Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Agriculture, Resources, Fisheries and Forestry, I present the committee's advisory report on the Wheat Export Marketing Amendment Bill 2012, together with the minutes of proceedings and evidence received by the committee.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

by leave—On 22 March 2012, the selection committee referred the Wheat Export Marketing Amendment Bill 2012 to the Committee on Agriculture, Resources, Fisheries and Forestry for inquiry. Introduction of the bill followed a report by the Productivity Commission, released in 2010, which recommended: abolition of the Wheat Export Accreditation Scheme 2008; abolition of Wheat Exports Australia and the wheat export charge; and discontinuation of the 'access test', instead relying upon general competition law and a voluntary code of conduct. The bill aims to facilitate a transition of the bulk wheat export industry into a deregulated market in line with the Productivity Commission's recommendations.

From the 20 submissions received and two days of public hearings, a divergent range of views was presented to the committee both in favour and against the bill. Some issues were identified as requiring further consideration, including by stakeholders who supported deregulation. In particular, these questions related to quality assurance, access to supply chain infrastructure and the availability of wheat stocks information.

However, there is no clear link between the current arrangements and quality assurance. In reality, quality is currently only assured through market competitiveness, not export accreditation rules or some other form of government process. Industry should manage quality and, in fact, the current law reflects this situation. I would think that the customer would let you know what he would want. The committee is aware that the current supply chain infrastructure is divided into regional monopolies developed through historical circumstances. However, delaying deregulation will not necessarily improve these trading conditions; indeed, the entrance of new players into the market may be aided by deregulation and the abolition of accreditation.

In relation to market information, the committee agreed with evidence that information relating to wheat stocks should be improved and be freely available. A number of submissions and witnesses explained that wheat stocks information currently available would be insufficient for a deregulated wheat market to function properly.

The committee has therefore recommended:

The ombudsman would be paid for by industry and by those that need to use an ombudsman—there are several models in Australia along these lines—

Finally, the committee recommends that the House pass the Wheat Export Marketing Amendment Bill 2012. I would like to take the opportunity of thanking the committee's secretariat, Thomas, Nathan and David, for their strong and professional work. We have achieved a lot in a short time and we have brought down a very good report. I commend the report to the House.

Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As Deputy Chair of the Standing Committee on Agriculture, Resources, Fisheries and Forestry, can I compliment the committee as a whole on reinforcing its reputation for working together in a bipartisan way on issues related to agriculture, forestry and fisheries. I endorse the opening remarks made by the committee chairman about the recommendations of the committee on this particular issue of wheat exporting.

Some of us in this place can well remember the issues centred around the Australian Wheat Board at a time when there was significant activity which indicated some graft in the marketing of wheat, particularly export wheat. It is also true to say that, at that time, the behaviour of some individual senior officials within that organisation verged on criminal activity. These are the things that I am reminded of as I make my contribution within the committee process. Whilst we do not like to think about those things, the point I am making is that there has always been controversy in wheat marketing, whether it is at the local level or at the export marketing level. Some people in this place, including myself, were criticised by elements of the wheat growing community in this country because we believed that we should be protecting people in Western Australia and South Australia who were growing export wheat from being ripped off to the extent of $60 to $100 per tonne of their export wheat just to satisfy the A and B class shareholders within the Australian Wheat Board organisation.

In closing, I would like to thank the committee for the wonderful way in which we worked together to come to the recommendations that the chairman has outlined here in the House today. To the chairman, can I say that it is always a pleasure to work with him, because politics are put aside and we as a committee make our decisions on the basis of the open and transparent evidence that is taken within the committee process and on the basis of what we believe to be in the best interests of the people that we are representing. The outcome of this hearing—this recommendation that the House pass the Wheat Export Marketing Amendment Bill 2012—has been based on the independent evidence that we have taken and on the wonderful contributions by people within the industry. It is my hope and I know it is the hope of the committee as a whole that the House will embrace the recommendations of this committee today.