Does this sound familiar? It’s a aged ABC Rural report but may be relevant given the forthcoming MLA vote on livestock taxes/levies.
As reported, “New Zealand lobby group Federated Farmers says wool growers voted against paying levies because they were fed up with wool prices and disenfranchised by the industry.”
“Wool research and development body Meat and Wool New Zealand will get no levies from wool growers, after a vote last week.” Read the ABC Rural report
“Federated Farmers says it’s concerned about the long term future of wool, now no-one is looking after the industry.”
Chairman Hugh Taylor says wool growers are upset with Meat and Wool New Zealand spending money in areas that didn’t help them. Heard that before?!
“I think the vote will take the shackles off [the industry] in some ways,” he says. It’s got to be market-led.
We’re going to get the industry all together and work together for the benefit of the grower.” Hah! If only! Do you see any parallel’s to this vote and that of the forthcoming MLA AGM and vote on Australian cattle taxes/levies?
$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?!
Sounds ironic, don’t you think? MLA has apparently claimed it is giving itself (its Board and senior executives), salary increases because NLIS is so successful.
Cop that!
A salary increase justified by a severe impost on producers (and agents) that is paid for by producers and benefits processors and retailers!
The MLA already receives a triple tax from producers: 1. The increased per head ‘levy’ tax 2. LPA tax to use the industry’s standard NVD form. 3. Federal Govt. co-funding from ‘Normal’ government farm taxes to boot!
(So, despite the fact that it is an independent corporation, MLA is actually funded primarily from taxes and would have very little revenue without taxes. Not much free market economics going-on there! ) However, it does seem a tad strange, don’t you think, that it can have the gaul to increase its salary based upon the spending of producer’s taxes. i.e. “We have spent your taxes so well, we deserve an increase in salary”.
One wonder whether they will then have the gaul to increase the taxes (levies) again in order to pay for the salary increases. Now that would be a truly vicious cycle.
If we are to take other large corporations as an example, we would expect to see peer group benchmarks and performance hurdles before salary increases would even be mentioned. As it stands, it seems there are no benchmarks on NLIS and all we have are: 1. PWC audit that showed ‘black’ holes in NLIS 2. Producer and agent displeasure with the NLIS 3. No international requirement for NLIS 4. No international implementation of NLIS
If this is the case, where is the case for MLA salary increases based upon the success of NLIS? In 2008 it should no longer be possible to say something is so without proof.
This view pretty well sums-up the perception of NLIS from many producers who believe they are funding a scheme flawed in theory and practice.
The National Livestock Identification Scheme more resembles a gauze jug than the failed Quarantine and Inspection Service and should immediately be abandoned in favour of the tail tag system.
Early 2004 I examined the Impact Statement and explained to Michael Beer, N.S.W. D.P.I. how and why it was completely undeliverable. For four years I have been providing details of this fiasco to State and Federal Polititions and their bureauracies. They too, seem to be unable and unwilling to comprehend the Scheme is simply nonsense based on fantasy, and will work wonderfully well so long as there is nothing like Equine Influenza.
Michael Beer recently reported in “The Land” that the subsidy to purchase scanners would discontinue, 794 producers had taken advantage of the offer. There are well over 70,000 Property Identification Codes in N.S.W. Before the Federal election, former Minister McGauran promised $15 million to fix N.L.I.S. which according to some “trumped up” exercise was almost perfect. When Labor won the election this money evaporated and nil allocation in latest budget. Hardly Government support, while producers are being slugged hundreds of million of dollars in compliance costs and wasted levy money.
I appreciate Tony Burke has more pressing problems than a Scheme with no purpose and no tangible results but hope he soon gets around to a serious inquiry into this fraud.
The database is a shambles and the credibility of M.L.A. is in tatters.
I am not so kind as my great little mate the Ooomanakker bird, who recently broke down and wept, then prayed; “Father forgive them for they know not what they do”.
Telstra has thanked the new Fed Government by connecting 900 exchanges to its faster ADSL2+ service. The Govt has said it doesn’t think there is a compelling reason for 3rd parties wishing to onsell such services to be regulated. i.e. It’s up to Telstra to decide how much such parties should pay to use the service. This is a bit like the Microsoft anti-trust case where Microsoft (given its dominance) had to unbundle its Internet Explorer (IE) product from its Office product to give competitors a fighting chance. In the case of Telstra, it has been allowed to continue to control the products it has invested in and developed as free market enterprise ideal would seem to support. Whirlpool forum notes. Are you thankful ADSL2+ is now available more widely? Do you think ADSL2+ will help you? Please leave a comment below.
