Australia’s grain industry slams inquiry into APVMA’s paraquat decision as ‘calamity’ for sector

The Australian grain industry has slammed an inquiry into the chemical watchdog’s decision to not ban paraquat earlier this year, labelling it a “calamity” that undermines the independent regulator.

Independent Australian Capital Territory Senator David Pocock last week put forward a motion to form an inquiry under the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee to review the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority’s decision to tighten controls on paraquat use, rather than banning the herbicide outright.

The inquiry was voted on successfully with support from Nationals Senator Matt Canavan, Ross Cadell, and Bridget McKenzie, and nine Liberal senators.

The maximum application rate for both chemicals was reduced from 1150g/ha to to 231g/ha in the APVMA’s June decision, and included a raft of changes to usage patterns and label requirements.

The decision was celebrated as a win for Australian farmers and science-based decisions by peak industry bodies.

But Mr Pocock said the APVMA’s decision to not ban paraquat placed Australian farmers at risk, linking the chemical to Parkinson’s disease.

“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,” he said.

Mr Pocock referenced the ban on the chemical in China during his motion. Pesticide-related suicides in China were found to have declined by 60.5 per cent from 2006 to 2018 following the ban.

WAFarmers Grain Council president Mark Fowler said an inquiry into the regulator on its paraquat decision would be a “calamity” for the APVMA’s independence from government and industry.

“(It risks) politicising what should be a highly controlled and independent scientific analysis,” he said.

“By politicising it, it’s bringing into the picture people that have conflicts of interest, that have other agendas.

“It’s really undermining the integrity and the reliability of our chemical regulation system. We’ve just had the APVMA go through a lengthy, detailed, and comprehensive process which took two years examining 170 submissions.”

Mr Fowler said despite the motion for an inquiry, Mr Pocock had failed to identify a single procedural flaw and simply did not like the outcome of the review into the herbicide.

“It is breathtakingly arrogant of David Pocock and his supporters to think that they could, as untrained people, that they could do a better job than the APVMA,” he said.

GrainGrowers chair Rhys Turton accused the independent senator of “politicising” the APVMA, and said it undermined the watchdog’s independence and scientific evidence-based decision making.

“Any further analysis of the determination on paraquat must recognise the ongoing need for a robust regulatory framework which empowers independent regulators to make determinations based on the scientific evidence it has before it,” he said.

“The grains industry accepted the determination of the independent regulator and has been focused on ensuring growers have the information they need to comply.

“Australian growers need ongoing access to these tools of the trade to continue to produce grains and oilseeds which support Australia’s and the world’s food security.”

Grain Producers Australia research, development and extension spokesman Andrew Weidemann said that although the sector did not entirely agree with every aspect of the APVMA’s decision made in June, it respected the regulator’s independent authority.

“We cannot support the integrity and independence of that system only when it delivers the outcome we want, because governments, parliamentarians, industry groups and other stakeholders must respect the regulator’s role even when they disagree with a particular decision,” he said.

Mr Weidemann questioned what the inquiry hoped to discover, pointing the public availability of the APVMA’s reasonings behind the June decision.

“If new and credible scientific evidence emerges, that information should go to the APVMA so the regulator can assess it through the statutory process designed for that purpose,” he said.

Paraquat is listed as a schedule 7 poison in WA and requires a licence for purchase. It is banned in the European Union.

Concerns were heightened after the herbicide was the subject of an ABC Landline report in 2024 where the use of the chemical was linked to Parkinson’s disease. Manufacturer Syngenta strongly denied the allegation.

Syngenta announced in March that it would halt paraquat manufacturing at its Huddersfield site in the United Kingdom, citing significant competition from generic producers.