CRC for Plant Biosecurity - chairman

That's all folks (for the CRCNPB at least)

CRICHTONA — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 23:10:02 +0000

Since this is the final leaflet to flutter from the CRCNPB twig….

… I thought that just a touch of nostalgia might be acceptable.

It was the indefatigable Angela (not pictured, above) who reminded me that before her time (when the CRCNPB was prone to melfunctions) a celebrated precursor to The Leaflet was in existence. Biosecurity Briefs modelled, provocatively, by Simon and I ran to a rather elastic timetable from 2006 to 2008.

Whilst the copy was appropriately erudite, ‘BB’ achieved lasting fame for its daring and provocative mast-head.

Biosecurity Briefs No.1

These were, of course, less sophisticated times. There was no CRCNPB ‘Font-Fuhrer’, no ‘PowerPoint Polizei’ and, definitely, no CRC censor. Indeed, Angela commented that the ‘BB’ header would never get past the censor these days. Well, we’ll see.

Here are a few nuggets of nostalgia from the archives.

October 2006 - Chairman’s musings

Being able to call in and discuss matters with the Management team is some compensation for living in Canberra! It also serves as a reminder that the Company and the Centre are getting a lot of work out of a very small team….

[Nothing changes, really].

January 2007 - Chairman’s Musings

Happy New Year to everyone. After the pre-Christmas euphoria regarding the Supplementary Bid (well done Team CRCNPB!) it was pleasant to think about non-CRC matters, just for a little while.

[That makes three lots of euphoria altogether].

April 2007 - CEO’s Selections

I attended the AICD Company Directors Course from 7-13 March. The course was five solid days with attendees from many backgrounds. Being in Canberra there was a large presence of senior government staff with Defence and Federal Police having a large presence.

[The latter improved Simon’s network no end….]

August 2008 - From Our Territory Correspondent

Enlivened, perhaps, by the balmy tropical nights, fine wines and a surfeit of barramundi the Boards’ visit to northern climes witnessed a greater than average incidence of risky, and risqué, incidents.
Never risk averse, the Business Manager (with the Chairman) travelled with Qantas and experienced not one but two instances of the famed ‘technical difficulty’. On arrival in Darwin their aircraft was deemed unfit to return south while, on the return leg, two hours was spent in contemplation at Brisbane airport awaiting the arrival of an aircraft delayed in Townsville by the lack of a replacement rubber band (or similar) at that location.

[Following a Board meeting in Darwin].

The first of ‘The Leaflet's’ flutters down - June 2008

October 2009

A Global Summit ‘Food security in a Climate of Change’ (an interesting play on words and themes) was held in London from 19-21 October. … the challenge of food security and constraints to keeping pace with demand – including dealing with biosecurity issues - was featured, for example:

“By 2050 it is estimated that we will need to grow double the amount of food to feed the world’s people, as population growth and changing food preferences increase pressures on land and water availability. This will need to be achieved against a backdrop of climate change which will exacerbate water shortages, reduce crop yields and create new pests and disease threats”.

[We were needed then, we’re needed now and we’re going to keep on being needed].

[Which Program will handle this? ‘Secure Future’ maybe?]

August 2010

[At any rate, we can send a boat to rescue the bear].

After the frenzied activity leading up to the submission of the bid to establish a Plant Biosecurity CRC, the CRCNPB premises appeared almost tranquil. This was, of course misleading. Like the swan apparently sailing peacefully along the surface of the lake, vigorous paddling continued under water.

[Perhaps we didn’t quite understand that there were sharks to contend with….]

February 2011 - IT’S ON FOR YOUNG AND OLD…

My December ‘Leaflet’ column concluded with a reference to the Billy Ocean song ‘When the going gets tough…’ The message this time is ‘Well, we have’. Got going, that is.

[No further comment required].

November 2011

Arriving at the CRCNPB office jet-lagged on Monday morning (but fortunately not the victim of the Qantas downheaval) it became immediately obvious that no sympathy for my condition would be forthcoming from Obersturmbannführer (or ‘Senior Assault Unit Leader’) Max Knobel or her aide Leutnant Anders von Crichton of the kommunizieren kommissariat (‘KK’, for short). “You vill produce ze presentation, unt today - or ve haf vays” was the gist of the message which they conveyed.

[See previous comment re simpler, less sophisticated times].

February 2012 - CARRY ON COOPERATING

[Success! But my cartoon celebrating this cataclysmic event didn’t get past the censor.… Perhaps Angela’s ‘modesty bars’ got it past this time around…]

June 2012

So now, it’s:

And, ever compliant, we do.

Until the first Leaflet of the PBCRC....

Back to The Leaflet.

It's on for young and old

CRICHTONA — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:26:58 +0000

My December ‘Leaflet’ column concluded with a reference to the Billy Ocean song ‘When the going gets tough…’ The message this time is ‘Well, we have’. Got going, that is.