Struggling farmers would become renewable energy generators under a new Greens plan aimed at rejuvenating rural Australia and reducing carbon emissions.
The Greens believe their plan would give farmers whose drought-ravaged land is no longer agriculturally viable a way to make a living without moving away.
Under the plan, mapping would take place to match areas where the viability of traditional agriculture is declining with areas which have excellent renewable energy resources. More…
This seems a good start to some clever thinking needed that the major parties don’t seem to be able to come up with.
What do you think? (Please post your comment below).
Should The Bush just vote back the people it has supported forever i.e. The Vailles, Andersons, McGaurans and Heffernans? In the cities, because there are a significant number of voters who swing between the traditional political battle of Labor and Liberal, most electioneering is spent trying to woo them.Wouldn’t it make sense then if The Bush caught on to this and made the parties treat them more seriously as well? And this would then give The Bush more respect from the cities as Bush voters could then participate more in some broader issues rather than the ones that just affect their own hip pockets. e.g. While the media loves painting The Bush as rednecks, most of us have some sensible opinions on the War in Iraq, Free tertiary education, Social payments for those in need, Health costs, Humanitarian assistance for refugees, Inflationary pressures and interest rates, etc. By always just throwing our lot in with what seem to be issues that just affect our own lives and seemingly not voting for broader, selfless issues, we are an easy media target and an even easier target for professional organisers who move from farmers group to semi-government bodies to state or federal politics – and we all know a swag of them! And by mindlessly supporting the same party each time despite what we may think abot their handling of major isssues, we have personally ended-up with the costly NLIS, LPA, FMD risk, HECs fees for education that used to be free, service-based health that disadvantages rural areas, etc. Perhaps if we showed a little more flexibility and more Worldy appreciation for how politics is actually run, not only might our opinions be listened to at election time but perhaps we might also achieve a bit more from whichever mob ends-up in power.
We’re not gunning for Minister McGauran, but it’s always hard to stomach when politicians who are supposed to be upholding the highest standards in representing us in this wonderful democracy, show their true colors.
While we believe Australia’s producers should feel badly done by in recent times by the Nats and Libs (Undemocratic MLA elections, ‘letting-in’ at risk USA / Brazilian meat, NLIS & LPA costs, NZ Fireblight, increased stock levies, native vegetation laws, …) , when you read about the personal habits/self-interest culture of some of them, you can gain an insight into why they aren’t focussed on helping others as much as they should be!The McGauran brothers last year declared $1 million of expenditure on their Victorian hotel from poker machine revenue as “community benefit” spending but only $5000 has gone to genuinely charitable causes.Click here to read the whole story
Since Peter McGauran has been in charge, our livestock have never been at at more risk of Foot and mouth disease and BSE (and Equine flu) ! This Minister has a record of going in to bat for business lobbyists interests over the need for quarantine purity.
But are they really looking after the bush? With the exception of a pork barrell that may or may not be rolled-out in your electorate just before the election, do they just take us for granted?
Before you jump-in with the old knee-jerk chestnuts, here’s a few points off the top of my head to start some thinking: 1. John Anderson implemented MLA and Vaille and McGauran followed him up. This has resulted in a huge increase in livestock levies, NLIS and LPA QA. Perhaps this is OK by you.
2. Howard, Costello and Co. have increased tertiary HECs fees. Does that make it easier or more difficult for your children to attend university?
3. Vaille, McGauran and Co. have welcomed USA meat at risk from foot and mouth sourced by US companies in Brazil. What’s their reason for NLIS and LPA then?
4. Vaille, McGauran and co. have agreed that Japan and the US buy meat other than Australian that isn’t controlled by NLIS or LPA .
5. American producers are receiving much more for their meat than Australian producers. 6.Australia’s debt is the highest that it’s ever been by far, which affects us all.
7. Helen Coonan has blustered about pulling Telstra into line but coming up to the election has now passed this off to Ruddock as too hard.
8. Helen Coonan has given Elders and Optus nearly a Billion dollars of our money and apparently the word is that they’re still not going to connect the Bush!
9. The Libs & Nats have removed the right of all Australian children to receive an education. They have given Private schools multiples more in funding than tertiary education. (Don’t even think about our local state/public schools).
10. Malcolm Turnbull backed by Howard and Truss, are enabling non-farmers to trade in water to turn a profit while our farms dry-up!
That should do for now. Let’s not get into the debate on biodiesel subsidies, decimation of rail and health services, whether our money spent on Iraq would have been better spent on better water management than simply putting in more dams, etc etc.
Are these the sorts of issues to make you vote the ‘other’ way this time or have you faced-up to what the pollies seem to take for granted, that you’ll vote for them come what may?! Times have changed. Have you?
