Patrick Secker (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

but I certainly have quite a few in my electorate of Barker in South Australia. In fact I have about 90 per cent of South Australia’s dairy farmers in my electorate, which equates to a bit over five per cent of Australia’s dairy industry. Not only do we have a large pork industry, a large number of pig growers, in my electorate of Barker, but also we have a very large processing plant, Big River Pork. If they were to find it very hard to obtain pigs because the pork industry had collapsed as a result of high grain prices then I think you would find that would affect other jobs. So there is a domino effect from any government decision that you make.

This legislation amends three acts: the Farm Household Support Act 1992, the Social Security Act 1991 and the Age Discrimination Act 2004. It is certainly legislation that this House should support. The fact is that my electorate is in what you might call uncharted waters. For example, areas around Tintinara, Keith, Coonalpyn, Bordertown, Mundalla and Naracoorte have had the lowest winter rainfall on record, and the records date back 100 years. As the member for McMillan said, it is extraordinary. We have never had anything like this—in 2006, the lowest winter rainfall on record. That followed a pretty tough year in 2005 and, frankly, if it were not for one month, October, then 2005 could have been just as bad as, if not worse than, 2006. There was not much feed growing during the winter and it was only that rainfall in October that allowed the crops to finish growing and many of the farmers to cut a lot of hay. There are farmers in my electorate who have been feeding their stock hay for nearly 18 months nonstop as a result of the drought conditions that we are facing.

Whilst October 2005 did allow some hay to be cut, some grain to fill out and some reasonable yields, it was not helped by the fact that prices were pretty low. Many farmers barely covered their costs. They had already had a tough year and we thought we were going to have a good opening, and we did in late March and early April last year in much of my electorate, but it just forgot to rain. This is an area that is generally considered very reliable. They had never seen anything like it before. It rained and then it just forgot to rain after that. I can remember that, in about September 2006, we had half an inch of rain and people thought, ‘Hell, we haven’t had rain like this for 12 months.’ So it has been a very tough year in those reliable areas where generally the farmers would say, ‘We have dry years and we have wettish years, but we don’t have droughts.’ Well, we certainly had one in 2006.

We did have some rains in January, but they were generally pretty useless for our Mediterranean climate. That Mediterranean climate in most of South Australia basically means we have a drought every year—it is called summer—and that drought usually lasts for five or six months. Those rains in January really are not all that useful to us as a rule, unless you happen to have a bit of lucerne. The January rain certainly brings that up, but I can say from my own experience—I am on the land; my son runs the farm—that the lucerne that resulted from the rains six months ago has now all been eaten off. It was an extraordinary two years, and the year before that was also pretty tough, so we have had three pretty bad years, and not only are farmers affected but also those businesses that rely on the farmers are affected.

That is why I was very pleased in November 2006 that businesses that rely on farmers were able to become part of the exceptional circumstances relief that the government so generously provides. I know of a tyre businessman in my hometown of Keith who not only is getting little business—because the farmers are making their tyres last a bit longer and not replacing them as they should or are perhaps just doing a patch-up rather than buying new tyres—but is having trouble getting payments owed to him, because the farmers do not have much money to pay him, so he is getting the double whammy. I am very thankful that we as a government were able to acknowledge the fact that, as the member for New England mentioned, not only farmers but whole communities suffer. We have now acknowledged that. I think the government probably did get it a bit wrong previously, but we were very quick to change the definition of small business from 20 employees to 100, which, as was pointed out by the member for New England, is the same definition used in the Work Choices legislation.

That change affected one business very near me that had 30 employees. That business could have got rid of 10 employees to become eligible for EC relief, which would have had quite a disastrous effect on the town. We used our nous and amended the legislation very quickly, and that enabled businesses in rural areas that I would consider to be small businesses to become eligible. That was an example of the government acting very quickly to fix an anomaly. The last thing we want in drought affected areas is for businesses to cut back, because when the rains do eventually come it will be very hard to get those employees back. We already have shortages in some fields, such as mechanics, and if they left it would be very hard to get them back.

The prolonged drought is having a severe effect on farmers and regional communities. Of my electorate of Barker, which is 64,000 square kilometres, over 40,000 square kilometres have already been EC declared, and I suspect that by the end of the next month or two it might actually be up to about 60,000 square kilometres. This is the first time that people in my electorate have had their areas fully declared as being in exceptional circumstances, so it is not as if we are used to the idea of going to the government for help. In fact, as many in this chamber would know, that would be the last thing on the minds of many farmers. But I have encouraged them. I believe this drought is, as other members have said, a natural disaster of unforeseen magnitude, and it has occurred in areas that have not seen drought before. I am not sure whether it is the worst drought in history—I have read the history and note that, from 1895 to 1903, the Federation drought was pretty severe—but, if it is not the worst, it is pretty close to the worst. These are quite extraordinary times for our rural communities.

