Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak about the Wheat Marketing Amendment Bill 2006. I understand we are at the end of a long sitting and everyone is very keen to wrap up this debate. I appreciate that the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry is at the table this evening, and I note he is listening very carefully to the contributions, particularly those that have come from this side of the House. This bill will transfer the power of veto—very importantly on a temporary basis—until 30 June next year. It does not alter the functions or the responsibilities of the WEA , but they now will have to consult with the minister. Overriding that, what has to happen as part of that process is a resolution of the impasse that has manifested itself in Western Australia at the worst time of the year for any wheat grower, which is during the harvest period. At the end of the day I know that the minister will act in the best interests of Australian wheat growers, and I think that is of paramount importance. The major responsibility of the WEA has always been to ensure that the wheat growers’ interests are of paramount importance.

It is important at this time to think about why we have had the AWB running the single desk, the national pool, with the power of veto. It is important to reflect on why, under the legislation, those powers were given to AWB in the past. They are important powers. Through the Cole commission of inquiry we learnt that certain individuals—former employees and maybe some who are still in the employ of the AWBL or AWBI—let us all down. They brought great discredit to the wheat growers of Australia. But what was not on trial was the single desk export status of AWB, the management of the national pool or the power of veto. That was not in the terms of reference and was certainly not on trial during the Cole commission of inquiry.

It is also important to reflect on why we have had a single desk marketing arrangement for Australian wheat which has served the wheat growers of Australia well for decades. Wheat growers have to sell their product into world markets that are distorted by the subsidies paid by the Europeans and the United States of America—two very powerful economies that subsidise production of their wheat which ends up in international markets. They are not going to wind back those subsidies. In fact, through the Doha Round of World Trade Organisation discussions, which we could probably say have collapsed, they have failed to move on that very fundamental point of world trade reform. So, as wheat growers, we have to sell into distorted markets against the two most powerful economies of the world. The AWB have done an incredible job in the past and I know they can do it in the future, because they will have to into the future. The minister will have to consider this point when he considers how to exercise his veto power and make sure that we do not undermine the AWB and their operation of the national pool.

The other thing I am mindful of in this debate is that for decades and decades the wheat growers who have delivered to the national pool have known that they will get paid for their commodity. You cannot say that about every rural commodity. I have growers and livestock producers in my electorate who have sold valuable commodities which cost an enormous number of dollars to produce only to find that the company they sold them to has ended up in receivership and they will not receive anything for that year’s work. There is a record as long as my arm of companies that have gone broke and the farmers they have received produce from have not been paid for it. That is another one of the great benefits of the AWB and the way they have marketed wheat over many generations: they have never defaulted on a payment to wheat growers. They have always ensured, which is their charter, to maximise returns for the Australian wheat growers, despite selling into distorted world markets. In markets around the world where others would like to cherry-pick parts of the Australian wheat crop, AWB have developed those markets, gone to those markets and shown those people who buy Australian wheat how to get the most out of it—they have an after-sales service as well, if you like.

One of the important things that must happen over the next six months is consultation with wheat growers as to the way forward. There has been a lot of discussion in this place, mainly coming from those on the other side of the House, who would like to tear up the Wheat Marketing Act. They would like to put it through the shredder, judging from comments we have heard in the corridors.

See this speech in context