Peter McGauran (Gippsland, National Party, Deputy Leader of the House) Share this | Hansard source

I wish to thank the members of the government and the Independent members for New England and Calare for their constructive and supportive contributions to this extremely difficult and complex issue, in both economic and social terms, during this debate on the Wheat Marketing Amendment Bill 2006. The members for Wills and Hotham, predictably, tried to make politics largely out of their contributions. If it is out of their systems now and they can now move on to debate the merits of the issues that lie ahead then we will all be well served.

The government believes that removing the bulk veto power from AWBI will give growers greater confidence in the accountability of export decisions following the Cole inquiry. The change will also provide for clearer separation of the commercial and regulatory functions of the current wheat marketing arrangements. These temporary arrangements will provide greater flexibility to government to manage the single desk in a way that maximises returns to growers while it considers the policy moving forward.

The temporary measures will address current concerns in industry about the wheat marketing arrangements, particularly in Western Australia, where there is not the same range of options for the sale of wheat because the domestic market possibilities are not as available to them in any real sense as they are in the Eastern States. The government will consult widely over the next three months at the grassroots level so that the interests of wheat growers are considered in any future policy on wheat marketing arrangements.

I have been asked on more than a few occasions in the 72 hours since the government made its announcement to transfer the power of veto to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry under what circumstances it would be in the public interest to waive the veto. It will depend on the circumstances in question. Each situation will be different and any guidance that I may give now could not reflect all of the complexities likely to exist and the balanced judgements needed.

In approving or rejecting a bulk wheat export application, I do not want to create two classes of wheat growers—those who are winners and those who are losers. I will not allow the very livelihoods of farm families to be decided by a lottery of who acquires and exports their wheat. This will almost certainly require compromises by the parties involved. Not everybody will get everything they want during this interim period. Instead, it is up to the industry and government over the next few months to decide permanent arrangements. Fairness is paramount and will be the government’s guiding principle.

I will turn now to the amendments. On the amendments to be moved by the member for Hotham, I should simply say the type of review proposed would be both time consuming and unnecessary. The industry has been subject to review after review. Do not delay the hard decisions that have to be made by one and all. The government has already committed itself to a process of consultation with growers and stakeholders as to the future of wheat marketing arrangements.

Looking now at the more thoughtful amendment to be moved by the member for New England, needless to say, there has already been considerable discussion about those future wheat marketing arrangements. I have been presented, in company with, I would suspect, many members of the government and a spattering of those opposite, with numerous industry proposals. These proposals have represented not only positions that are for or against the single desk but also a range of intermediate positions. A poll to determine the level of support for the single desk would not allow in practical terms consideration of these intermediate positions. In light of this I do not anticipate the government will be conducting a poll to determine the level of support for the single desk. Instead it is for individual members representing their constituents, being accountable to them for the judgements they make, to represent their views and come to a fixed position. Already during the course of this debate a number of members have declared that they support a single desk in much the same form as it exists today.

Instead, I hasten to assure the House and wheat growers far and wide that it is my intention to write to all growers to inform them of the consultation period and seek their views on the crucial issues. The government will consider the proposals put to it and determine what arrangements will best serve the wheat industry into the future. The views of Australian wheat growers will be at the forefront of our deliberations. I commend the bill to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

See this speech in context