Phosphine Folly: The Red Tape Threatening Australia’s Grain Industry

MR RICK WILSON MP
FEDERAL MEMBER FOR O’CONNOR

17^th August 2026

OPINION: Phosphine Folly: The Red Tape Threatening Australia’s Grain Industry

Australia's grain industry is one of our great export success stories. It feeds millions of people around the world, underpins regional communities and generates billions of dollars in economic activity.

In Western Australia alone, growers delivered a record grain harvest of around 25 million tonnes last year. From paddock to port, thousands of jobs depend on that supply chain continuing to operate efficiently.

Now, a poorly justified regulatory change threatens to undermine it.

From 1 December 2026, new workplace exposure limits for phosphine are scheduled to be implemented by state governments following a review led by Safe Work Australia. The proposed limit would reduce allowable workplace exposure from 0.3 parts per million to just 0.05 parts per million, making Australia an international outlier. The United States, United Kingdom, New Zealand and major grain-producing regions in Canada continue to operate at 0.3 ppm, while the European Union applies 0.1 ppm.

The problem is that phosphine is not some optional chemical that can simply be replaced overnight.

It is the primary fumigant used throughout Australia's grain supply chain to eliminate insect pests in stored grain. Without effective fumigation, grain can become infested with weevils and other insects, threatening export markets, biosecurity standards and food quality.

The reality is simple: Australia cannot export grain riddled with insects.

If our grain does not meet the expectations of international customers, ships do not sail, contracts are lost and our competitors take our place.

Industry groups have repeatedly pointed out that there is currently no commercially viable alternative capable of operating at the scale required by Australia's grain industry. Grain Trade Australia has warned that the proposed limits cannot presently be measured or met in practical operating conditions and risk undermining Australia's ability to deliver pest-free grain to domestic and international customers.

What makes this situation even more frustrating is that nobody has adequately explained why such a dramatic change is necessary.

Where is the recent scientific evidence?

Where is the modern Australian study demonstrating widespread harm under current operating arrangements?

Where is the feasibility analysis examining the practical consequences for regional industries?

Industry participants have noted that much of the evidence underpinning the review is decades old. One of the frequently cited occupational studies examined just 22 grain fumigation workers in India and was published in the late 1980s, relying on exposure observations dating back even further. That study found workers experienced transient symptoms and specifically recommended further long-term follow-up to assess chronic effects. It was hardly the definitive evidence base for regulations that could reshape a multi-billion-dollar Australian industry.

Of course, worker safety matters.

Nobody disputes that.

The grain industry has every incentive to protect workers. Farmers, storage operators and exporters are not interested in exposing staff to unnecessary risks.

But good regulation requires evidence, proportionality and practical application.

What we appear to have instead is a bureaucratic decision searching for a justification.

The consequences will be particularly severe in regional communities.

Most CBH terminals and receival points sit within established townsites. Under associated restrictions requiring phosphine use to be separated from neighbouring properties by 800 metres, significant parts of Australia's grain infrastructure could become effectively unusable.

These are not temporary sheds that can simply be relocated down the road.

They represent hundreds of millions of dollars in long-established infrastructure built around rail lines, roads, receival networks and export supply chains.

You cannot pick up a grain terminal and move it 800 metres because a bureaucrat in an office decides a long-standing operating practice is suddenly unacceptable.

The economic consequences would flow well beyond growers.

Transport operators, storage providers, export businesses, local contractors and regional towns would all feel the impact.

Thankfully, Victoria has already recognised the serious flaws in this proposal. WorkSafe Victoria announced this week that it intends to delay implementation of the new phosphine exposure limits until 1 December 2029 while further assessment is undertaken. WorkSafe Victoria acknowledged concerns around implementation costs, monitoring capability and the practical realities facing industry.

If Victoria can recognise the need for a pause, surely WA can as well.

Australia's grain industry is already facing enough challenges from volatile markets, rising input costs and global uncertainty.

The last thing regional Australia needs is another layer of red tape that threatens productivity without delivering any demonstrated safety benefit.

Before these changes proceed, Labor governments owe farmers, grain handlers and regional communities clear answers.

Until then, common sense should prevail.

ENDS

Media contact: Reuben Keyser
Communications and Community Engagement Adviser
[email protected]
(08) 9842 2777
0455 125 035