The CRCNPB Board has held two workshops, one in Melbourne in January and a second as an adjunct to the hugely successful ‘2011 Science Exchange’ in early February. Feedback from DIISR was reviewed and accepted as being, in general, favourable to the prospects of a re-bid in the CRC Program Round 14. Both workshops were very positive and the Board’s commitment to a re-bid was echoed at a meeting of Participants, also held during the Science Exchange.

A most encouraging feature of this event was that representatives of the CRCNPB’s researcher community and our various end-user constituencies turned up in numbers and were fully engaged over the two-and-a-half days of activities. It was particularly pleasing that a number of industry delegates spoke warmly of the continuing growth in maturity of the CRCNPB, evidenced in the excellent array of oral and written presentations.

Should the CRCNPB be obliged to close its doors in 2012 we shall be able to do so in the knowledge that we have fulfilled our commitments to the participants and to the federal Government and that a substantial legacy will be left in place. Naturally, the legacy will be much greater if we’re able, over a second CRC term, to develop from the base which so many have worked so hard to create over the past five plus years.

In the short to medium term, preparations for the re-bid need to be progressed concurrently with preparation of a CRCNPB Wind up Strategy, Plan and Deed for submission to DIISR by 30 June. Refer back to the quote in paragraph one at this point….

Fresh from the Science Exchange the CRCNPB was invited to give evidence to the Senate Rural Affairs and Transport References Committee inquiry into ‘Biosecurity and quarantine arrangements’. We understand that more than 40 submissions were made to the Committee and that the CRCNPB was one of only five entities invited to give further evidence. This provided a good opportunity for the CEO and me to highlight our activities and achievements over the past five years, and our aspirations beyond the initial term of the CRCNPB. The Committee ranged widely in its questions and appeared to be supportive of our continuing efforts. A transcript will appear in Hansard in due course.

The Committee expressed particular interest in remote diagnostics. The remote microscope is a sure fire winner with any audience. We thought they might ask about biosecurity and climate change, given that the latter has roused passions in more than one parliamentary breast. In the event we were spared this potential minefield but it begs the question as to what actually is going on with the weather?

Anthropogenic influences - elevated carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and changing temperatures - are measurable, and there is a strong body of scientific opinion which links them to global warming. But beyond that point it seems to me that the jury is out, and may remain so for some considerable time. Relating these effects to the extreme climate events which are occurring around the world isn’t easy. La Niña episodes, for example, have been reported for at least 300 years. The current event is certainly one of the strongest in recent times, but 30-odd years ago record floods in Brisbane and Cyclone Tracy in Darwin were related to a comparable La Niña event.

In the days when my academic activities including lecturing innocent Second Years on climate and plant growth, the modellers of the day were intrigued by the apparent occurrence of cyclical climate events in Australia (especially droughts) at more or less regular intervals. Thirty years was one of them. No doubt today’s computing power and ocean-atmosphere models will reveal whether the cycles were real or just wishful thinking – which brings me back to much of the ‘debate’ on climate change.

One thing is absolutely for sure, whatever changes take place in the climate, Australian and global, the plant pathogens and insects which are biosecurity’s bread and butter will be more than capable of adapting to them.

‘Always look on the bright side…’ [Python, M 1979].

VANMEURSA — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 01:08:23 +0000

Minister Carr’s announcement of the successful CRCs in Round 13 may not have been quite the Christmas present we would all have enjoyed. But we were warned. At interview in November the message was that the competition would be severe. In the event only four CRC bids of the thirteen which went to interview were successful. In previous rounds six or seven might have been anticipated but the CRC Committee had fewer resources at its disposal this time round.

Interestingly, the header of the Minster’s media release on 10 December was ‘$100 million boost to tackle health and environment challenges’. Maybe the latter is a reflection of changed circumstances for Government since Round 13 was launched? However, the successful bids were, by-and-large, consistent with the announced Ministerial priorities of social sciences and manufacturing, which remain in place for Round 14. The eclectic mix of Round 13 winners encompasses mental health, environmental remediation and the well being of young people. And I, for one, shall enjoy barbecues even more in the future, secure in the knowledge that my sausages are of high integrity and come from really contented sows.

In the October issue of The Leaflet, written before our interview, I wrote “…we look forward to a safe landfall and delivering the goods on your behalf”. In terms of completing the bid process and performing at interview I believe that we accomplished both those objectives. Enormous credit is due to all members of the CRCNPB who worked so hard to put together a bid which met all the CRC Committee’s criteria.

At the time of writing we are yet to receive detailed feedback on our bid. This will be critical in Participants advising the Board and Management as to which option we might pursue in 2011.

Meanwhile, we have a Science Exchange to look forward to in February and the prospect of continuing to build on a track record which bears comparison with any CRC in its sixth year.

