General Manager of Biosecurity Queensland’s National Red Imported Fire Ant Eradication Program, Graeme Dudgeon told ABC News on 10th October 2020, ‘We have eradicated fire ants six times…in what is the largest eradication of any invasive ant species in the world’ and that ‘eradication was the only option for Australia.’ Just more lies. Fact: There is NO scientific evidence for a fire ant eradication program. The decision was a political one. In 2001, Queensland Minister for Primary Industries Henry Palaszczuk announced a program to eradicate fire ants ahead of any scientific assessment of the entrenched infestation. He rejected scientific advice to tightly contain the infestation and to thoroughly bait the whole infestation, most cheaply and effectively by air. He made the decision to use Commonwealth money to create hundreds of jobs for many unemployed people, especially in his own electorate. Auditors said the biggest drag on the program was an accident prone workforce and weak management. Scientific reviews said the program is not eradicating fire ants. Fact: The fire ant program is a cash cow for the Queensland government to create jobs, not kill fire ants. The Queensland governments contributes 10% of the program’s funding, - the rest comes from the Commonwealth and other States - but Queensland makes 100% of the decisions on how it is spent. The program has never tightly contained the infestation or thoroughly treated the whole infestation, but it has created thousands of jobs in Queensland and a boon for recruitment agencies. Fact: There is no scientific evidence the fire ant program has eradicated ANY incursions of fire ants. A make-or-break performance indicator for the program, set by the Agriculture Ministers’ Council in 2001 was for a functioning information system to collect reliable performance data. The program has never had one. The Queensland Audit Office said in 2017 Biosecurity Queensland cannot always demonstrate it has successfully achieved the goals of its programs because it does not capture adequate, reliable and consistent performance data. Auditors and scientific reviews since 2001 have complained about the program’s lack of performance data. The program’s own Risk Management Committee said in 2018 the program’s lack of a functioning information system and the lack of timely and accurate performance data posed an extreme risk to the program. Time for a Royal Commission to hold all Queensland and Commonwealth Ministers for Agriculture and all oversight committees since 2001 to account for the waste of over $600m of public money and a fire ant infestation, now covering 600,000ha, fifteen times worse than when they were detected in 2001. 14th October 2020
General Manager of Biosecurity Queensland’s National Red Imported Fire Ant Eradication Program, Graeme Dudgeon told ABC News on 10th October 2020, ‘We have eradicated fire ants six times…in what is the largest eradication of any invasive ant species in the world’ and that ‘eradication was the only option for Australia.’ Just more lies.
Fact: There is NO scientific evidence for a fire ant eradication program. The decision to mount an eradication program was a political one.
In May 2001, Queensland Minister for Primary Industries, Henry Palaszczuk announced Queensland would mount a program to eradicate fire ants well before local experts had fully scoped the infestation and before fire ant experts from the USA had assessed it. Not wanting to contradict a local politician, US experts said the well-entrenched infestation was as bad as anything they had ever seen in the US, but there was an outside chance it could be eradicated IF, the infestation was tightly contained and baited repeatedly and thoroughly – most cheaply and effectively by air. Minister Palaszczuk rejected sound scientific advice to use Commonwealth funds to create hundreds of jobs for unemployed people, at a time of high unemployment in Queensland, many in his own electorate. In 2005, the Deloitte efficiency audit said the biggest drag on the program was a large accident prone workforce and weak management.
The fire ant program has NEVER aggressively contained the fire ant infestation or treated it thoroughly.
In 2002, the independent scientific review team said it could not determine if the eradication attempt will be successful, but if the ants were not virtually eradicated by 2004, the program should revert to a containment program. That didn’t happen.
The independent scientific review in 2004 said the size of the infestation had blown out and fire ants were surviving at ground zero that had been treated multiple times. The reviewers questioned the director’s decision to reduce treatments, his claim 99.4% nests had been killed, his decision to inject individual nests and criticised his poor reporting. They told him to start again and treat the entire infested area. That didn’t happen.
The independent scientific review of 2006 said the program was under severe threat because financial and political decisions were taking precedence over scientific requirements. Nothing changed.
The 2010 independent scientific review team spelt it out in black and white. They said ‘Current surveillance methods are inadequate for defining the limits of the infestation or for detecting new infestations… the efficacy of current treatment methods is questionable given that infestation are recurring in key or difficult habitats’ They concluded that fire ants could not be eradicated from Brisbane using current techniques and recommended the eradication program revert to one of suppression and containment for two years while the program developed alternative methods.
