Judi Moylan (Pearce, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I will continue where I left off yesterday afternoon. I was commenting on some points that were made by the member for New England in this House yesterday. He said that drought is a fact of life in this country and that one sometimes wonders why it is not treated in the same way as any other adverse event, such as flood or fire, where we immediately go into rescue mode and provide considerable assistance.

I want to return to a point I raised yesterday. I get very angry when I hear allegations by some in the financial sectors during drought times that we are agrarian socialists and that farmers are agrarian socialists because they receive a little help during these extra exceptional circumstances that our rural areas go through from time to time. That is simply not the case. As the member for New England quite rightly pointed out, we provide very substantial subsidies to several industries in this country, but our farmers have demonstrated a great capacity to operate very efficiently. In fact, they are some of the most efficient primary producers in the world. During the reforms of the eighties, they took the bit between their teeth and got out there and embraced reforms—sometimes it was tough, but they did it. They are very efficient. But no-one can foresee the difficulties that might arise from prolonged periods of drought, so I think that we have an obligation.

As I said yesterday, despite the growing disconnect between urban and rural areas, I believe that most people in urban areas, when they understand the circumstances and difficulties faced by farmers, are more than willing to dig deep in their pockets to help out, and that is just as it should be. A concern of producers experiencing drought, once they begin to recover, is the support services they require within their regions. How the government addresses the substantial issue of how to keep the support businesses in rural areas going during a drought period is pivotal. It is very vital to continue to support primary production. When there are prolonged periods of drought and there is little work for some of the businesses that provide support services for farmers, they have to close their operations and go away. When there is a recovery, when the rains come again, of course it is very difficult to re-establish those services. These include all sorts of services to primary producers, including machinery dealerships, mechanical workshops, grocers, banking facilities and a whole range of support services.

Yesterday I outlined to the House my visit to rural areas in New South Wales during the last drought, in the early nineties, when I was shadow minister for small business. It was a devastating time for many. As shadow minister for small business, I came back to this place determined to develop some policies to ensure comprehensive assistance for primary producers and those whose business services look after the primary producers and to put a plan to shadow cabinet along the lines that, interestingly enough, the member for Windsor outlined to the House yesterday. Since its election in 1996 the Howard government has continuously worked to improve the substance and timeliness of assistance to drought affected areas. Measures that have been introduced include the Farm Management Deposits scheme, which is quite effective. In good times it helps farmers to put funds away for the more difficult times. We have other drought-proofing measures, like the 100 per cent tax write-off for farmers who elect to build additional dams and put down sink bores so that during difficult times they have reserve water supplies on their property. In the Pearce electorate, many farmers have done just that. At least it is helpful. It does not completely save the day, but it is helpful if they are able to do that in the good times.

Somebody once said that without trucks and farmers Australia stops. This bill to amend the Farm Household Support Act 1992, and consequentially the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Social Security Act 1991, will ensure positive support so that during times of drought businesses that support primary industry production will have a better chance of riding through the drought and providing continuity of services when the drought breaks.

The Prime Minister made an announcement in November 2006 to allow agriculturally dependent small business operators access to the same exceptional circumstances assistance that is already provided to farmers. This assistance includes EC relief payments and ancillary benefits such as provision of the health care card and, indeed, concessions under the youth allowance and Austudy means tests. Assistance will be available to eligible small business operators until certain dates. I think the dates have changed, but there are some cut-off dates for that. It is a very sensible measure.

2006 was indeed a tough year for farmers. Those in horticulture, viticulture and aquaculture industries were hard-hit. In this place we have heard about the dairy industry and how difficult it has been for them. The season was dry and unforgiving and the rain just did not arrive. Most farmers across the Pearce electorate, just like those across the country, suffered the income losses that come as a result of a poor or dry season. Financially, many of them are struggling as we come into another season. We certainly hope and pray for good rains this year.

Despite Pearce not being included in the exceptional circumstance area, I support the government’s move last year to declare areas across the state of Western Australia drought affected in order for them to be eligible for exceptional circumstances assistance, including this measure to assist small businesses. Originally the government made the assistance available to eligible small business owners who were affected by the 2006 drought, had no more than 20 employees and whose income was at least 70 per cent reliant on agricultural industries located in the EC declared regions. Later in the year these areas were extended and more regions in WA were EC declared, meaning that more residents could access financial help, thankfully. Again, this did not apply to my particular electorate, but I represent a rural electorate and we are all very sympathetic to those further east in Western Australia who have particularly hard times ahead.

Agriculturally dependent small business owners are currently able to access EC relief payments through ex gratia arrangements. The Farm Household Support Amendment Bill 2007 will formalise these arrangements by outlining eligibility criteria payment rates and multiple entitlement exclusions, and provide agriculturally dependent small business people with access to the health care card and other benefits. This may further assist some farmers as many have informed me that they have had to diversify into different industries and change their crop routine to make enough money to make ends meet in the tougher seasons. Some have had to work off farm or start their own small business, in many cases in local rural towns. This will perhaps further assist some of those farmers in that category. It will provide for farmers who have diversified into agriculturally dependent small businesses as a drought management measure. As these farmers are no longer deriving a significant proportion of their income from their farms, they would not be eligible under the normal course of events for EC relief payments as farmers, and their continued ownership of farm assets would affect their eligibility under the small business assets test.

Farm families are very resilient and resourceful. We often see them unable to farm for a season or two and when the drought is over they successfully resume their farming activities. To make sure that this category of farmer is not disadvantaged, applicants will have specific farm and small business assets exempt from the relevant assets and means test. 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 will affect agriculturally dependent small business operators where 70 per cent or more of their gross income is derived from providing farming related goods and services to farmers in EC declared areas.

Farming land in the Pearce electorate in Western Australia is located past the Perth hills in the rural centres of Northam and York, through the Swan Valley, east of the Perth wineries, where lots of small horticultural properties scatter the landscape, and south-east of Perth in the centres of Narrogin, Beverley, Brookton, Wandering, Pingelly and Cuballing—areas home to farming families and businesses reliant on these farming families. Farming is about sustainability and we need to be able to assist our hardworking agriculturalists in times of need. When the rains fail, it is very much beyond their control. As I said, they can take advantage of some of the measures that the Howard government has put in place, such as the deposits, scheme and the incentives to drought-proof their properties. But in difficult and sustained periods of drought, these are often just not adequate and farmers need additional assistance. The government does recognise the value of agriculture and the contribution that farm families make in good seasons. It is this recognition that prompts the government to make significant investments in the environment and in agricultural land to ensure that it is preserved for generations to come, while agriculture remains sustainable into the future.

Through droughts, fires, cyclones, frost, labour shortages and even the recent events in respect of the Australian Wheat Board and the debate about the wheat marketing arrangements in Australia, which have all come to a head during the last year’s harvest, farmers and farm families are indeed survivors. For all of those farm families around Australia, we hope that the rains do come and that this next season will be a very productive one that restores many farms to productive farming activity.

See this speech in context