Call for Resources to Speed Up APVMA Approvals

The National Farmers' Federation (NFF) is reiterating its calls for better resourcing for the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA), in the wake of the regulator's worsening processing times.

The APVMA's latest quarterly report shows worrying delays to crucial regulatory processes – just 54.9 per cent of major pesticide application assessments for new products were completed on time.

NFF President David Jochinke said the APVMA needs to be better resourced to avoid the serious impacts of delays on farm productivity.

"AgVet chemicals play a critical role in the production of food and fibre in Australia," Mr Jochinke said.

"The importance of an efficient, science-based regulatory environment that delivers world-leading access to technology was reaffirmed by NFF members who adopted the NFF's new AgVet Chemical Policy in May."

The NFF and its members are calling for a range of straightforward reforms that would enhance access to new products and boost the sector's productivity.

"The first priority should be ensuring the APVMA is sustainably funded and staffed, to deliver on its statutory obligations," Mr Jochinke said.

"The Federal Government has given the APVMA a $5.2 million boost this financial year, which we strongly welcome.

"We need long-term solutions to this problem - to that end we're calling on the government to commit $8 million per year to support the APVMA's role in regulating and controlling agricultural and veterinary chemicals.

"The current delayed response times are jeopardising crop performance, which harms farmers' bottom lines.

"The government is looking for ways to boost productivity across the economy - when it comes to agriculture, investing in the APVMA is a simple solution."

The NFF's AgVet Chemical Policy (May 2025) can be found here.

/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full here.