checking um against the the requirements. Um we've taken a number of actions working with industry to establish a number of tools in which the industry can can help make sure that they are compliant if if need be. Um for cattle the livestock production assurance program now provides geoloccation sharing tool um so that producers can enter coordinates for their own LPA account so effectively to assure themselves that they are compliant. Um, Geolabs has developed through and a government funded um grant from food agility cooperation research center a deforestation free assessment tool using various data sources um and for timber products the program for endorsement of forest certification and the forest stewardship council have created additional modules um for entities seeking compliance with EUDR. So there's a number of options there. Um but as noted, the obligation that the EU will put on is with the European importers to assure their regulators that they're compliant with regulation.
Um okay. Uh well, the key key thing with this regulation obviously is what uh what uh is defined as a deforested area. So it seems the EU has it as a forest map of Australia. Is that correct? they produced a map that they designated areas that were or have been forested
>> in the initial stages. They did um as part of their I think assessment as to whether a country would be high, low or medium risk. Um we worked with them in both you know bilaterally um and with the joint research council which had produced the the map um on you know there was some obviously some clear defin differences in the way that we define forests and and all the like um one of our constant you know messages to the EU is that you know sustainability has a different context in different countries and to ensure that that was replicated. So that work all led to us being designated a low-risk country. Um and then so subsequently it's really at that small end of checking with those tools that have been developed which will help supply chain assure that they our production is deforestation free.
>> So their map is irrelevant then is it
>> effectively it's not what's used to test. It's the obligation is put on the importer and they will seek information from their supply chain and those tools that I mentioned can help amongst others there'll be other private um tools that will be available to assure that their supply chain is deforestation free.
>> So what do those tools refer to like is there a map underlying that or because ultimately what's defined as an area that hasn't been deforested. Yeah, there
will be definitions underneath that which um I'll have to take on notice the exact detail. I don't have it all.
>> So, those definitions are set now or they're still being worked out.
>> They they should should be set now. >> Okay.
>> And who's developed this LPA? Who's developing that?
>> So, there's a few different organizations um that have been involved. Um yeah, so there was that livestock production assurance which I'll have to to get the details or notice if you like on who the underlying um developer is, but then there's that one that was co-unded with food agility CRC um that developed one that we did and then the ones in forestry.
>> Okay. And the um uh beef central reported in late August that there was still 1500 to 1,800 beef producers um yet to comply. uh is there updated figures on that?
>> I don't have updated figures on on compliance but noting that the the regime still has not come into effect. Um and it is under a um I guess a checking system at the EU and should they be requested to provide you know assurance through those there's those mechanisms they could use. So
>> right. >> So this EU map is meant to be irrelevant, I suppose, but apparently the EU commission itself um uh says that uh uh and I quote, there's a general overestimation of forest cover along the west coast and north of Australia. Is that your understanding too? Are they still working on this map as such or
>> I I can take further detail on on notice, but my understanding is that it's settled now. Um and we had that work that we had done previously which you know was a a fruitful dialogue in differences between what you know our our system and our regulatory arrangements are defining of deforestation and what the EU had and that those have now been been settled
>> right um in terms of establishing the geoloccation because my former understanding of this was that it what was key is that the the the beast so to speak had not touched a foot on any area that had been deforested. So in terms of establishing where that animal had been before it goes to the EU, has the EU recognized their NIS system or is there a separate geocation requirements for
that you know we are capable of of meeting those requirements our producers um whether that's through the exact linking through the NLIS or through these other mag mechanisms which will use other data as you pointed out and and private sector will have their own own sources of information which they might do privately um will do that um so I think that will be the the main mechanism in which it occurs given the restrictions on the the use. It's not a government to government, you know, provision of information for this.
>> So, I'm just I'm not sure I got an answer there. Is is the NLS enough for >> I'll have to take that.
But given my given the the nature of the arrangement being private sector and and you know, business to business, not government to government, I suspect that the use of data will be from some other sources as well. Okay, if >> that makes sense.
