EPBC Act List of Specimens Taken to be Suitable for Live Import (the live import list)

Question

1. The department has reviewed assessments of applications to add species to the EPBC Act List of Specimens Taken to be Suitable for Live Import (the live import list). None of these assessments appear to consider risks posed by novel pathogens (i.e. pathogens not already present in Australia). (a) What is the legal basis for not considering the risk of novel diseases when assessing applications to add specimens to the list? (b) How does this approach align with the objectives of the EPBC Act, and is it consistent with the precautionary principle? 2. What proportion of permitted taxa on Part 1 of the live import list have been assessed under the EPBC Act? Of those assessed, what proportion have been assessed within the last 10 years? 3. What proportion of permitted taxa on Part 2 of the live import list have been assessed under the EPBC Act? Of those assessed, what proportion have been assessed within the last 10 years? 4. There is no legislative requirement to review whether specimens on the live import list remain suitable for import. However, risk profiles can change over time due to environmental changes or new evidence of invasiveness or establishment (e.g. Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens) now established in the Adelaide River). (a) How does the department monitor changes in the import risk profiles of listed species? (b) Are there any formal processes, guidelines, or policies governing this? If not, why not?

Answer

Please see the attached answer.

Documents

• Question with answer (PDF) (opens in a new tab)
• SQ26-000773.pdf (opens in a new tab)