Judi Moylan (Pearce, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

At the outset I thank the member for Riverina for her very generous comments. As I speak to this Wheat Marketing Amendment Bill 2006 I must say it is undeniable that the Iraq wheat saga has been a shabby affair and the wheat growers of Australia have been very badly let down by those responsible. The Cole commission of inquiry has brought down its finding, and I do not propose in the short time available to comment further. It seemed inevitable, though, that this event would once again open discussion about the future of the single desk. Growers have long argued the merit or otherwise of the AWB holding the power of veto and marketing the bulk of Australia’s export wheat through the single desk.

Foreshadowing that discussion, I called a meeting in York in the Pearce electorate to seek the views of growers. At that meeting the majority of growers strongly expressed a view that the integrity of the single desk must be maintained. In the wake of Cole, WA growers have also confronted a serious drought and a locust plague. These events have had a devastating impact on rural communities as the economic viability of associated businesses declines, with a roll-on effect well beyond the farm gate.

Farming is a risky business and the management of the export wheat pool from a single desk helps to minimise a number of risk factors on behalf of growers. These include prices, exchange rates, wheat quality and seasonal and market volatility. Growers tell me that the risks will be greater for most growers if the AWB or a similar grower owned entity is unable to take a longer term strategic approach to selling wheat in the intensely competitive international marketplace.

Currently, the European Union maintains price support for wheat in excess of 40 per cent of its total value, and the United States similarly maintains price support of 30 per cent—in other words, a $3.3 billion handout to growers, as well as the advantages of export credits and food aid operated by the United States. Under the single desk system growers tell me they have benefited from premium wheat prices and an integrated package of services. One man wrote to me to say that he had been well served by the single desk for something like 70 years. The international marketing activities undertaken by the AWB have secured market share, delivering reasonable consistency and certainty to growers for many years. That is the message that my growers have given to me.

Time does not permit me to go into all of the arguments put to me by growers in Pearce. However, it is clear that the majority of growers who have taken the time to comment want the single desk system to continue. This includes some young, energetic growers. I spoke to one on his harvester the other night who related to me his experience selling wheat outside the pool. There can be no benefit in a knee-jerk reaction to Cole by dismantling a system that has produced a reasonably consistent result for growers. In this volatile commodity market and time of drought, it would create further hardship and greater uncertainty.

The bill gives the power of veto to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, the Hon. Peter McGauran, for a period of six months. Growers have expressed some nervousness about how the power of veto will be exercised in the hands of the minister and whether it may compromise the AWB’s ability to operate so as to maximise the returns to the majority of growers. I believe that this minister fully understands how important it is to the majority of growers to maintain the integrity of the single desk, and I am quite sure that the minister will exercise his power accordingly. Along with this interim measure, the government has announced a consultation process. Over the next three months, growers and grower organisations will have a chance to examine the options for the future of wheat marketing and to make comment. I urge growers in the electorate of Pearce and beyond to fully participate in that process.

I agree with much of what the member for New England has said—indeed, I think in some respects supported by the member for Riverina. As the minister is in the House, I make this point very strongly: we should not be talking only to grower representative organisations, because it does seem, as the member for New England has pointed out, that not all of those organisations fully understand the issues for wheat growers or they are pushing a particular barrow. I do think that we have to ensure that our consultation process not only is with those organisations that represent different sectors of the rural community but also extends out to the individual growers within our community. I agree with the member for Riverina that that responsibility really rests very much with those of us in this House charged with the responsibility of properly representing our communities. So, as I said, I will be urging the growers in Pearce and beyond to fully participate in this process.

I actually read with interest the comment of the Grains Council in their press release today, where they are calling for a well-structured, independent process for consultations. I support that notion. I hope that, with the passing of this legislation, our growers can get on with running their businesses, growing and harvesting wheat, getting it to markets and getting a return for the tremendous work and effort that they put in—and the contribution they make to this nation should always be acknowledged.

See this speech in context