>> How how in like in terms of how this actually works in practice, what what is classified as something that's deforested? Is it try and go back to what our continent looked like before European settlement or is there some date from which uh deforestation is set to
>> Yeah, the date the date was um the 31st of December 2020.
>> Right. Okay. So any any So how is regrowth treated after December 2020 if someone clears regrowth? So it would
be so it's commodities or products produced on land subject to deforestation or or forest aggregation that occurred after December 2020. Um and so with regrowth within our environmental laws and the like as you've been discussing it would remain you know as per the domestic >> regulations that apply.
>> So that would be okay in those areas if they were already had been cleared before 2020 you're allowed to continue to clear them afterwards in that geographic area. Let let me take this
with you. No,
>> but it would definitely going back to my former question. If we wanted to open up new areas like the Cape and there'd be significant clearing required, that wouldn't be bank couldn't export to the EU from there.
>> If they were subject to deforestation,
yes, that's what a joke. Uh okay. Um the EU free trade deal says that we're going to cooperate with the EU on this regulation. What does that mean?
>> I think it really just talks to the spirit of of communication and and discussion. So the EU free trade agreement has a number of forums which allow government-to-government discussions on a range of issues be SPS technical barriers to trade of which this one would be one um and and the like. So
>> so this is more a question for the minister but we previously and in fact it was bipartisan myself and Senator Jacone uh wrote to the EU commission opposed to these regulations. Does the uh government's uh uh backing down on the EU free trade deal mean we now accept these regulations and we're not going to push back against the EU uh trying to dictate uh our our environmental laws in this country?
>> Um Senator Canavan, I'm not familiar with the letter that you're referring to, but I will say that we are proceeding uh with uh the agreement.
But are you are you going to put a specifically Australian government position here as previously was stated? In fact, I believe you would have voted for the motion, Senator McCarthy, >> which previously had us opposed to this this regulation. Seems like we backed down now. >> Just accepting it.
>> Well, we're certainly not opening uh reopening negotiations on uh the EU free trade agreement.
>> Yeah, I I accept that. Yeah, it's a different question about this regulation. Does the deal EU free trade deal draw a line in regards to the federal government's position on the EUDR? Do we now accept this regulation?
>> Yeah, I think I think it's um it's bringing two separate issues together. So the EU deforestation regulation and as you mentioned the the the department and the government was very active in engagement with the the EU about the the structure and form and the implementation of the um of the regulation and that led to um two delays to the introduction while clarity was sought and as um Dr. Greenville has said we we have received a lowrisk um rating the EU. So so that is a law. It is in place in the EU. It will come into effect in uh at the end of the year. The department and the government presumably will still um when things come up uh in the EU or elsewhere um that are causing concern for our trading relationship, we will engage actively with those um against that. The EUFTA, as I understand it, makes no direct link to the EUDR or forces the the department or the the government or Australia into uh an any such agreement. Um they're two separate.
>> I'm just trying to clarify. I'm not I'm not combining the two. In the government's own fact sheet on the EU free trade deal, uh this is the fact sheet in regards to environment climate. Uh the government says that Australia and the EU have agreed to cooperate on a range of trade, environment, and climate issues, [clears throat] including and I won't read them all out, but one is deforestation. >> So I'm just trying to clarify what the federal government's position is. The federal government's link two things, not me,
>> Sorry. I I I will I see now [clears throat] where you're asking. So we will continue to engage with the trading partners on issues of importance including non-tariff barriers and we've been clear on our position on the EU deforestation regulation which was your original question.
>> Okay.
>> Thank you.
>> Okay. And Senator just to put provide a bit of color and light around that. We continue to advocate for you know changes to the EUDR you know until the last moment and obviously as these you know would evolve into trade irritants we will use the mechanisms that are available to us if the the free trade agreement gets ratified to to raise these issues
>> and we were successful in having skins and hides removed from the commodities that were to be covered by the EU deforestation regulation which is a terrific outcome.
>> Okay. Uh uh well actually just on just on the the EU free trade deal we're on it. Um I'll just be quick. Is that for this outcome the trade deal?