Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the motion that is in my name. The New South Wales north coast has endured floods, damaging winds and torrential rain on a number of occasions in the last two years. The unusually wet weather in late 2010 and early 2011 has devastated our local sugar industry. Many farmers planted crops twice and lost both crops to the wet weather, leaving them with no possibility of a harvest but still out of pocket because of the substantial cost of planting. There are currently some 6,000 hectares of land in northern New South Wales which should be covered with sugar cane but lie unplanted. The New South Wales Canegrowers Association is working with the affected parts of the industry to develop solutions to this problem.

I am calling on the government to match the assistance provided to the Queensland and Victorian farmers following the natural disasters in those states. New South Wales's support measures currently fall some $10,000 short of the assistance available for farmers in Queensland and Victoria, who are able to access up to $25,000 re-establishment assistance in flood declared areas. Unlike in other areas, New South Wales sugar cane is primarily a two-year crop, so the impact of poor conditions in late 2010 will flow through until at least 2012. Canegrowers New South Wales estimates that the 2012 harvest could be 50 per cent lower as a result of poor weather. Canegrowers in northern New South Wales have been forced to take on short-term financing of $1,000 per hectare at a 7 per cent interest rate with the loans to be repaid from the proceeds of the coming crop—an example of the local industry attempting to help itself in a very difficult situation. Unfortunately the crops around Broadwater and Harwood are expected to be the worst in 50 years. Without decent crops in the next couple of years the viability of the cane industry in New South Wales will certainly be called into question.

In northern New South Wales sugar cane is a major driver of local economies. Money from sugar cane operations flows through the many different suppliers in towns like Maclean, Yamba and Grafton. The sugar cane industry is one of the region's biggest employers and accounts for $230 million of economic output each year; total direct and indirect employment in the industry is estimated at some 2,200 people. This includes 600 cane farmers and 150 seasonal harvesting workers. The sugar mills provide employment for 450 people. I have been advised that these mills are currently operating at a loss due to the difficulty in conditions and increased costs.

The cane industry in New South Wales is broken into three regions with each region have a milling facility. Should the tonnage from any of the mill areas fall below sustainability levels, this would bring into question the future operations of those mills. It is vitally important that we maintain the critical mass of product flowing through those mills to retain our industry in the long term. The New South Wales Canegrowers Association put forward a plan which they believed would assist the industry to get back on its feet and assure the sustainability of sugar in northern New South Wales. They estimate that about 6,070 hectares needs to be replanted and, to put this in perspective, that is the equivalent of around 8,900 football fields with the estimated cost of replanting being some $10 million. The industry acknowledges that some losses are manageable and come with the territory, come with what it means to be a farmer; however, the industry also believes that the record adverse events in 2010 and 2011 result in the requirement for a comparatively small amount of government intervention to help get the industry back on its feet.

The industry has put forward a proposal to the government with two important elements. The first problem is the inequity in the disaster assistance provided to canegrowers in New South Wales, and I have touched on that inequity between Queensland and New South Wales. Their second proposal is a package involving a partnership between the Australian government, the New South Wales government and the cane growing industry. The industry is proposing that the cost of replanting be funded equally between the two levels of government and individual growers, and predicts a maximum replanting cost of $1,750 a hectare, with an independent auditing program to ensure the integrity of the scheme. The New South Wales Cane Growers Association met with the member for Page, Janelle Saffin, on 12 July to present its case. However, we are yet to hear of a response from the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Sugarcane is generally planted in September and October, and this means we must get the issue sorted out in the next few weeks if we are to avoid irreparable damage to the New South Wales sugar industry.

These weather related problems in New South Wales are further challenges for Australian industry at a time when many sectors are struggling with increased costs and difficult trading conditions. Manufacturing in Australia is already struggling due to a range of factors. BlueScope steel announced today that it will cut 1,000 jobs and close one of its blast furnaces due to difficult conditions. Recently OneSteel announced it will shed 400 jobs. AWU National Secretary Paul Howes said we are 'facing a major crisis in Australian manufacturing'. Businesses around Australia are facing very difficult trading conditions indeed. The high Aussie dollar is hurting exporters, consumer confidence is low and households are saving more money. Wasteful government spending is helping to keep interest rates higher than they would otherwise be.

