Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Will the minister advise the House on how the government’s recent wheat export marketing reforms have been received?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Wakefield for his question. I am reminded by the comments the Prime Minister made earlier concerning the AWB monopoly and its behaviour under the previous government to say it is about a year since this government abolished the AWB monopoly on exports.

Kay Hull (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You should know! You destroyed every wheat farmer!

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the lead-up to that news being received, we had some extraordinary stories of gloom and doom from the National Party as to how it would be received. We had the member for Calare, the shadow minister, describing it as economically irresponsible legislation, we had Senator Boswell saying that the new arrangements would throw an industry to the wolves of the international market, and we had the Leader of the National Party disagreeing with it on the basis that he wanted premiums for growing quality Australian wheat to go to Australian farmers and the Australian economy. But interestingly, since the reforms came in and growers started to get their returns and have the choice of who they would sell their wheat to, the Nationals went strangely quiet—

Kay Hull (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Whose choice?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In fairness, the member for Riverina never went strangely quiet; except for her, the National Party went strangely quiet. And there is a good story in exports at the moment for agriculture. The figures that have been released this week show rural exports having increased 18.3 per cent in the March quarter, and in particular the value of wheat exports having risen by 65 per cent to close to $1.7 billion in the quarter. And so I thought I would have a look at Wheat Exports Australia online and look at the actual marking down of what has happened to the National Party’s predictions on whether or not Australia would get a better deal for wheat under the new arrangements.

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Julie Bishop interjecting

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You voted with us on this, okay, so don’t get too angry! I know you do not always remember how you voted, but you voted with us. You might have a National Party member either side of you, but you did not vote with them on this one.

We have on the bulk wheat exports the different prices between what you get on the west coast of Australia and what you get on the east coast of Australia. Wheat Exports Australia, in the information they have provided, have provided graphs on the three different markers: the Chicago Board of Trade for the international price, the Fremantle price and marker for the west coast price and Newcastle for the east coast price. Before these reforms were introduced, the Chicago price was consistently above what we were getting on the east coast of Australia or the west coast of Australia. But since growers were given a choice as to whom they wanted to sell to, first of all you find that on the east coast of Australia prices have gone up to close to parity with the Chicago price.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

But in Western Australia there has been a $35 a tonne premium above what they were previously getting, above the Chicago marker, since this was introduced.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Now this is why the party—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I would remind honourable members on the front bench on my left that, if they want to make accusations about members’ actions, the contravention of standing order 65(b) is not the way to go about it and I will deal with them.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is no surprise that the party that has representatives from Western Australia—not the National Party—knew that this legislation was the right thing to vote for. At this point in question time, I would like to say something nice about the Liberal Party.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I would. On this issue they voted against the Nationals. That was the compliment. That will be as good as it gets. But on this issue it was a real compliment, because the National Party, for the sake of the local agripolitics that they get involved with, were willing to see the AWB monopoly continue to behave as it was and see Australian farmers suffer lower prices as a result. And yet, time and again, that judgment is the judgment that the Liberal Party is willing to defer to. But they were not willing to defer when this bill came up, and that is why, when they are willing to exercise a judgment independent of the National Party, we end up with a situation where we get decent legislation and Australian farmers get a premium.

But that sort of judgment will never be the judgment that the coalition has as its standard. People on the other side who take an interest in agriculture who are from the Liberal Party—like the member for Groom, the member for the Forrest and the member for Farrer—never get the agriculture portfolio on that side because, due to a mad coalition arrangement, consistently they decide that the party with the fewest country seats should get the total call on agricultural policy. And as long as they keep that deal, it will be a deal that lets Australia’s farmers down.