Following the Annual General Meeting in November I attended an Executive Board meeting of the Global Crop Diversity Trust, held in Rome. Excellent progress continues to be made in securing crop genetic resources in the Global Seed Vault on Svalbard. If there is a concern it is that, while duplicates of the major collections of the international Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) Centres are being obtained, the many smaller collections around the world are still at risk. And the costs of saving them are escalating. The trust’s initial target for its endowment fund was $US260 million. The sum is now estimated at around $450 million.

I was also able to visit CABI Headquarters in the United Kingdom and to receive an update on the development of CABI’s Invasive Species Compendium (ISC) and the Global Plant Clinic initiatives. The ISC will be launched, globally, in 2011 and we expect to be part of that process. Meanwhile, it is planned that pre-publicity for the ISC launch will be generated during the Science Exchange. The Remote Microscope Network is a natural fit with the Global Plant Clinic concept, which provides a diagnostic service for all plants and types of problems, is used by over 80 countries and helps maintain disease vigilance. The clinic also trains plant pathologists, and works to improve regular and reliable access to technical support and advice, particularly in the developing world.

So, as I retreat to the armchair with something soothing, have a very Merry Christmas and, for 2011, consistent with my nautical theme, remember that Billy Ocean once sang ‘When the going gets tough....'

Full steam ahead!

VANMEURSA — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 03:48:14 +0000

Regular readers may recall the image of aquatic tranquillity that decorated my most recent entry in the log of The Leaflet. The subsequent period has been anything but tranquil. As I write (in my heaving cabin) the crew leading the bid to establish the Plant Biosecurity CRC is driving at full speed towards a rendezvous with the CRC Committee on 10 November. It’s very pleasing to record the efforts of all the Able Sea-persons aboard the CRCNPB who have been solidly behind this activity, not least those who work from ports remote from our harbour in Canberra. Thank you all, and we look forward to a safe landfall and delivering the goods on your behalf.

The image also reminds us of the essential driver for both CRCNPB and, hopefully, its successor. Travel, trade and tourism are significant elements in exposing Australia to biosecurity risk. Recent data show, for example, that the number of international travellers arriving at Sydney Airport in 2010 will exceed 12 million. When the CRCNPB began in 2005 the figure was less than 10 million; if the PBCRC bid is successful and an eight year term is completed in 2019 the number of travellers will have reached almost 20 million (30 million is predicted by 2029), and this is through one Australian entry point alone. Every traveller represents a biosecurity risk and one that must be managed more effectively as the numbers grow.

None of the foregoing is particularly new but it has added force at the present time when Australia is dealing with two significant incursions. The first, Myrtle Rust (Uredo rangelii), was detected on the Central Coast of New South Wales in April this year. This pathogen is a threat to the horticultural industry via its impact in nurseries. In addition, native Myrtaceae - eucalypts, bottle brushes, tea trees and other valued indigenous flora - are all at risk, so that there is a significant ‘amenity’ or community aspect to this particular incursion. It emphasises why it is so important that community awareness be enhanced to support the efforts of industry and government when incursions occur. This is a significant thrust in the PBCRC bid.

The Myrtle Rust example is also an excellent illustration of concerns identified by the United Nations in documentation for 2010, the International Year of Biodiversity. The UN statement “…invasive alien species can have devastating impacts…affecting natural and cultivated ecosystems” exactly fits the challenge presented by Myrtle Rust. And the link between biosecurity and biodiversity, to which I have alluded in previous columns is, once more, apparent.

The second incursion was documented as recently as September, when chestnut blight (Cryphonectria parasitica) was detected in two chestnut groves in north east Victoria. Following a meeting with industry Bill Sykes, Federal Member for Benalla, said "The concern is the impact on production and the cost of eradicating and who pays for that cost and if the disease isn't eradicated the cost of living with the disease." A very succinct assessment of the impact of a pest incursion and echoes of October 2004 when half a million citrus trees in Central Queensland were destroyed in the interest of protecting the Australian citrus industry at large.

These two examples are a reminder that when we think in terms of Australia’s grains industry or horticultural industry we are actually dealing with a plethora of crops with their attendant suites of insect pests and pathogens. Myrtle Rust and Chestnut Blight may not rate with, for example, Russian wheat aphid as pests we’d rather not have, but for the industries and communities concerned they are no less significant.

Time to put the quill down, leave the arm of the chair and head for the hammock.

CRC Association Conference 2010

VANMEURSA — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 05:43:47 +0000

‘Pathfinders 2010: the Innovators Conference,' sub-titled ‘Challenge and Change: Sourcing Evidence to Tackle the Real Issues’ was held in Alice Springs from 26 to 28 May. Approximately 43 CRCs were represented and a total of approximately 300 delegates took part. Details of the conference program may be found on the conference website.

