What’s in a bowl?

For what it’s worth, I am one of those who define 'the food bowl of Asia' as an aspirational term

APPARENTLY it’s not OK to describe Australia’s agricultural future as “the food bowl of Asia”. Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce says the term is ridiculous and sounds like a threat to our neighbours.

He claims we can be a food bowl, but we can’t feed all of Asia and should stop talking as if we can. Rather, we should be focusing on supplying premium food at a premium price.

I have searched for anyone, anywhere, who has used the “food bowl of Asia” term to indicate we can feed the whole of Asia. I presume Barnaby has met him, given the effort he gave to disagreeing with him. But my efforts to find him have failed miserably. All I have found is people who believe Australia can become a much more significant supplier of food to Asia.

For what it’s worth, I am one of those who define “the food bowl of Asia” as an aspirational term conveying that there is potential to sell a great deal more food to Asia. I also think it is a useful way of focusing attention on that potential, given that Australia’s greatest market opportunities in agriculture lie in Asia.

But as for only selling premium food at a premium price, is that the only option? Can’t Australian farmers be globally cost competitive? Are we internationally uncompetitive in one of the three industries in which we have a natural advantage?

It is true that Australia is a high-cost country. On top of the huge distances involved in getting our produce to markets, our taxes are high, labour costs are high, our labour rules are inflexible, we have intrusive environmental laws with high compliance costs, and we are infested with nanny state-ists and know-it-alls who think they know what’s good for us.

But these burdens are not unique. Many of our rivals deal with similar distances in getting their produce to market and, while our infrastructure is sometimes less than ideal, some of theirs is woeful. We also don’t have to contend with the economy-sapping impact of endemic corruption.

Our access to inputs is no worse than our international competitors either. Although most agricultural chemicals and a sizeable share of our fertiliser and machinery are imported, there are no tariffs and few entry barriers.

And several of our key competitors have their fair share of nanny state-ists and know-it-alls too.

Where we struggle to remain competitive is where there is a significant labour component in production or processing. Indeed, the more labour required, the less competitive we become.

But this is not new. Australia has a proud history of inventing labour-saving machinery, including the header harvester, stump jump plough, mechanical sheep shears, self-propelled rotary hoe and buffalo fly trap. We have also made major contributions to wheeled and tracked tractors, the milking machine, the sugar cane harvester and travelling irrigators, all significant contributors to reduced labour.

Currently we are on the cusp of a revolution in broad acre cropping with the introduction of driverless equipment based on GPS navigation and sophisticated sensors, and in milk production with the arrival of robotic milking systems.

Provided we continue to adopt labour-saving technology and embrace modern production methodology, there is no reason we cannot remain cost-competitive in commodities such as wheat, barley, milk and livestock exports.

Having said all that, there is nothing wrong with seeking a premium price. Indeed, we should aim to be both cost-competitive and worthy of a premium. But higher farm profitability can be assisted with either. And since the Minister for Agriculture rightly has an objective of increasing farm profitability, there is no justification for ignoring one of these.

Indeed, the government could do a lot more to boost farm profitability by reducing the costs of farming than through seeking premium prices. With so many costs attributable to government policy, the scope to make a difference is pretty substantial.

All of which makes arguments about the meaning of the Asian food bowl somewhat unimportant. Whether we are filling the bowl partially or completely, and whether it’s because the food is cheaper or better quality, what matters is that our food is in it.

David Leyonhjelm

David Leyonhjelm

has worked in agribusiness for 30 years and is a Senator for NSW representing the Liberal Democrats.
Date: Newest first | Oldest first


8/08/2014 1:00:02 PM

Have a listen to bushie bill. He is now denying that he and Mike Carlton are one and the same person, when no one has even suggested they are! Interesting also that he fully supports Mike Carlton and obviously the disgraceful behavior he was sacked for. Says it all.
King Billy
11/08/2014 10:01:48 AM

David, stick your head inside the Meat Industry !! Then you will really see how compliance costs , regulatory burden and labour costs have affected our international competitiveness. Even the Yanks can turn a beef steer into boxed beef at ac 100 dollars per head cheaper than we can. That's something for you to get your teeth into.
Bushie Bill
11/08/2014 4:08:43 PM

EH, your bold statement that Mike Carlton was sacked is so demonstratively wrong that you have, in one simple sentence, destroyed any remnants of credibility that may have had in some distant time.
Bushie Bill
11/08/2014 4:15:15 PM

How so, argie old son (presuming you were actually asking a question, although that is hard to determine as there is no question mark)? Or is simply that any sentence that is not simpler than "watch Spot run" is beyond you comprehension?
Bushie Bill
11/08/2014 4:19:50 PM

EH, you seem to have the same English comprehension skills as our old mate, argie. Go back (using index finger if necessary) and reread my post, then tell me where the denial exists in my post? Hint: a sentence ending with a question mark indicates a question being asked. Not hard, old son. Do get back to me in due course, won't you?
12/08/2014 6:29:10 AM

Gee bushie, you are making yourself sound like you are actually Mike Carlton?
Bushie Bill
13/08/2014 11:02:05 AM

Do you think, perhaps, bronwyn , that we may share the same computer and email address?
Love the country
15/08/2014 4:58:09 AM

Just watching all the TV shows on people trecking Asia, I have never seen a shortage of food.its everywhere, the vendors barrows in streets are loaded, food hanging from trellises ,just loaded, I also notice lush pastures ,plenty of water, so with our rainfall falling 60 percent in our area in the last 50 years, me thinks, Asia, May we'll be the food bowl of Australia !
Ted O'Brien.
15/08/2014 6:45:56 PM

David, you are in need of a good night's sleep. You are getting boged down in the size of the job. You speak of "premium food at a premium price, is that the only option?" Yes, David, it is. Because without the premium we can't cover our costs. Food Bowl of Asia an aspirational term? It certainly is. "Driverless equipment"? David, if you take away the people you won't need the food. As for the rest, just remember that the job you have taken on is to look after us. Study "Unilateral Trade Reform" until you can see what is insane about it, then rewrite "Free Market Theory".
Bushie Bill
18/08/2014 9:49:00 AM

Ted is a perfect example of the old adage that you can't teach old dogs new tricks.
< previous |  1 | 2 | 3 | 4  |  next >
Agribuzz with David LeyonhjelmCommentary, news and analysis with agribusiness consultant David Leyonhjelm. Email David at reclaimfreedom@gmail.com


light grey arrow
I'm one of the people who want marijuana to be legalized, some city have been approved it but
light grey arrow
#blueysmegacarshowandcruise2019 10 years on Daniels Ute will be apart of another massive cause.
light grey arrow
Australia's live animal trade is nothing but a blood stained industry that suits those who