|
representatives vote 2019-02-21#2
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2019-03-07 15:39:00
|
Title
Motions — Dairy Industry- Motions - Dairy Industry - Let a vote happen
Description
<p class="speaker">Bob Katter</p><p>I seek leave to move the following motion:</p><p class="italic">That the House:</p>- The majority voted against a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2019-02-21.8.18) to suspend the usual procedural rules (known as [standing orders](https://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/standing-orders.html)) to let a vote happen.
- ### Motion text
- > *That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent the member for Kennedy from moving the following motion immediately:*
- > *That the House:*
- > *(1)notes that:*
- >> *(a)it was the National Party which deregulated the dairy industry taking the farmers income from 59c a litre down to 41c a litre;*
- >> *(b)at the announcement of deregulation there were over 230 dairy farmers on the Atherton Tablelands, now there are 51;*
- >> *(c)neither the ALP or LNP will introduce arbitration for farmers;*
- >> *(d)for supply and demand in the free market to work there must be an unlimited number of sellers and buyers; and*
- >> *(e)dairy farmers in North Queensland have only one processor to sell to and in the whole of Australia effectively only two buyers of milk—the supermarket duopoly; and*
- > *(2)therefore, condemns both sides of politics in creating misery and heartache where dairy farmers are the victims of the free market 'fundamentalists' in this House.*
<p class="italic">(1) notes that:</p><p class="italic">  (a) it was the National Party which deregulated the dairy industry taking the farmers income from 59c a litre down to 41c a litre;</p><p class="italic">  (b) at the announcement of deregulation there were over 230 dairy farmers on the Atherton Tablelands, now there are 51;</p><p class="italic">  (c) neither the ALP or LNP will introduce arbitration for farmers;</p><p class="italic">  (d) for supply and demand in the free market to work there must be an unlimited number of sellers and buyers; and</p><p class="italic">  (e) dairy farmers in North Queensland have only one processor to sell to and in the whole of Australia effectively only two buyers of milk - the supermarket duopoly; and</p><p class="italic">(2) therefore, condemns both sides of politics in creating misery and heartache where dairy farmers are the victims of the free market 'fundamentalists' in this House.</p><p>Leave not granted.</p><p>Mr Speaker, I am not sure of the process, but I want to move it anyway—</p><p>An honourable member interjecting—</p><p>by moving for a suspension of standing orders to bring forward the motion.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>The Leader of the House on a point of order.</p> <p class="speaker">Christopher Pyne</p><p>On a point of order, so that I can explain this to the member for Kennedy. While I obviously don't want to be at all disrespectful to the member for Kennedy, we just had a debate about the dairy industry, from 9.30 to 10.10 this morning, and the government has other priorities, including passing the Future Drought Fund Bill today so that farmers can get drought support. So I'm not giving leave to move the motion, because it will just delay the house for another hour or when actually we need to pass the drought fund bill today, and I thought you wanted to do that.</p> <p class="speaker">Bob Katter</p><p>I think the 10 minutes I'm going to take up here are not going to stop the drought bill from going through. I take the member's point, but—</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>The member for Kennedy, now leave has not been granted, would need to move to suspend standing orders.</p> <p class="speaker">Bob Katter</p><p>I move:</p><p class="italic">That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent the member for Kennedy from moving the following motion immediately:</p><p class="italic">That the House:</p><p class="italic">(1)notes that:</p><p class="italic">(a)it was the National Party which deregulated the dairy industry taking the farmers income from 59c a litre down to 41c a litre;</p><p class="italic">(b)at the announcement of deregulation there were over 230 dairy farmers on the Atherton Tablelands, now there are 51;</p><p class="italic">(c)neither the ALP or LNP will introduce arbitration for farmers;</p><p class="italic">(d)for supply and demand in the free market to work there must be an unlimited number of sellers and buyers; and</p><p class="italic">(e)dairy farmers in North Queensland have only one processor to sell to and in the whole of Australia effectively only two buyers of milk—the supermarket duopoly; and</p><p class="italic">(2)therefore, condemns both sides of politics in creating misery and heartache where dairy farmers are the victims of the free market 'fundamentalists' in this House.