$223 million has supposedly been paid by Australia’s producers and spent by MLA on LPA, Flockcare, Cattlecare, MSA + …… to gain a net industry benefit, over 30 years, of $1.1 billion. (See The Australian article here.)
$1.1 billion is about $0.91c per beast (cattle + sheep currently less than 40million head)! i.e. $1.1 billion ($1.1 thousand million) over 30 years is about $36 million each year. (I wonder how much a head that is when inflation etc is taken into account?)
However, what does this mean if the QA programs affecting meat quality aren’t being used?! (See Some figures on MSA non-usage here).
What benefits have Australia’s producers received from this cost? Let’s hope someone like CEO of MLA, David Palmer or Brad Bellinger, Chair at Australian Beef Association (ABA), can enlighten us.
David Palmer said the program has three quality systems for beef and sheep meat.
It began with beef in 1996, and aimed “to dramatically boost meat-eating quality”. Mr Palmer said it had evolved into a “world-leading quality assurance system from farm to consumer”.
Mr. Palmer states that QA systems have resulted in the consumer benefiting from better eating quality meat.
However, as only a bare proportion of producers use the meat quality QA programs (none use MSA in Victoria, apparently!), Australia’s farmers must be improving their meat without MLA’s programs – something Mr. Palmer didn’t clarify. Which means the programs can’t be accounting for the improved eating quality, which means producers are paying for QA programs that cost them via their MLA taxes (levy) but don’t achieve anything.
And let’s not forget that it has been proven time and again that producers aren’t receiving any additional income from this $223 million cost either. So, if this is the case, what is happening to the supposed magnificence of the $0.91c per beast?!
Related link – NZ Farmers Vote-Out Levies
What do you think?
Please leave your comments below
Is The NFF (and others?) Just Another Stepping Stone For Their Chairmen? « Rural Australia said
[...] It’s hard to disagree with Mr. Bellinger and the ABA that, “ The Peak Councils have done little to improve the profitability of the Australian livestock producer and should not be funded by milking the (levy) Reserve Fund dry. The assets of levy payers must be protected”. (For more see research showing levy taxes are wasted here). [...]
Leonard Hill said
All MLA pprograms will be dreams as there is no practical people in the design process. THeir first objective is to increase the size of the MLA.
If Australia is to have a real quality assurance program it is necessary from the grass roots and managed by local organisations. This is the only way to have simple compliance.
LPA is a great idea but could never be effective in the long run. There is no way to manage the process. Just NVD and NLIS is fantastic but never could it operate on a practical level. The first prolem we have it will fail and a blanket approach will be the only solution and the fat cats of the MLA will not be found or accountable. Why do these bobies change ever few years?. So there is no tracability. Just look at the RLPB in NSW. Just as everybody wanted to scrap the boards it reappears in a reincarnated form with no responsibily for the past. Farms own the TSR but the RLPB representing the farmers gave them to the government. Why because the top boys of the RLPB got promotions by the government.
In todays scoiety few who are elected remember why they are elected. It is own grand stand not not representation.