Instead of working with Australian industries to protect Australian jobs and growing Australian businesses the government is pressing ahead with plans to introduce a carbon tax that will push up the cost of electricity and transport. This particularly affects our cane industry, where transport is such a major factor in the cost of production. Businesses in Australia are crying out for support and a fair go. Instead the government is waging war on Australian businesses and Australian jobs by introducing new taxes, reregulating the labour market and mismanaging government programs. I met recently with cane growers to discuss the impact of the carbon tax. They were deeply concerned about the impact of this tax, particularly on the cost of transport and of operating local sugar mills.

It is clear that the Gillard government does not have the will or the competence to support Australian industries. The New South Wales cane industry desperately needs help from the Australian government to ensure its long-term prosperity. We still await a response from the minister, and I note that the member for Page is in the chamber and will be speaking shortly on this matter. I call on the parliament to support this motion. Hundreds of jobs and local businesses are at stake. Certainly the vibrant, long-term future of the cane industry is very much at stake at this very difficult time.

Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am speaking tonight in support of local cane growers. It is a significant industry in my area and I want to outline some of the assistance and some of the work that I have been able to do with them. It would be nice for once to come together and work together in this place for the good of the community and for the good of industry, and I wish the honourable member for Cowper were fair dinkum on this and not playing games with it. I suspect that that is not how it is, so it makes it difficult to say: 'Yes, let's get together. Let's work in the best interests of cane growers on the North Coast.' I have certainly done that, because it is a significant industry in my area.

I met with the cane growers recently and meet with them all the time. They also wrote to me earlier this year. Mr Andrew Tickle, the General Secretary of the NSW Cane Growers Council, said:

I appreciate the efforts you have made on these issues to date, including arranging the meeting between industry representatives and the federal Attorney-General, the Hon. Robert McClelland MP, at Greenridge Hall near Casino in January.

Further quoting:

Your early action in seeking NDRA—

I think it means NDRRA—

declarations for the local government areas in northern New South Wales has also been greatly appreciated by all cane growers.

Speaking to that point, it is up to the state government to make the declaration of natural disaster; then the federal assistance kicks in. It was during the period when we had the floods. There were about seven floods in my area in Northern Rivers of varying degrees—major, minor and moderate—as there were across the North Coast area. I was able to hop onto the phone and ring anybody I could at the state level and federal level and say, 'I want these natural disaster declarations as soon as we can'. I knew that the sugar industry would be impacted and I wanted them to have access, as other farmers and small business do, to what we commonly call the cash grants. I wanted to make sure that that happened. That was not something I advertised, but it became known—hence, the thanks in the letter.

I have met with the cane growers since. When I look at the honourable member for Cowper's seven-point motion, points one, two, three, four and five are straight forward. When you come to number six, it talks about the amount of cash available—the $15,000 and $25,000—it is up to the state government to ask the federal government to increase that assistance. That is how it works. It has worked like that for a long time and we can come into this place, we can get into the media and we can talk about that as much as we like, but that is the system that exists. It just muddies the waters if we are not accurate in how we talk about that. It is up to the state government. Whether it was the previous state government, which was a Labor government, or the now coalition government, it is an issue that I have always said had to be taken up with the state government and the state members. That is absolutely clear.

On the other issue, the cane growers did put up a novel proposal for seeking assistance for planting at any level. In their submission they talk about having two crook seasons. There have actually been three major weather events in total over the last four years that have impacted on the sugar cane farmers. That is what they were asking for. I also had written to the Hon. Katrina Hodgkinson, the Minister for Primary Industries and Minister for Small Business. I have a recent letter from her where she said, 'Thank you for the representations on behalf of the New South Wales cane growers.' They wanted me to write to her on the issue of increasing the category C NDRRA Grant from $15,000 to $25,000 and seeking financial support for the replanting of sugar cane. I knew that the state members in my area had done that. I was asked by the cane growers to do it. I was happy to do it, although that is normally within their bailiwick to do.