Several members of the CRC Committee were present, including Professor Elizabeth Deane, who was a member of the panel for the CRCNPB Third Year Review, Dr Warren King, a member of the interview panel for the CRCNPB Supplementary Bid, and Dr Don Anderson. I was able to have two conversations with Dr Peter Jonson, Chair of the CRC Committee.

The opening plenary session was devoted to the topic ‘Evidence or anecdote – which has the most influence?’ Speakers included Ms Clare Martin, former Chief Minister of the Northern Territory, and Mr David Kalisch, Commissioner with the Productivity Commission. The ‘take home message’ from this session was that many decisions made by governments are not based on evidence. David Kalisch cited examples where evidence had been taken and used by government, tariff reform being a case in point. But there were many examples of policy decisions being made without a strong evidence base or in spite of evidence provided. The CRCs need to provide evidence of achievement which is understood by governments and bureaucracies.

A panel of speakers in the second part of the session addressed ‘The Intervention as a Test Case: Was Intervention Based on Evidence or Anecdote?’ While interesting as a test case the emotion and political overtones of the session left many delegates pondering its relevance to the CRCA.

A closed workshop session for Chairs and CEOs was opened by a short presentation from Dr Peter Jonson, Chair of the CRC Committee. His message was that, at least for the time being, the ‘reform cycle’ is over. Shorter terms for CRCs and strategies for exit but continuation in a different guise remain high on the Committee’s agenda. The possibility of supporting precursors to full CRCs is being examined to make it easier for new players to enter a very competitive field. There was a cautionary note that, after 19 years, Treasury remains to be convinced of the merits of the CRC model. A questioner raised the prospect of the CRCs being drawn into the Productivity Commission enquiry into the RDCs. For example, if the RDCs are doing their job in drawing together research on a national basis, why are CRCs needed as well?

Photo caption: Panel discussion: Pathfinders 2010: the Innovators Conference, Alice Springs

The workshop, proper, considered various aspects of the bidding and review processes. The workshop outcomes will form the basis of a CRCA submission to DIISR. Main points were:

the online DIISR system for applications is not user-friendly
feedback to bidders has been patchy
valuing social and public good is difficult to achieve and to defend
experiences differ but the majority felt that maintaining contacts with DIISR were difficult, not least due to turn-over of staff
an annual CRC round of applications, coupled with DIISR taking responsibility for the Third Year Review, will compound this problem, and
increasing complexity in DIISR processes is paralleled by decreasing funding for successful CRCs.

Capturing the emphasis on international linkages and social sciences in the current CRC Guidelines, the second day of the conference commenced with presentations on ‘Widening the worldview – looking through a different lens’. Humans have preconceived notions which benefit from being tested against a broader contextual framework. This framework includes important cultural elements which may, for example, be critical in negotiating terms of trade.

It was in this context that one of the more unusual papers was presented. Jack Sim of the WTO (World Toilet Organisation) spoke to the topic ‘Making Sanitation Sexy’. The WTO’s thesis is that, in the humanitarian sector, unlike saving pandas, global warming or providing safe drinking water, toilets and sanitation are not popular topics. However, for the 2.5 billion people who live without access to proper sanitation they are a matter of paramount concern in terms of health and quality of life.

Professor Joe Mathew (Centre for Integrated Engineering Asset Management) addressed the challenge of maintaining Australia’s physical infrastructure, pointing to gas plant failures in Victoria and Western Australia as examples where inadequate maintenance – a consequence of declining investment and a shortage of ‘fit-for-purpose’ workforce – had contributed to the problems.

A motivational session ‘The Chemistry of Success’ enabled significant audience participation in examining drivers of peak intellectual performance. The speaker, Matt Church, espoused the need for physical as well as mental fitness among Australia’s CRC elite, at all stages of their careers. For further information visit his website.

As always ‘Showcasing Early Career Scientists’ was a conference highlight. Four speakers were allowed 10 minute presentations with visual aids; four other speakers made three minute presentations with no visual aids. The standard was uniformly high, a PhD student from the CRC for Asthma and Airways claiming victory in the 10 minute category and an excellent presenter from the CRC for Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems narrowly beating a PhD student from the Invasive Animals CRC in the three minute category.

During the conference, Dr Tony Peacock, CEO of the Invasive Animals CRC, gained instant notoriety via a live interview on ABC Radio where less than flattering comments were made as to the gender and age of many CRC Chairs.

Professor Barney Glover, Vice-Chancellor, Charles Darwin University, and Mr John Scanlon, Secretary-General of the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species within the United Nations Environment Program, closed the conference in a session on ‘Innovation by Collaboration’.

The customary awards at the conference dinner included, fittingly, a ‘Star’ award to the Desert Knowledge CRC. This CRC had played the major role in conference organisation and winds up on 30 June. It is to be succeeded by a CRC for Remote Economic Participation.