The only new method the program trialled, against the specific advice of the 2010 scientific review panel, was aerial surveillance. Between 2009 and 2015, the program trialled the technology. It falsely identified thousands of cow pats and rocks as fire ant nests but identified only 38 fire ant nests. In the meantime, the fire ant infestation blew out from 93,000ha to 300,000ha.
The ‘so-called’ independent scientific review of the program in 2016, chaired by Bill Magee who is now Chair of the fire ant program’s Scientific Advisory Group, declared it was still technically feasible to eradicate fire ants because the program had delimited the extent of the infestation and an eradication program was still cost effective because new generation aerial surveillance technology would reduce the costs. Neither of these claims was true.
The 2019 audit of the program reported that the extent of the infestation had NOT been delimited. In 2017-18 the infestation increased by 78,000ha – a 21% increase. By 2019, the infestation covered 600,000ha, up from 400,000ha in 2016 and fifteen times worse than when they were first detected in 2001.
He also questioned the likelihood that new generation aerial surveillance technology would significantly reduce the costs of running the program. A feasibility study of the technology, commissioned by the program in 2018, rejected the basic premise of the technology – that it could detect fire ant nests in winter because they are warmer than their surrounds. The study concluded the technology could not distinguish between cow pats, rocks and soil which emitted the same thermal image as fire ant nests and the technology missed actual fire ant nests.
The auditor also questioned the program’s claim its baiting program was effective because there had been no independent assessment of the program’s siting of its monitoring sites or its data collection method.
Fact: The fire ant program is a cash cow for the Queensland government to create jobs, not kill fire ants.
The fire ant program continues to be a cash cow for the Queensland government. Queensland contributes 10% of the costs of the program, the Commonwealth and other States and Territories contribute the other 90% but Queensland makes 100% of the decisions on how it is spent – mostly to create jobs in Queensland and a boon for recruitment agencies.
Fact: There is no scientific evidence the fire ant program has eradicated ANY incursions of fire ants because the program has never collected reliable and consistent performance data.
A make-or-break performance indicator set by the Agriculture Ministers’ Council in 2001 was for a functioning information system and data collection system. The fire ant program has never had one.
Independent scientific reviews and independent auditors have raised alarms about the program’s lack of performance data from the beginning.
In 2002, the scientific review said it was in no position to know what areas had not been treated, what areas had been treated and what they were treated with because the program did not have a functioning information system. Further, they said, if a functioning system was not operative by the end of 2002, consideration should be given to terminating the program.
In 2003, the program auditor said they could not objectively evaluate the program’s operational efficiency because of the program’s scarcity of performance measures against outcomes.
In 2004, the scientific review said the program was in no position to know what areas had not been treated, what areas had been treated and what they were treated with because it did not have a functioning information system and that too much information was being left out of reports, including how many properties had become re-infested and how many properties had not received the prescribed number of treatments.
In 2005, program auditors said the program still did not have a functioning information system. They said operational managers were running independent information systems through a series of spread-sheets because they could not trust the program’s information system.
In 2010, the scientific review said it was surprised by the program’s lack of a consistent and coherent information base to assess the effectiveness of surveillance and treatment protocols.
In 2012, a review of the fire ant program’s information system said it was fragile, its performance was erratic and its ability to provide basic functions was questionable.
In 2015, the Queensland Biosecurity Capability Review of 2015 said Biosecurity Queensland lacked an effective performance management information system with high quality, timely and well-understood performance information.
The 2016 scientific review acknowledged it could not assess the effectiveness of the program because of the program’s lack of performance data.
In 2017 the Queensland Audit Office said that Biosecurity Queensland cannot always demonstrate it has successfully achieved the ultimate aims of its programs because Biosecurity Queensland does not capture adequate, reliable and consistent performance data.
In 2018 the fire ant program’s own Program Risk Management Committee reported program’s lack of functioning information systems, capable of providing timely and accurate performance data posed an EXTREME risk to the program.
There is no evidence the fire ant program has eradicated ANY incursions of fire ants.
Time for a Royal Commission to hold all Queensland and Commonwealth Ministers for Agriculture and all oversight committees since 2001 to account for the waste of over $600m of public money and a fire ant infestation, now covering 600,000ha, fifteen times worse than when they were detected in 2001.