I received another letter back from her. The minister says that she is extremely sympathetic to the concerns raised. She said she has had various meetings with local members to discuss these issues and she has also encouraged them to discuss it with the federal minister. That is what we have been doing—discussing it with both. I did not want to do this. I was not bringing partisan politics into this; I was just playing an absolutely straight bat in trying to get the best deal I could for the cane growers. The motion the honourable member for Cowper has put here tonight forces me to bring this in here. It is not what I wanted to do. I just want to see what we can do for them.

There is a letter here that the honourable Minister Katrina Hodgkinson enclosed for me. It is to Mr Andrew Tickle, the General Secretary of the New South Wales Cane Growers' Association, to his address at Wardell. I also meet with Mr Tickle as well on behalf of the New South Wales cane growers. In the letter, among other things, the minister says about the $15,000:

The level of assistance is determined on the impact of the disaster on whole communities and implemented to address the longer term holistic community recovery following a severe natural disaster. The floods in Queensland were very extensive and of a greater magnitude than those experienced in New South Wales and in many cases reached historical record water height levels resulting in extreme flood damage. Therefore the maximum eligible level of support as determined by the national NDRRA was activated in Queensland.

The letter goes on to outline what is available under the scheme and advises members to contact Mr Rik Whitehead, who is the Assistant Regional Director, North Coast Department of Primary Industries, or the New South Wales Rural Assistance Authority for assistance.

It is really clear what the state minister is saying about that issue of the $15,000 or $25,000 and there have been two natural disasters where the honourable member for Cowper has been in the media saying we should get extra money. One was when the Labor government was in at state level and now there is this one, with the coalition government. It is up to them to ask. That is the way the scheme works and I am not sure the honourable member for Cowper understands that. It is up to them to ask and then it can kick in. The minister has been quoted on that point—and when I say minister, I mean the minister at the federal level.

There is one issue I discussed with the local cane growers and also with the Rural Assistance Authority, the body at state level that administers all of these programs. I asked the RAA: 'Is is possible to have a collective loan? There are $130,000 concessional grants—is it possible to have that done in a collective way?' I thought it had happened before, but they said it was not possible. In fact it had happened once before, but for a whole range of reasons it did not work out—the money did not get paid back and it was harder to get money back in that system. That was an example of trying to think a bit outside the square.

Just recently, the New South Wales Sugar Milling Co-operative Chief Executive Officer, Chris Connors, announced the start of the Grower Loan Planting Assistance Scheme, which is being offered in partnership with the Manildra Group. This scheme will offer plant loan assistance of $1,000 per hectare and will be available to all cane planted this year and next year. This is in my local paper, the Northern Star, and it was also in the Daily Examiner. Wayne Rogers, a grower and Chairman of the Richmond River Cane Growers Association, said the initiative was necessary because many people had attempted to plant at least twice last season without success. He said:

They had incurred significant cost but had nothing to show for it.

The scheme is a great initiative and one that they have taken themselves.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise tonight to speak in support of this motion introduced by my colleague the member for Cowper. I have been quite interested to sit here listening to the contribution from the member for Page. While I do not doubt her concern and empathy for the cane growers on the North Coast, I am afraid that does not help them out of their predicament. The member for Page should note that this motion calls on the government to take action to help the cane growers in northern New South Wales. We have heard a monologue on the member for Page's activities and on letters she has written, but it missed the point: that governments can make this happen. The frustration the cane growers have is that, while they are seeing money squandered elsewhere—in home insulation programs and double priced school halls and a whole range of other things—when something comes up and they really need the funds—

Ms Saffin interjecting—

I sat silently, Member for Page, during your contribution. When something comes up and we need some decisive action, the money is not there and we get excuses. There is a precedent for this. In 2000, a major rainfall event went through western New South Wales and, at the point of harvest, decimated the wheat crop. The Deputy Speaker would have been a member here at the time and may remember it, as someone involved in agricultural activities. It was devastating—right at the point of harvest, in early December. The then Deputy Prime Minister immediately instigated $60,000 in replanting grants. That was a huge benefit, to not only those farmers but the entire community and Australia as a whole. It was not welfare. It was not benefits. It was not relief payments. It was an investment by the Australian government in its food producers. I would say that the money that went into those farmers in that wet harvest, that replanting grant, would have been repaid in taxation 10 times over in the next couple of years by stopping those farmers going to the wall. And it is not only the farmers that it goes through. A replanting grant—and that is what the Member for Cowper is speaking about—flows through to the agricultural suppliers and the contractors. And having that cash going through helps to keep that core number of people in a community so that you can keep services like education, medicine and all those things going.