</p><p>This may sound like I'm taking up the time of the House unduly, and I take the honourable Leader of the House's comments, so I'm going to be uncharacteristically brief. But it is very, very simple. The president of our party is one of the biggest dairy farmers in Queensland. It is very simple. The reason we have to go in the direction that we are going in is that, on the day before deregulation, we were on 59c. That's not very complicated. The day after deregulation, we were on 41c. I carry the letter that was sent to all the farmers in North Queensland and I would be very surprised if it didn't go to all the farmers in Queensland and all the farmers in New South Wales. It did not go to Victoria, because Victoria had already been deregulated into the Melbourne market and all they had was the export market. I note the honourable member, one of my esteemed colleagues behind me here. Victoria wanted deregulation at that stage because they they'd already been deregulated and they felt that, if they could get across the border, they could get the 59c that the New South Welshmen were enjoying instead of the 40c they were getting in a deregulated market. That was the only reason Victoria went for it. They'd already been deregulated.</p><p>So, anyway, the deregulation proceeded and we lost a third of our income. In our area we had over 230 farms. We now have 51 farms. 'You can't blame the penguins in Antarctica.' That's a quote from the Nuremberg trials. You can't blame penguins in Antarctica; you've got to blame people on this side of the house and on that side of the House. They made the decision. So I'm not going to condemn for the purposes of politics the ALP for proposing to reinstitute arbitration. If every worker in Australia enjoys the protection of an awards system, well, thanks to the Country Party, every farmer in this nation enjoyed an awards system.</p><p>The great architects of our Country Party, Jack McEwan and Doug Anthony—Doug Anthony introduced the wool scheme. A person here—I don't mean to denigrate the man, but I was around at the time and he wasn't, I suppose. But we saw the price of wool go up 300 per cent when he introduced that scheme. When the scheme was removed, over the next three years it dropped to one-third of what it was. Oh, what a coincidence! When we introduce arbitration the Country Party way into the system, the price goes up. When we take it away, the price goes down, and I would strongly recommend to the minister to read that section of my book. He might hate me and he might even hate the book, but read the section where it gives the actual figures in the egg industry, in the milk industry and in the sugar industry.</p><p>You don't have to be Albert Einstein. I want to sue the University of Queensland for my economics course, because they told me you need an infinite number of buyers and sellers for the free market to work. Well, with Coles and Woolworths holding 93 per cent—and I'm not blaming Coles and Woolworths; they're out there to make money, that's their objective. You can't blame a bird-dog for chasing birds! But this place is here to set the rules. In this country, if you remove arbitration workers will be working for nothing. But it's infinitely worse for farmers, because there are only two people to sell food to in this country and they get 90 per cent of the market. When I went to university, it was called an 'oligopoly' and there was no free market operating.</p><p>I don't want to go on any longer. I framed that resolution before the ALP took their fall off the horse from Damascus, because it was the ALP which deregulated the wool industry. They can take full blame for the wool industry—and part of the blame for the others too, because it was ALP state governments that were in there. All I can do is to thank them; they've taken their fall from the horse to Damascus. I thank them and I move that accordingly. I support any party or group of people in this place who will give us back our right to arbitration and our right to protect ourselves against a situation where there is no free market, where there are two people to sell food to in Australia and two people to buy food from.</p><p>I don't wish to take up any more time in the House, because I think the government is entitled to help the people up north, who I represent.</p> <p class="speaker">Rob Mitchell</p><p>Is the motion seconded?</p> <p class="speaker">Andrew Wilkie</p><p>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</p> <p class="speaker">David Littleproud</p><p>I acknowledge the member for Kennedy and his passion and belief, not only in the dairy industry but also in agriculture. In fact, I was up in Malanda the other day with the member for Leichhardt, and met with a number of dairy producers up there. I was listening not only to their concerns but also to what they see as opportunities.