The 2011 CRCA Conference will be held in Brisbane in mid-June.

Photo acknowledgement: CRCA conference website

Biodiversity and biosecurity – you can’t have one without the other

VANMEURSA — Mon, 03 May 2010 02:25:25 +0000

In February’s edition of The Leaflet, my armchair comments closed with a note on the imminence of ‘Global Biosecurity 2010’, the international conference which exceeded our expectations in terms of both quantity (numbers of delegates) and quality (an acclaimed range of presentations). We all had our favourites but to me the stand-out was the number of industry representatives who commented on how well the CRCNPB presented itself. Well done to everyone!

I’m going to continue the global theme but cheat a little in this article. Readers may know that I serve as a member of the Board of the Global Crop Diversity Trust (GCDT), with my affiliation being as Chairman of the CRCNPB. When I make presentations about either the CRCNPB or the GCDT I invariably point out that biodiversity and biosecurity are inextricably inter-twined. You simply can’t have one without the other. The following words are from the latest communiqué from Executive Director of the GCDT, Dr Cary Fowler. The full version may be found on the GCDT website.

'Of Pandas and Peas

Days after the international community failed to establish legally binding measures to halt climate change, the UN launched the International Year of Biodiversity. Scientists predict climate change will directly imperil one-fourth of the Earth’s species.

In the coming months, you can expect to hear about charismatic mega-fauna - whales, tigers, gorillas, pandas, etc - as well as the diversity of species found in the oceans and tropical forests. You’ll be exposed to the organizations devoted to saving them. Most of all you will be told about the threat of extinction. The issue of “endangered species” has dominated the biodiversity narrative since the 1980s when the term entered into common usage.

To many people, “biodiversity” is almost synonymous with the word “nature”, and “nature” brings to mind steamy forests and the big creatures that dwell there. Fair enough. But biodiversity is much more than that, for it encompasses not only the diversity of species, but also the diversity within species. It includes not only wild species and their diversity, but domesticated species and their diversity.

It is the diversity within species that keeps species going.

People and Plants

Whether we consciously realize it or not, the biodiversity with which we are most familiar, and the biodiversity with which we have most intimate historical, cultural and biological connections, is that associated with food plants.

This diversity, this cornucopia of genes, has arisen and persisted in large part because of the ancient and ongoing tie between peoples and plants. Farmers and more formally trained plant breeders use the diversity found in wheat and other crops to improve the yields, disease and pest resistance of the varieties in use today. The process of varietal improvement is continuous.

Nevertheless, when we think about biodiversity, we rarely think about food.

What is it that makes one cuisine distinct from another? Which foods and spices are strongly associated with a particular cuisine? What makes Thai food “Thai” as opposed to Italian? It doesn’t necessarily have to do with where the crops were originally domesticated. So many key ingredients are immigrants!

The number of crops we use for food is impressive enough, but the diversity within those crops is particularly notable for both agronomic and cultural reasons. Like other biodiversity, however, it is endangered.

Plants and animals are not waiting for the next IPCC report to document global warming. Hundreds of scientific articles document the movement of wild species in response to climate change. But the disturbing fact is that many aren’t moving fast enough, and can’t. Others simply have no corridors of escape. All are potential climate change road kill.

Agricultural crops face a similar dilemma.As with pandas and many other wild species, the maize and sorghum varieties grown by subsistence farmers in Africa cannot and will not easily relocate. And staying where they are is hardly an adaptive strategy that inspires confidence. Even if such crop varieties were to survive, what would become of the farmers hit with devastating drops in production due to climate change?

Seed banks with their vast collections of crop diversity constitute a cultural corridor, a bridge through time that will help enable crops to adapt to climate change. The biodiversity that seed banks protect may not inspire our empathy as easily as pandas, but its loss would be catastrophic for many, many species.'

In context of the closing remark, a notable first has recently occurred. The Board of CIMMYT (Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maíz y Trigo) met in Canberra over several days in early April. The international gene bank for wheat and maize, CIMMYT has been a vital source of material for Australian plant breeders. Australia has been a strong supporter of the international centres – through bodies such as Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) and the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) - and has provided key personnel to a number of Boards. This visit recognises these vital linkages.

And to return to my ‘global biodiversity/biosecurity’ theme, CIMMYT is a key player in providing genes in the battle against the threat of wheat stem rust strain Ug99, one of the major global biosecurity threats of the moment.

‘Know your friends’

VANMEURSA — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 03:13:52 +0000

Frighteningly, the ‘New Year’ is already more than one month old and the timeframe for preparing our re-bid becomes ever tighter. When we launched ‘CRCNPB Mk I’ back in 2004 we used the catchphrase ‘Know your enemies’ as one of the key rationales for biosecurity activities as a defence against plant pests and diseases. That line remains valid but it occurs to me that ‘Know your friends’ is going to be just as important this ‘second time around’.

