Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Hunter from moving the following motion forthwith:

That the House:

(1)notes that:

(a)Australia's dairy farmers are caught in a long-running cost-price squeeze, where they are paid less than the cost of producing their milk; and

(b)Government intervention is needed to save our dairy sector and our dairy farmers; and

(2)therefore, calls on the Government to task the ACCC with testing the efficacy of a minimum farm gate milk price and to make recommendations on the best design options.

This is not just a motion about dairy farmers, as important as our dairy farmers are and as much as they are struggling. This is a motion about a broken dairy industry. The fact is that our farmers aren't making money. In fact, most are losing money. The fact is that our processors aren't securing good returns either. The greatly ironic part of the market is that our retailers are not making money either, but, in their case, because they choose not to. I've been watching this market very, very intensely for a five-year period now. I've watched more farmers leave the land, I've seen more farmers culling their cattle and I've seen more farmers in tears.

Just today, Dairy Australia produced its latest outlook for the industry, and the news is all bad. There are a couple of glimpses of hope in some dairy regions in the country, and we welcome that. But production is down year on year and is predicted to fall further in the future.

Government members interjecting—

Not too many people, including those interjecting, would know this—few members of this House would know this, and I wouldn't expect them to know it—but we are very close now in this country to being a net importer of dairy products. Think about that. Australia is on the edge of being a net importer of dairy products. If we are not careful—and I don't make this comment lightly; it's not my style to overreach—but we are facing a situation now where our drinking milk and the milk we put on our Wheaties will be imported powdered milk. This is now coming close to being a national emergency.

Unlike the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources—and I welcome the fact that he has joined us—I'm not into criticising and attacking the retailers. I'm not into criticising and attacking the processors. We can only have a strong value chain and an efficient market if everyone is productive and everyone is making some money. And the farmers should be amongst those who can make some money, because if they don't start making some money there won't be any dairy farmers.

Twenty-three years I've been here, and I said to the member for Jagajaga last week, who's also been here 23 years, 'We've seen at least three things here in this place this week that we've never seen before.' I saw another one yesterday: a cabinet minister calling for a consumer boycott of two major retailers in this country. Where does this end? What boycott, Minister, will it be next week? But here's what really hurts. The majority of farmers don't provide their milk to Woolworths; many more than those who supply Woolworths provide milk to Coles and ALDI. So the minister has called for a boycott of farmers who provide milk to Coles and ALDI. Of course, he hasn't thought about all those others who supply Coles and ALDI, and of course he hasn't thought about all those who work at Coles and ALDI. But the piece de resistance was that we found out the minister had shares in Woolworths!

Mr Littleproud interjecting—

Minister, guess what? We don't care how many you hold. You can sit there all day and argue you don't hold many, but you have a direct pecuniary interest in the war you launched on Coles and ALDI yesterday.

This government has been governing this country, or trying to govern this country, unsuccessfully, for five years now. The drought that farmers are facing, which is compounding the cost price squeeze, is becoming very, very serious for dairy farmers. What have the government done in five years? Have they had a plan to help farmers adapt to a changing climate? No. Have they had a plan to lift farmgate prices for farmers? No. Do they have a future for the industry? No. Have they brought the processors, retailers and farmers together to see how we can lift productivity and profitability across the value chain? No. Nothing. They talk the talk but they never walk the walk.

For at least the last four years we've supported a mandatory code of conduct for the dairy industry. Now, I can be a bit of an economic rationalist. I was of the view for a number of years that the dairy industry would fix itself. The dairy industry would fix itself, the market would play, the small and less efficient would exit the market, and the vacuum would be filled by bigger and efficient players. I was wrong. It's not happening. It's a simple fact: it is not happening. The bigger and efficient players can't make money either, because they just don't have sufficient market power. So I used to think, 'A mandatory code of conduct would fix this. 'We will manage the behaviour of those in the sector and help the dairy farmers.' The government opposed it. They opposed it. Here, in their fifth year of government, they now support it. In the absence of any other idea, they now support the mandatory code of conduct. And guess what? When do you think they're going to introduce the mandatory code of conduct? On 1 July 2020.

About a year ago, to buy Pauline Hanson's vote in the Senate for their tax cuts, they introduced a mandatory code for the sugar industry. How long do you think it took them to develop, introduce and legislate that mandatory code? Less than 24 hours—overnight. Overnight, for Pauline Hanson's vote, they developed a mandatory code for the sugar industry. But the dairy farmers have to wait till 1 July 2020.

We should not be surprised. The government are playing to the crowd all the time. They love the dairy farmers! They're the salt of the earth! They never mention they're also often their pre-selectors. But they never do anything for them. And, out of ideas on drought, they have a drought summit, a talkfest! And, of course, they appointed a drought envoy.

Ms Burney interjecting—

I thank the member for Barton—where is the drought envoy? They're asking the same thing down at the Menindee Lakes. They're asking the same thing in every drought affected area in the country. The media asks where the drought envoy has been. He's been on 23 trips, I think it was, or something, last month. But then they said: 'But where were they?' Do you know where they were? They were all in the drought envoy's electorate, because the drought envoy knows he's in trouble, so no-one else sees him. He spends all of his time talking about drought, but only in his own electorate.

Now I need to say this. The day after the drought envoy left the role of agriculture minister, I said in this place, 'Well, the member for New England's gone, and today we begin cleaning up the mess.' I was encouraged by the arrival of the current minister. I thought he was different from the member for New England. He seemed more sensible. He seemed less populist. He was certainly more interested in having discussions with me about policy issues in the sector, even on live sheep. He came to the party, commissioned some inquiries and talked about tougher regulation, and I was really encouraged by all of that. But, you know, with the National Party, in the end it's all politics; it's all the base; it's all about holding onto the seats. They only need four per cent to become half of the government, where they just bully and get the most ridiculous decisions out of prime ministers. Whether it be Prime Minister Abbott, Prime Minister Turnbull or, now, Prime Minister Morrison, the stupid ideas—the APVMA relocations, the regional investment corporations—that do nothing other than destroy the sector just keep coming forward.

So, Minister, I'm sorry, but you've been a great disappointment. You've just reverted to type. You are as much a National Party agriculture minister as all those that went before you over many, many decades. You are not interested in the farmers. You are not interested in policy. You are not interested in helping them lift their productivity and sustainable profitability. You are just interested in one thing: you've got your eye on the leadership, and the only way you'll get there is to keep these Neanderthals up on the crossbench happy. And, of course, in that context, the farmers come second every time.

See this speech in context