I, too, am disappointed sometimes at the misguided nature of the finance coming out of this government. My electorate also suffered, largely through the floods at Christmas time. Indeed, parts of my electorate, communities and individual farms, were underwater or surrounded by water for two or three months. They received no funds. And now some of them, who had received Centrelink payments, have been asked to return them. There are farmers who had come through eight or nine years of drought who, on the point of harvest, were completely wiped out. I flew over thousands and thousands of acres of unharvested wheat standing in water; that wheat will never be harvested. A replanting grant at that point would have been very useful as well. But it was not forthcoming, and so those communities now are really suffering a cash shortage.

So I support the member for Cowper's motion here. I am not a cane farmer, but I understand that cane is a very intensive crop. It is very expensive to get established and to plant. And it is a little bit unusual, and different from the crops that I am used to, in that it lasts in a two-year rotation. So when an event wipes out the crop, as this one has, it is very expensive to replant, and the consequences of that flow through for not one but several years.

The member for Cowper has every right to come into this place and speak up for the farmers on those issues. And if the member for Page is offended by that, or needs to apologise for the inaction of the government on that, then I am disappointed because I would have thought that it was the role of all in this place to bring to light, to the Australian Parliament, the issues that concern the people they represent.

So I am concerned about the priorities of this government when money seems to be bountiful for some things and very tight for others. We speak a lot in this place of food security and climate change and looking after the environment, but here is an opportunity to actually do something practical. And it is not just about funding these farmers to plant a crop. If these farmers are forced off their land, if they have to sell out because they are in a financial bind, then years of expertise—sometimes two or three generations of expertise—is also forced off that land. And that becomes a problem because quite often the land is bought up by corporate investors who have no idea about growing cane. One of the great frustrations in here to me, as someone with an agriculture background, is that, in some quarters, there is no recognition of the skill that farmers have. It is as if they are a tradeable commodity, so that if someone goes off a place and leaves the land we will just replace them with someone else. While many farmers have tertiary degrees, many do not. They gain knowledge and skills from the time they are knee-high and following their father and grandfather around the farm until they finally take control of the farm themselves. That will be the real loss here. It is not just about $15,000 or $25,000 for a replanting grant. The real loss will be if these people decide: 'This is just too hard. We will cash this out. We will sell our cane farm to a developer. They might turn it into a Club Med or an ecovillage or put in some ski boats down by the Clarence. There is good money in that, and we will buy a unit at Yamba and watch the Pacific Ocean.' That is not a bad outcome, except that the expertise of these people, their productivity and the dollars they give and have given over the generations to their community, to the state of New South Wales and to this country will be lost. It is appalling that for just a few dollars—we are not talking about a large number of farmers—their situation could be alleviated.

I understand why the member for Cowper has brought forward this motion. He understands how difficult it is for people in Australia who are running their own business, particularly those who are running an agricultural business, when mother nature throws a double whammy at them and puts them in a place they have not been before financially. When this happens, it is very nice to think that the government of this land can make their future and the future of the community in which they live a priority.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Parkes may understand why the member for Cowper has brought this motion before the House; but, please forgive me, I do not. But I do understand the area that the member for Cowper represents because I have lived there longer than he has. So I really do understand the issues surrounding this motion. I suspect, knowing the good people of Cowper the way I do, that if they had a member who really concentrated on honestly putting forward their case they would be a lot happier with the member for Cowper than they would be with him getting up in this parliament and sprouting rhetoric.

You might ask: why did the federal government give only $15,000? It was because that is what they were asked to give. They delivered what they were asked to give. Now we have the member for Cowper standing up in this parliament and playing politics by saying, 'The cane growers should have been given $25,000,' when only $15,000 was asked of the federal government. The federal government delivered what they were asked to deliver, and it is very dishonest of the member for Cowper to stand up here and try to make any other argument. What we need to do is separate fact from fiction.