During January the Re-bid Task Force held a meeting in Melbourne. Subsequently, Simon and I have made visits to potential ‘friends’ who have the capacity to make big contributions to the international component of our re-bid.

In my case, I was invited to take part in a workshop held at Manado, North Sulawesi, and hosted by the Pacific Institute for Sustainable Development in association with other partners* in the Australian Indonesian Biosecurity Community project (AusIndoBIOCOM) led by Professor Ian Falk of Charles Darwin University.

Taking the existing AusIndo BIOCOM project ‘Managing Biosecurity Across Borders’ as a starting point the workshop examined current and future directions for plant biosecurity with a focus on key drivers for the re-bid: securing trade and market access; emphasising social sciences, including community engagement, and developing international linkages.

The workshop was a supreme example of why it is so important – to Australia and its near friends and neighbours – that we are border-vigilant.

As a gateway to the northern and eastern provinces of Indonesia, Manado was an excellent choice of venue through which to demonstrate this point. Developing, rapidly, as a tourist destination, like any other gateway Manado representsa significant biosecurity risk.

But, whilst Manado is a gateway to Indonesia, the whole Indonesian archipelago stands across numerous avenues, natural and man-made, by which pests and diseases may enter Australia. Not surprisingly, given that 15 of 32 Indonesian provinces grow wheat, the spectre of stem rust strain Ug99 making its way south through the islands was a topic of keen discussion.

Plant biosecurity risks in Indonesia itself include major food staples such as rice, maize, coconut and banana. Indeed, Ian’s map is titled ‘Food for Thought’ and we can expect that the nexus between global food security and global biosecurity will be a feature of the forthcoming conference Global Biosecurity 2010, now just a few weeks away.

But in North Sulawesi there are also risks to the marine environment, the basis of the flourishing tourist trade. As has been noted many times, while the environments differ the principles of maintaining biosecurity are the same. That’s why it’s gratifying that our colleagues in the ‘Australian Biosecurity CRC for Emerging Infectious Disease’ and the ‘Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre’ are joint hosts with the CRCNPB for Global Biosecurity 2010. I look forward to seeing you there.

*Charles Darwin University, Bakti East Indonesian Knowledge Exchange (Makassar), Jikti East Indonesian Researchers’ Network, Universitas Mahasaraswati (Bali), Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana (Java) and Universitas Nusa Cendana (West Timor).

Images:

PhD students, Theo Litaay (left) and I Wayan Mudita (right) with Professor John Lovett (middle)

Map courtesy Ian Falk, January 2010

‘tis the season….’

VANMEURSA — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 03:19:17 +0000

“Bah! Humbug!” said Scrooge, dipping his quill in the inkpot one more time. “Christmas! Nearly year’s end. Ledgers to make up. Cash contributions to count. More in-kind chickens than you can possibly eat. Bah! HUMBUG!!”

It is a bit like that isn’t it? Don’t you always feel that this is the time of year when everybody is emptying their desks on to yours, so that they can have a break feeling they’ve met their KPIs, delivered outputs and outcomes, and generally met their accountabilities? You don’t? Oh, so it’s just me. Well “Bah! Humbug!” to that.

There hasn’t been much “Bah! Humbug!” in 2009 as far as the CRCNPB has been concerned. We’ve actually had a pretty good year. The Third Year Review satisfactorily completed; follow-up actions taken and reporting deadlines met. A very successful Science Exchange gave ample evidence that our CRC is doing all the things that CRCs are supposed to do – good science; effective networking and delivering the goods in a timely fashion.

The last month has seen no let up in activities, with a Board workshop on intellectual property held on 23 November, followed by Board Meeting No.19 on 24 November. A Participants Meeting on 25 November devoted most of its attention to the ‘re-bid’ and was followed by the Fifth Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the Cooperative Research Centre for National Plant Biosecurity Ltd. In my ‘Chairman’s Report’ to the AGM I mentioned many of the points in the previous paragraph, and emphasised what strong support the Participants had given to the activities of their CRC throughout the year. The attendance and contributions at Participants Meetings has been excellent and gives everyone confidence that expectations are being met. Nick Langley, our Business Manager, was able to present a Financial Report which had received an unqualified audit. Always a pleasing and reassuring result.

The AGM saw the retirement of four members of the Board, me included. It was very pleasing that the election which was held saw all retiring Board members elected for a two year term. Having half the Board retire each year is enshrined in the company’s Constitution. While it’s healthy to have provision for turn-over, continuity is also important, especially when there are major initiatives – like a re-bid – on foot. So we can move into 2010 with an established Board and Management team in place.

Five years ago those of us involved in the initial bidding process had one of the best Christmas presents ever - notification from the then Department of Education, Science and Training that the bid had been successful. While the news wasn’t delivered by reindeer and sleigh, and no-one had to climb down a chimney, there was a good deal of “Ho! Ho! Ho-ing!” to be heard. And, again, in 2006 with the success of the supplementary bid.