Three areas have been EC declared in the Barker electorate, and they are the Murraylands, the Murray Mallee area and the upper south-east. Including those in Barker, there are now 64 areas of rural and regional Australia that are EC declared, and a further two areas in my electorate are currently being assessed for EC declaration—and, as of yesterday, I believe there may be another application from the South Australian Dairyfarmers Association. The total area that is now EC declared is approximately 45 per cent of Australia’s agricultural land, which is quite extraordinary.

In November 1996, the Prime Minister announced that agriculturally dependent small business operators would have access to the same EC assistance that is already provided to farmers. This assistance includes EC relief payments and ancillary benefits, such as a healthcare card and concessions under the Youth Allowance and Austudy means tests. Assistance will be available to eligible small business operators until 30 June 2008 unless that date is extended by regulation. For farmers, it actually goes until March 2009, and that is on the basis that for every year of drought you need one year for recovery. In many cases we are basically looking at three years of pretty tough conditions.

That is going to be very important to our farming and business families who want to send their children off to university. When times are tough, farmers tighten their belts and, unfortunately, the children often miss out on university, because of the extra cost, if they are unable to qualify for Austudy and rent assistance. Quite conservatively, because those people from rural areas have to move to a town and rent a place to live, you could say it costs them at least $10,000 more than if they could stay at home. That is $10,000 more than their city cousins would need; they can drive to university or catch a bus. So that is an extra cost for farmers and, as I said, in tough years their children tend to miss out. I think that measure is very important to ensure that our rural youth do not miss out on tertiary studies as a result of climatic conditions.

Agriculturally dependent small business operators face many financial challenges; therefore, it is imperative that this assistance be available and it warrants the prompt action that we have taken. We need to assure rural communities that there is support available for those businesses that can demonstrate a sustained negative impact on business activities and income. The proposed amendments provide small businesses which would otherwise be at risk with the ability to bestow services on rural and regional communities which, if not addressed, would have a significant impact on those communities and the broader economy.

The purpose of the Farm Household Support Amendment Bill 2007 is to allow agriculturally dependent small business operators access to the same EC assistance that is already available to farmers who have been adversely impacted by drought. Specifically, the bill will formalise current ex-gratia arrangements for EC relief payments and allow agriculturally dependent small business operators to access a healthcare card and concessions under the Youth Allowance and Austudy means tests. The bill will also make amendments to the Farm Household Support Act 1992 to bring it into line with the intent of the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the changes made to that act in April 2006.

Agriculturally dependent small business operators are currently able to access EC relief payments through the ex-gratia arrangements. The amendments to the FHS Act will formalise these arrangements by outlining eligibility criteria, payment rates and multiple entitlement exclusions, and will provide agriculturally dependent small business operators with access to a healthcare card.

The amendments also include provisions for farmers who have diversified into agriculturally dependent small businesses—for example, they might be contractors engaged in trucking or harvesting crops or making hay for other farmers. As these farmers are no longer deriving a significant proportion of their income from the farm, they would not be eligible for EC relief payments as farmers, and their continued ownership of farm assets would affect their eligibility under the small business assets test. To make sure that this category of farmers is not disadvantaged, applicants in this situation will have specific farm and small business assets exempted from the relevant assets and means tests. These provisions do not apply to farmers who continue to derive a significant amount of income from their farms but who also operate small agriculturally dependent businesses.

The amendments affect agriculturally dependent small business operators where 70 per cent or more of their gross business income is derived from providing farming related goods and services to farmers in EC declared areas. To ensure that small business operators can continue to access assistance where they are reliant on providing agriculturally related goods and services to farmers in areas that continue to be EC declared, it may be necessary to extend the availability of EC assistance for eligible small business operators. The bill provides for this by allowing the end date to be extended by regulation.

The consequential amendments to the Social Security Act will provide agriculturally dependent small business operators with concessions under the youth allowance and Austudy means tests, mirroring those that are currently provided to farmers. The changes to the Social Security Act will make the same exempt assets, as outlined in the Farm Household Support Act, exempt under the youth allowance and Austudy means tests.

The consequential amendment to the Age Discrimination Act will make certain that the Age Discrimination Act applies consistently to the provisions in the Farm Household Support Act that relate to payments made to farmers and those made to agriculturally dependent small business operators. The change will allow exceptional circumstances relief payments to be provided to eligible small business operators at a rate that is in accordance with their age. Sections in this act that limit access to assistance based on a person’s age and which have not already been granted exemptions under the Age Discrimination Act will be repealed in order to bring it into line with the intent of the Age Discrimination Act. (Time expired)

See this speech in context