Agriculture Victoria has taken the unusual step of issuing a fact sheet, debunking what it says is misinformation about a new parliamentary bill that aims to clean up separate agricultural acts, some of which date back to 1975.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The Agricultural Amendment Bill seeks to tidy up 11 acts, with parliament being told it seeks to "improve efficiency, operation, administration and enforcement."
The bills that are subject to revision cover such matters as agricultural and veterinary chemicals, land protection, farm debt mediation, drugs, poisons and controlled substances as well as biosecurity.
But right-wing anti-vaxx group Reignite Democracy Australia has been posting on social media that the bill is 'more overreach, more power and more control' by the state government.
"Seems the Victorian government is soon to deploy a fresh gang of authorised officers with extraordinary powers to enter, search and demand 'assistance' from people in the agricultural sector," the group's website says.
Reignite Democracy Australia describes itself as an advocacy group aimed at maintaining individual and collective liberty for all.
Read more:
An Agriculture Victoria spokesperson said the organisation had put out a fact sheet, aimed at setting the record straight.
In its fact sheet, it rebuffs claims, including that the government will forcibly come and rip out food crops and landholder consent will no longer be required for Authorised Officers to take samples, stock or documents.
"The Agriculture Legislation Amendment Bill 2022 will help safeguard food security, food safety and access to export markets which are vital for Victoria's economy," the spokeswoman said.
"The amendments will not result in the destruction of crops, nor will they prevent people growing their own food - any suggestion to the contrary is false and misrepresents proposed changes in the bill."
AgVic's move follows concerns raised by Victoria's peak agricultural bodies.
The two groups - which often have differing positions - both condemned the claims.
Victorian Farmers Federation and Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance have both spoken out about what they say is misinformation about the bill.
AFSA represents small producers and consumers and president Tammi Jonas described the claims as 'fearmongering' and 'alarming.'
She said the organisation had been contacted by members, concerned about the Reignite claims.
"The claims made on social media assert that the government is seeking greater control and increased surveillance powers, which will disempower small-scale farmers and home gardeners," a statement from AFSA said.
"As a farmer-led organisation that advocates for the rights of small-scale producers and individuals to have autonomy and agency over their practices of growing ethical and ecologically-sound food, we would like to assure our members that we are not concerned about these amendments."
Read more: Cut food red tape, small producers
Ms Jonas said AFSA's legal team looked at the source of the claims and found they originated from 'far-right' groups, with anti-mandate, anti-vaccination and libertarian ideologies.
"It's just nonsense from these groups that have been formed - the organised right have been taking advantage of people's fears in a pandemic.
"It's coming from groups that are trying to undermine a government that has seen us through the pandemic.
"We had members start contacting us asking if it was true that it was going to stop agriculture, whether (Premier) Dan Andrews was trying to kill agriculture in Victoria and whether it meant they wouldn't be able to grow organic vegetables."
She said it appeared the groups were trying to push 'any line' that appeared to support its views of increasing government authority.
"That's the fearmongering they have been using, to drum up support for their organisations."
AFSA was supporting the changes, as they would allow the sale of packaged meat from farmgate shops.
'We, along with the Victorian Farmers Markets Association, have been working on this for seven years - they are finally delivering us the right to sell packaged meat, wth a class three registration from the local council."
That would mean farmers did not have to get a butcher's shop licence, if they only intended to sell prepackaged meat, which was processed off-site.
She said AFSA's support might seem odd, to some.
"But we are not anti-government, we are opposed to over and inappropriate regulation - here we have these clearly anti-government characters, who are running for government."
"People should pay attention to who they are voting for."
On its website, the VFF said it had received a briefing from the government prior to the introduction of the Bill and understood the intentions behind all changes to legislation.
"The Agriculture Amendment Bill 2022 is a complex and varied piece of legislation that seeks to amend 11 separate Acts.
"There are a number of changes that the VFF supports including improvements to biosecurity enforcement.
"The VFF welcomes increasing penalties and provisions for offences associated with noxious weeds or pest animals."
The VFF statement says misinformation about the bill suggested the authorised officers would be able to undertake searches without a warrant, without landholder consent and without the requirement to present identification.
"The VFF believes this misrepresents and misinterprets the amendments set out in the bill."
Authorised officers were required to present identification unless deemed unreasonable in the circumstances.
"The change does not mean presentation of identification can be refused just because the authorised officer thinks it is inconvenient.
"The VFF acknowledges that additional powers for authorised officers must assist in investigations conducted by the authorised officer only.
"The VFF encourages compliance with investigations conducted by authorised officers, and welcomes penalties incurred for the provision of false information; the obstruction of investigations; and the threatening or intimidation of, or failure to comply with reasonable requests by an authorised officer."