Gavan O'Connor (Corio, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for New England for bringing this matter of public importance before the parliament. I note that in the chamber there are many members that represent rural constituencies and have an interest in this particular debate. The parliamentary secretary ought not to be upset if I do get somewhat political in my remarks; I thought this was a political chamber. This is a debate about effective rural policy, and I think the parliament certainly can engage in a discussion on the government’s performance over a decade.

Be that as it may, Australian agriculture in this new millennium faces challenges that in the coming decades will test its resilience and its viability. The new global trading environment, climate change and associated issues of water management and salinity, the availability of new technologies, the animal welfare debate, the depletion of our soils and the sustainability imperative are all issues that now challenge farmers, rural communities and national governments, and that will shape Australia’s agriculture into the future. With the ageing of the rural workforce, the overall decline in some rural communities, and the declining contribution of the agriculture sector to the national economy, governments at all levels, particularly at the national level, have a critical role to play in the future directions and development of policy in this sector. The federal government, through its budget and through its involvement in national policy formulation and implementation, plays a central role in the development of the national economy and industry sectors such as agriculture.

There is a particular onus on the federal government and the minister responsible for agriculture to secure the integrity of the policy formulation process and ensure that those policies are administered effectively—which is the subject of this MPI—and that promises made to the sector are promptly and honestly kept. Over the past 10 years, successive coalition ministers of agriculture have not lived up to this reasonable expectation.

Australian farmers and the communities in which they live are, as we speak, under the pump from emerging dry conditions that rival the Federation drought of 1902. I acknowledge in the chamber the member for Kennedy, who has joined us for this debate. Many of those farmers have not recovered financially from the widespread drought that occurred in 2002-03, and they have been plunged into despair as a result of the dry conditions that are now gripping the nation from east to west and throughout Central Australia. Over 95 per cent of New South Wales is now drought declared—and I acknowledge in the chamber for this debate members of the coalition that represent that great state of the Commonwealth of Australia. Grain production is expected to halve. Farmers are offloading stock and saleyard prices have plummeted. Rural businesses associated with the sector have seen their business income plummet, and predictions from the Bureau of Meteorology are for an El Nino effect that is likely to prolong the dry conditions by in excess of 12 to 18 months. This is not the only drought we have experienced in recent times. The drought of 2002-03 put enormous stress on farm families and rural communities.

Labor responded before the last election with a comprehensive policy that we challenge the coalition to match. We maintained that great Labor initiative, the Farm Management Deposits scheme, as it is known under the government, because we saw this was of great value to farmers in working their way through conditions that would be considered extreme in a climactic sense. Our reforms included: the scheduling of regular meetings between the Commonwealth and the states to monitor climactic conditions and emerging issues; exceptional circumstances case meetings between the Commonwealth, the states and rural communities to monitor the impact of emerging drought conditions, to be done on a regular basis; improved advice to communities to assist in the preparation of applications for drought assistance; and more administrative measures to make sure that we streamline processes so that farm communities could be supported effectively in times of drought.

The federal government won that election, promising elements of what had already been agreed between the Labor states and the Commonwealth in May 2002. With the climate change debate and the possibility that another drought event could sweep across this nation, rolling in on top of the adverse conditions in 2002-03 which decimated many farm families and their communities, one would have thought that a government that had its eye on the ball would have implemented those particular reforms. It did not. It did not, because it wanted to play politics with this whole area of drought policy.

We then come to 2005 and the audit report on drought policy, Drought assistance, which is one of the most scathing indictments of any Australian government in the past three decades. In 2005, after one of the worst droughts in Australia’s history, this is what the audit report had to say:

The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) did not have a specific preparedness or contingency plan for drought …

Planning by DAFF did identify some risks to delivery of EC—

that is, exceptional circumstances—

… However, there were no specific treatment strategies identified, corresponding to these risks. Nor did risk plans identify the possibility that substantial additional measures might be needed if the drought worsened.

… there was no whole-of-government implementation plan … there was no integrated communication strategy.

As well, there was no whole-of-government framework to support …the implementation of the full range of drought assistance measures.

I say to the honourable members opposite: you can come in here on behalf of your constituents and talk about the enormous difficulties that they are encountering at this point in time, but it is the government of the day that has the responsibility to formulate and implement effective policy now and into the future. Going on that particular audit report, despite all of your huffing and puffing in the media and all the sympathy that you have expressed, I have to say many farmers are seriously questioning your bona fides in this area. I cannot for the life of me understand how your parliamentary secretary here today, the member for Farrer, can say that we ought not to debate the issue of climate change in the context of a debate on effective rural policy now and into the future. I really have to say: you are so wide of the mark, you are a danger to the rural sector in this country.

The government are a danger to the rural sector and to farmers in this country because you have not recognised, and will not recognise, that, while farming communities and land based activities in Australia are a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, they also provide the sector with enormous economic opportunities. Farmers can take advantage of this particular area and how it will evolve. That can spill over, in tangible economic terms, to rural communities. Yet the parliamentary secretary gets up here today and asks us not to be political about a debate that is staring the Australian community, farmers in particular, in the face—one which will impact more than anything else on their future viability.

Let us not pull any punches here; let us just mention as we go effective policy and the mandatory retail grocery code of conduct. That was a Labor policy. We put it all out for you. All you had to do was implement it. You said you would implement it within 100 days of winning that election. The 100 days went by, then 700 days went by. You betrayed the horticultural producers in this country. The matter was taken out of the hands of the agriculture minister by the industry minister, then ripped out of his hands by the Prime Minister when it got too hot to handle. When are you going to implement policies that will impact on the incomes of farmers now, when they most need it? They need an effective policy in this area. They do not want any more backsliding from National Party ministers who betray them at every turn of the screw. (Time expired)

See this speech in context