Shall we be able to celebrate again this time next year? Well, a Taskforce, convened as a committee of the Board, is working on the re-bid and we shall call in additional expertise on a needs basis as the work progresses. We have a good understanding of the timelines involved and the expectations of the CRC Committee. Above all, nothing is being taken for granted. We can certainly stand on our record but, to succeed in gaining a further term of support, we need to have substantial new content in the scientific programs and, potentially, new participants to help to deliver them.

Next year will be busy. However, I shall hang my stocking up on Christmas Eve and sleep soundly (with ear plugs to deaden the sound of those jingling bells) knowing that the team will be on deck at 0830h on 1 January 2010, ready to go. Did I hear somebody say “Bah! Humbug!”?

‘Merry Christmas’ everyone and thank you all for your contributions to the CRCNPB in 2009.

Agriculture Outlook Asia 2009 and CABI Global Summit

VANMEURSA — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 05:48:13 +0000

Fastening the seat belt of the Chair one more time, rehearsing the brace position and checking out the life jacket I was reflecting that the ‘K747’ virus is almost as contagious in CRCNPB circles as ‘H1N1’…

My Leaflet contribution for August ended with myself and fellow Board member Christine Campbell about to head for Singapore to contribute to the international conference Agriculture Outlook Asia 2009. The theme was ‘Meeting the challenge of food security: producing sufficiently to feed a world population of 10 billion by 2050’. I was invited to present a paper on biosecurity and plant genetic resources, in the context of achieving this objective.

The audience was interesting. Predominantly Asian but with north American and European delegates drawn from agribusiness, government policy people, and international bodies, including World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. Hard-headed and data rich.

Given the theme and the location the immediacy of the food security challenge was well appreciated and highlighted by many speakers. Equally striking was the absence of any climate change sceptics. Given that climate change is already impacting in Asia, with rising sea levels and the incidence of ‘extreme’ climate events this is probably not surprising, but members of the Australian parliament (of several political persuasions) might have found the experience enlightening.

The conference format was ‘set pieces’ and discussion panels. My ‘set piece’ turned out to be an easier assignment than that given to Christine who was invited to Chair two lively panel discussions. The first, ‘Improving infrastructure facilities to meet the increasing demands from agricultural and food industries’ considered infrastructures available to the agrifood industries and where investment opportunities may be found. The second, ‘Examining facilities that ensure efficient distribution and post-harvest handling of agricultural products’ included an examination of best practice approaches to guaranteeing a safe and steady supply of agricultural commodities. Both had clear biosecurity implications.

Following the very stimulating and enjoyable Science Exchange, covered elsewhere in this edition of The Leaflet, it was time to re-pack the trusty suitcase and head for Europe. This time to present on biosecurity and plant genetic resources at the Warsaw University of Life Sciences – yes, the CRCNPB is known in some quite unexpected places.

This visit was an adjunct to taking part in the CABI Global Summit ‘Food security in a Climate of Change’ (an interesting play on words and themes) held in London from 19-21 October. As at the Singapore meeting, the challenge of food security and constraints to keeping pace with demand – including dealing with biosecurity issues - was featured by the organisers, for example: “By 2050 it is estimated that we will need to grow double the amount of food to feed the world’s people, as population growth and changing food preferences increase pressures on land and water availability. This will need to be achieved against a backdrop of climate change which will exacerbate water shortages, reduce crop yields and create new pests and disease threats”.

Timed to precede December’s United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, the CABI Global Summit brought together senior agricultural ministers, representatives from development organisations, scientists and the corporate sector to look at developing policies, practices and technologies to “… enable us to grow more and lose less of what we already grow”. A strong biosecurity message in this punch line.

The Global Summit was followed by the annual CABI Development Consortium Workshop, held at CABI headquarters in Wallingford, near Oxford. This workshop provides input to the ongoing work of developing the CABI Compendia. The Crop Protection Compendium is well-established and the CRCNPB was credited for brokering the deal for Australian membership of the consortium preparing the biosecurity-oriented Invasive Species Compendium.

These international contacts are important to the CRCNPB not only to raise the profile of our contributions but also to respond to the strong signals being sent by the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research as to the desirability of CRCs building strong international linkages. These linkages are even more important as we set about developing a bid to extend the life of the CRCNPB.

In context of the bid, I have recently become involved with two initiatives that should help to promote the social science aspects of the CRCNPB. In late August I was advised that I had been appointed to the Board of the Primary Industries Education Foundation (PIEF) as one of seven independent Directors.

