COMMITTEES
Senator DAVID POCOCK (Australian Capital Territory—Independent ACT Whip) (17:47): I seek leave of the Senate to amend business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1 in the terms circulated in the chamber. Leave granted. Senator DAVID POCOCK: I move the motion as amended: That the following matter be referred to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee for inquiry and report by the first sitting day of 2027: The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority's (APVMA) June 2026 decision regarding paraquat, with reference to: (a) the scientific evidence considered by the APVMA in reaching its decision; (b) the adequacy, transparency and independence of the APVMA's decision-making process; (c) the current evidence regarding any association between paraquat exposure and Parkinson's disease and other neurological conditions; (d) the implications of the decision for farmers, agricultural workers, rural and regional communities, golfers and others who may be exposed to paraquat; (e) the extent to which Australia's regulatory framework appropriately responds to emerging scientific evidence and uncertainty regarding the long-term health impacts of agricultural chemicals; (f) international approaches to the regulation of paraquat and other agricultural chemicals with potential long-term health impacts; (g) whether any changes to Australia's regulatory framework are required to ensure public confidence in the assessment of agricultural chemicals; and (h) any related matters.
I wanted to make a few brief remarks. Paraquat is a herbicide linked to Parkinson's disease. That's not my opinion; that's the overwhelming opinion of scientists who have for decades been looking at why and how rates of Parkinson's disease have been climbing in farming communities around the world.
It's now banned in more than 70 countries, including China, which is one of the largest manufacturers of this chemical. Yet, after a review lasting almost 30 years, the APVMA has decided to allow its continued use in Australia, putting even more generations of farmers at risk. I totally get the argument from farmers and some in the ag sector about the efficacy of the herbicide and how crucial it is, but the APVMA is tasked with looking at the evidence and the safety for human health, and the APVMA concluded that the available evidence did not convincingly demonstrate a direct causal link between exposure to paraquat and an increased risk of Parkinson's disease.
Leading Australian scientists strongly dispute the way the APVMA reached that conclusion. Professor Wes Thevathasan, a neurologist who treats people with Parkinson's, says that major studies of exposed communities were largely ignored by the APVMA studies, which have repeatedly found a link between paraquat exposure and Parkinson's. He said the APVMA reports wouldn't pass the first test in a science degree, and that should disturb all of us greatly, because this is our regulator.
Other experts I've spoken to say the APVMA treated studies differently depending on their findings and relied on research linked to Syngenta, the manufacturer, without properly addressing those conflicts. Those concerns deserve to be tested openly. Farmers need effective tools to manage weeds and protect crops.
They also deserve to know that the chemicals they use will not damage their health years later. The inquiry will hear from experts and communities and allow the APVMA to explain its decision and help determine whether Australia's chemical regulation is truly independent, transparent and based on the best available science. I thank the coalition and the Greens for recognising the importance of these questions and supporting this referral, and I commend the motion to the Senate.