I agree wholeheartedly with the member for Parkes: every member has the right to stand up here and speak on behalf of the people they represent, but let us do it in a way that is honest and that delivers a quality debate. Let us talk about the issue as it really is, not how we would like it to be. Let us not put things on the record just to score political points; rather, let us see what we can do to really help those cane farmers whose livelihoods have been devastated by these most horrendous conditions. I would attribute the abnormal wet weather to climate change; the member for Cowper would be, I think, denying its existence. We have had many adverse weather events in the area that I come from. I must say that, if the member for Cowper were prepared to support the government in putting a price on carbon so that the 500 biggest polluting industries were held to account for their behaviour, then maybe, just maybe, there would not be as many devastating climate events. I know there has been a very long period of time in the northern part of New South Wales in which there have been very adverse weather conditions and an enormous increase in the rainfall in the area, and this has had a devastating effect on the industry. I would just like to go through a few points in relation to this. Under the Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements, each individual state determines the level of assistance to be paid, subject to caps agreed between the Commonwealth and the state. Why doesn't the member for Cowper argue that? For clean-up and recovery grants for small business and farmers, often referred to as category C grants, the NDRRA clearly provides that the Commonwealth will meet half the cost up to $25,000. This can consist of tier 1 clean-up and recovery grants of up to $5,000, not requiring any proof of damage or expenditure, and tier 2 grants of up to $20,000 for small businesses and primary producers.

I hope the member for Cowper is listening to this because it is a very important point. The government has made it clear that it is willing to meet its share of the cost of grants up to the maximum amount. That is not what the member for Cowper tells this parliament. The government has done so following the recent devastating natural disasters in Queensland, Victoria and Western Australia. It is up to the New South Wales government to determine the level of assistance they believe is to be provided and therefore the level of assistance they should be seeking from the Commonwealth. The member for Cowper should talk to his mates down in Macquarie Street and ask them to support him, not bring it up here in the federal parliament. He needs to get his National Party mates and Premier Barry O'Farrell to support him. As I said earlier, $15,000 was the amount of money that was asked for and $15,000 was what the government delivered.

The NDRRA assistance for the December 2010-January 2011 flooding was made available for 13 local government areas. Included in that were a number that fall within the member for Cowper's electorate, including Bellingen, and the electorates north of Cowper. The money that was given to these local government areas was for personal hardship and distress assistance; certain counter-disaster operations; restoration of essential public assets; concessional loans of up to $130,000 for small businesses and primary producers; concessional loans of up to $25,000 for voluntary and not-for-profit organisations, who really stepped up to the plate at that time and provided assistance and support on the ground for those people who had been adversely affected; transport freight subsidies of up to $15,000 to assist primary producers for the carriage of livestock and fodder; and clean-up and recovery grants of up to $15,000, which the member for Cowper would like to see capped at $25,000, when that was not even asked for.

The member for Cowper comes in here, he argues one way, he puts forward a point of view that really is not based on fact and he expects this parliament to take him seriously. Come on. We just cannot take anything that the member for Cowper says seriously when he comes in here and does not tell the true story, does not paint the picture as it is. The government has already responded to Mr Andrew Tickle, the General Secretary of the New South Wales Cane Growers' Association. In his motion I think the member for Cowper refers to the fact that the government has responded, but the motion has been moved. As a National Party member, he voted against the flood levy which would have assisted the people he represents in this parliament. The flood levy would have supported his communities and helped them in the recovery and reconstruction after the devastating floods.

It is up to the New South Wales government. He needs to talk to his mates in Macquarie Street to get it sorted out. He should not come in here trying to blame the federal government for the ineptitude of his colleagues in New South Wales. Just so that the member for Cowper is aware of this the next time he raises an issue such as this, natural disaster management is a state and territory responsibility under the Constitution. Each jurisdiction determines the criteria and the level of assistance provided to individuals and communities affected by natural disasters.

I am disappointed that the member for Cowper did not even do the basic research need so that he could come in here and honestly debate this legislation. The cane growers of northern New South Wales have my 100 per cent support. I know they have done it tough and they really deserve a member who comes down here and argues effectively for them.

Kirsten Livermore (Capricornia, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made and order of the day at the next sitting.