The PIEF is a public not-for-profit company covering the primary industries, government and education sectors. Its objectives are to provide national leadership and coordination to encourage primary industries education in schools; to commission projects to further this end; to provide a source of credible educational resources for schools in order to improve community confidence in Australia’s primary industries, and to communicate primary industries research and development outcomes in a format accessible to schools. The CRCNPB’s innovative approach to taking biosecurity science into primary schools is an excellent example of the types of work with which I hope the PIEF will become associated.

On this note the CRCNPB have just release their Primary School’s unit Plant Pest Investigators. For further information on this please see our Plant Pest Investigators story. I am very pleased also to have been appointed an Adjunct Professor in the Research School of Social Sciences at the Australian National University. I shall hold this status within the National Institute for Rural and Regional Australia a body established with somewhat similar objectives to those of the PIEF, in respect of raising the profile of the primary industries sector, and positioning the CRCNPB for an association which should contribute to our social sciences credibility.

Now, how do I get the in-Chair video system to work……?

Compendium Programme Development Consortia Workshop CABI-HQ, Wallingford

Third Year Review

K.Scott — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 00:46:30 +0000

Regular readers of The Leaflet will recall that one of the big events in the life of our CRC, the ‘Third Year Review' (TYR), was scheduled for mid-December 2008. Preparations involved participants, program staff and leaders, management and the board. A board subcommittee, comprising John Irwin, Barry Windle and myself, with the CEO, participated in four teleconferences with the independent review panel prior to the formal meetings held at the University of Canberra on 16 and 17 December.

A TYR is carried out to provide a report to a CRC Board, which considers the report and prepares a response. The final report and response are then provided to the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (DIISR). It follows that the composition of the independent panel is vital in providing a board with feedback on all aspects of a CRC's work, no easy task in a CRC as large as the CRCNPB.

Our CRC was fortunate to have a panel which was both completely independent and genuinely multi-skilled. Dr Kevin Sheridan (Chair) had a distinguished career in the public service, culminating in 14 years as Director-General of New South Wales Agriculture and Fisheries. In addition, Kevin has served on the Boards of a number of CRCs as well as on numerous other boards and committees. His understanding of, for example, the pressures faced by public sector bodies involved in CRCs was particularly valuable to the review.

David Crawford, Chairman of the Westralia Airports Corporation, also served as Chairman of the Export Grains Centre in WA. David held senior executive appointments with Wesfarmers Ltd and was a member of the foundation board of the CRC for Innovative Grain Products. With this background, matters of corporate governance and the operations of the CRC were put under close scrutiny.

As Senior Scientist and Science Leader for Better Border Biosecurity, New Zealand, Dr Craig Phillips provided ‘scientific horsepower' for the review. Craig's interests lie in border biosecurity; invertebrate population genetics; integrated pest management; biological control, parasitoid host specificity and environmental impact assessments for new organisms. A formidable list, indeed.

Craig's expertise was complemented by that of Professor Elizabeth Deane, Pro Vice-Chancellor (Education) at the Australian National University, who brought a critical eye to bear on the CRC's education activities. This scrutiny was informed by Elizabeth's background as a scientist with research interests in immune research and marsupial immunology, and social perspectives of interactions with wildlife.

With such a line-up, readers will imagine that there was a degree of trepidation among the interviewees. In reality, the review was conducted as an amicable enquiry, critical but always constructive, and all who participated found it a beneficial experience.

So what happened? The CRC was able to have a relaxed Christmas holiday in the knowledge that preliminary feedback from the panel had been very positive. A draft report was considered by the Board at its meeting on Friday 13 February (an auspicious day!) and the final report was received on 17 February. In his covering letter Kevin Sheridan wrote:

"On behalf of the Third Year Review Panel for the CRC for National Plant Biosecurity I have pleasure in presenting the Final Report of the Panel. The Panel greatly appreciated the full cooperation of the Board of the CRCNPB, the staff and all participants. The Panel was impressed with the governance, management and operations of the CRC and commends the CRC for effectively pulling together a disparate group of stakeholders.

The recommendations in the Report are for improvements and refinements rather than to overcome any identified fundamental flaws in the management or operations of the CRC. The CRC program as a whole looks set to deliver benefits across a wide cross-section of stakeholders in Australia and is contributing significantly to biosecurity capability development."

The sixteen recommendations from the panel were considered by the Board on 13 February, following a workshop session which had identified significant factors in the operating environment, in particular, those which will impinge on actions resulting from the review. These include global challenges, for example, the economic downturn and climate change, and more local phenomena, such as the Beale Report on Quarantine and Biosecurity and the pressure on human resources faced by many of the CRCNPB's participants.

The next step will be a discussion of the recommendations and the Board's draft response, involving the Participants Committee and the Board's TYR Subcommittee. The final response will be presented to DIISR, together with the review report, by the end of March.

In forthcoming Leaflets I expect to be able to comment on the impact of the review, especially, insomuch as future directions for the CRC are concerned.

Professor John Lovett

Chairman

Back to The Leaflet.