Australian Advocacy Group

Communicate and Stand Strong. Everyone has a reasonable excuse to obstruct biosecurity officers. What they are doing is wrong and change is required immediately.

Change should be occuring but they misrepresent their bully, intimdating and threatening behaviour as compliance.

They will say and do anything to keep the program going.

STAND WITH ME, Just say NO.

The National Fire Ant Eradication Program (NFAEP) is doing harm, enacting the 2023-2027 National Red Imported Fire Ant Eradication plan, known as the outside in, horseshoe approach. This approach includes indiscriminate, prophylactic, toxic chemcial distribution throughout the eradication zone and designated outlier areas, whether fire ants are evident or not.

Despite being a National Program, funded by a cost share arrangement between the States and the federal Government, the NFAEP continue to work using the heavy handed, more violating State Biosecurity Act cf. the federal Biosecurity Act, which has better protection for individual and private property rights.

Harm caused by the NFAEP includes the physical and mental health decline of humans living in the affected area: with people suffering respiratory difficulties, skin irritations and dryness, allergic reactions and chemical sensitivities and stress and anxiety worrying about human right erosions, privacy breaches, and fear of adverse effects from these stressful activities occuring, such as break in’s, robberies, home invasions, and other more violating crimes, expecially in vulnerable populations. In addition, environmental, local ecosystems, and non-target species harm is a common in implimenting this program.

The elected members of Queensland Parliment are failing to stop the harm caused by the NFAEP or act for the people who are being harmed.

The Department of Primary Industries Director-General, Graeme Bolton and Board members also fail to listen or act on community concern.

Queensland Police and biosecurity officers have enabled and perpetrated the harm. They fail to provide due process and bully, intimidate and harrass people while implimenting the current strategy.

The NFAEP continuously breach APVMA permits, the Biosecuity Act which they claim to operate under, and peoples human and private property rights.

The Biosecurity Act 2014 (QLD), Chapter 1, Part 3

Section 9 Relationship with particular Acts states:

(1)This Act is in addition to, and does not limit, any other Act.
(2)If this Act is inconsistent with an Act as follows, that Act prevails, but only to the extent of the inconsistency—
(a)Biological Control Act 1987;
(b)Food Act 2006;
(c)Food Production (Safety) Act 2000;
(d)the Gene Technology Act 2000 (Cwlth), as applied as a law of Queensland by the Gene Technology (Queensland) Act 2016;
(e)Public Health Act 2005.
(3)Subject to subsection (4), this Act does not affect the application of a relevant Act.

Section 12 Community involvement in administration of Act states:

This Act is to be administered, as far as practicable, in Consultation with and having regard to the views and interests Of, public sector entities, local governments, industry, Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders under Aboriginal tradition and Island custom, interested groups and persons and the community generally.

Environmental Protection Act 1994 (QLD)

6APrinciples of environmental protection

(1)This Act is to be administered having regard to—

(a)the following principles of environmental policy as set out in the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment—

(i)the precautionary principle;

(ii)intergenerational equity;

(iii)conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity;

(iv)improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms (which includes the principle known as the principle of polluter pays); and

(b)the principle (known as the principle of proportionality) that a decision, action or thing directed towards minimising harm or a risk of harm to the environment should be proportionate to the harm or risk of harm that is being addressed; and

(c)the principle (known as the principle of primacy of prevention) that prevention of harm to the environment is preferred to remedial or mitigation measures.

(2)If a provision of this Act requires the chief executive or administering authority to consider, or have regard to, the standard criteria, the chief executive or administering authority—

(a)must consider, or have regard to, the standard criteria; and

(b)need not but may consider, or have regard to, any other principle mentioned in subsection (1).

Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
Entry to Places by Authoriseded Field Officers

6.5 Entry to a place when an occupier refuses access

An occupier may for many reasons, attempt to refuse entry. Field officers should enquire why the person has refused the entry and resord the reason. Where there is a lawful or resonable, the field office MUST withdraw from the place, record the reasons for withdrawal in Forage, set the visit status to revisit required and report thew withdrawal to their Team Leader the same day………
The Team Leader should discuss the case with their Area Coordinator on the day that the refusal occurs. The Area Coordinator will review the case and take on of the following actions within 24-48 hours:

• contact the occupier to addree the concerns and subsequently make an appointment to revisit the property. If the occupier refuses again the Area Coordinator must advise the occupier that the case will be escalated to the Program’s Compliance Team, whereupon compliance action may be taken against them.
• progress the case to enforced entry (refer to section 6.7.1). If the site is to be progressed, the Area Coordinator or Team Leader should set the visit status to restricted and draw a gap with refusal as the reason.

If the client refuses to let the Program treat the property, but will permit the team to survey it, and the team feels their reason for refusal is warranted, the team should refer the case to their Area Coordinator, who will contact the Quality Management team for assessment.

6.7.1 Enforced entry process

If an occupier has refused access and an Area Coordinator has progressed the case to enforced entry stage the following actions will occur (refer appendix 6)

• The Job Dispatch Coordinator will set the visit status for the property to enforced entry with-in 24-48 hours and will assign the job to the Gaps teams for assessment.
• The Gaps team will assess the reason for the refusal within 24 – 48 hours and decide whether to escalate the case for compliance action or find another solution.
• When a case is referred for compliance action, the compliance Officer will contact the client within 24-48 hours to discuss the enforced entry process and make a further attempt to gain consent th enter the property by arranged date and time.
• If the client refuses again, the COmpliance Officer will advice the client that a QPS officer will be engaged to keep the peace when accompanying the Compliance Officer and a field team when they return to enforce entry to the place.
• A warning should be given to the occupier that it is an offence under the Act (s.336) to obstruct a designated office, and that it is an offense (s.298) to contravene a help requirement (s.297) made of a person by an authorised officer, at the time the power of entry is sought.
• The Gaps team will engage a QPS officer and will liasise with the Job Dispatch and Compliance teams to organise a revisit.
• The field team will return to the property with the QPS officer, a DNI technician and Program Compliance officer and attempt to gain access. Ideally the compliance Officer who received the refusal should be the one to attend.
• The compliance Officer, accompanied by the QPS officer, will speak with the occupier to seek consent to enter the place. Where consent is not provided, the Compliance Officer will produce their identity card and inform the occupier of the reason for entering the place, that the authorised officer is authorised under the Act to enter, without the occupier’s permission, and advice the occupier of any steps taken or to be taken (s.270)
• The occupier should again be issued with a warning as outlined above, in respect of obstuction of a designated officer and a help requirement made by an authorised officer. All interactions with the occupier must be recorded in the Compliance Officer’s body worn camera (s.337A – Use of a body Worn Cameras).
• The compliance officer may formally request help (help requirment s.297) from an occupier to help remove an obstruction to treatment, such as unlocking a gate or containing animals. It is an offense for an occupier to contravene the help requirement (s.298). The Program has purchased temporary fencing, which can be used to house poultry or other small animals where the occupier has no such facilities.
• Under the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 – helping public officials excerise powers under other Acts (s.16.6, s16.7 and s.18), Police Officers can use accoutrements to deal with attacking dogs. Should an occupier obstruct and continue to obstract after being advised to desist the officer is able to use force upon the dog. The officer would need to be compliant with QPS policy/procedures by using minimal force to overcome the dog. Before a QPS officer can assist with restraining an animal they must be advised of the public official’s power under authorng law (s.16.4). The Program will provide information relating to which sections of the Biosecurity Act 2014 apply when entering properties each time a QPS officer is engaged to assist the Program.
• The field team may commence work at the place once the occupier has consented to the entry, or where consent has been refused and the occupier advised of the steps to be taken by the Compliance Officer and field teams at the place (s.270).
• If the owner/occupier threatens the welfare of Program staff the QPS officer may detain him/her for the duration of the activities beings undertaken onsite.
• Where consent is provided to the entry by the occupier, an acknowledgement of concent form should be completed and signed by the occupier and a copy retained by the Compliance Officer.
• If the client is not home, the DNI technician is authorised to cut the chain on a locked gate to provide access to the teram (s.296).
• Any subsequent obstruction by the owner/occupier will result in legal action being undertaken by the Program and will not prevent the Program from carrying out the required activity onsite.