</p><p>I think that the reassuring piece of where we sit at the moment is that while there are challenges within the dairy industry there are also opportunities. I saw that from producers firsthand. That's why we, as a government, have instituted a review through the ACCC. I had that review back in April; I asked the industry to give me direction with respect to a code of conduct, to make sure that there was fairness in the marketplace. The ACCC clearly found that there was an imbalance, and this government is working towards rectifying that imbalance. We're putting in place a mandatory code of conduct. The consultation process will be completed in the next couple of weeks, and the code will commence in 2020. It's commencing in 2020 because we have to align with contracts and production cycles.</p><p>The industry supports it fully and is supportive of where we're going with respect to that. But it's also important, as the member for Kennedy has quite rightly pointed out, around the imbalance with supermarkets in the purchase not only of milk but of agricultural products, that we, as a government, give our producers, whether dairy or any other commodity, the opportunity to spread their risk and to sell their commodity, not only domestically but internationally. That's what we've done with the trade agreements that we put in place, particularly with Japan, China and Korea. And now there is the TPP-11 and also—very soon, hopefully—Indonesia. Those give us the opportunities to spread the risk for our producers and to get a better commodity price that they may not receive domestically.</p><p>We have to understand that we're a nation of 25 million people and that we produce enough food for 75 million people. So it's important that we do engage the world and embrace the world through trade. That's what this government has done, obviously, to make sure that we get better returns at the farm gate and support regional communities, and that's the journey that we'll continue on as a government. We'll make sure that we, as a government, enter into a marketplace only when there is an imbalance. That's what a good government does. It doesn't interfere in a marketplace. It'll only interfere when there's an imbalance, and that's what we're doing with the mandatory code of conduct. That's what we'll continue to do. Anything else would risk the trade agreements that we have in place not only for dairy but also for other commodities. That has benefited agriculture, taking it from a $34 billion industry some eight years ago to, now, a $60 billion industry and to one that we intend to take to $100 billion by 2030.</p> <p class="speaker">Joel Fitzgibbon</p><p>I will also be very brief. Like the minister, I want to congratulate the member for Kennedy for his passion and the way he so energetically represents his constituents. He is, of course, a former member of the National Party, and it is a great shame that current members of the National Party aren't following him on some of these very, very important issues. I didn't hear what the member for Kennedy said about the wool industry; I was having a conversation with the member for Mallee about very important agriculture issues. But, certainly, the minister made a reference to the disaster that occurred in the wool industry. Of course, that was a National Party disaster, beginning with 'Black Jack' McEwen. It was Labor—</p><p class="italic">Mr Katter interjecting—</p><p></p><p>If you want to interject, I might hear you, member for Kennedy. It was the National Party that destroyed the wool industry with the reserve price scheme. And I have read Charles Massy's excellent book on the reserve price scheme and the way the government just kept buying wool in the face of falling—</p> <p class="speaker">Bob Katter</p><p>I'll give you a copy.</p> <p class="speaker">Joel Fitzgibbon</p><p>I thank the member for Kennedy; I'd be very happy to do some more reading on it. It was left to a Labor government—the Hawke government—and an agriculture minister by the name of John Kerin to clean up their mess. It's important that I tell the House that we will be—</p> <p class="speaker">Bob Katter</p><p>That's just the complete opposite to what happened.</p> <p class="speaker">Rob Mitchell</p><p>Member for Kennedy, you've had good run!</p> <p class="speaker">Joel Fitzgibbon</p><p>It is a statement of fact that the reserve price scheme was implemented by 'Black Jack' McEwen and exercised through the Wool Corporation and the Wool Council. They kept buying wool, buying wool and buying wool while the price continued to fall, and it was left to the Labor Party to clean up the mess.</p><p>But I just want to indicate to the House that, while there are obviously some things said by the member for Kennedy that we agree with, there are a number of things that we can't agree with. We will be supporting the suspension to allow his resolution to be put to the House, but, if it gets to a vote on the motion itself, then the opposition will be seeking to amend it.</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>
|