Agribuzz with David Leyonhjelm
I thought you were a libertarian who valued freedom David? What about people’s right to choose what they want to eat? Being a vegetarian may not be as healthy as eating a diet with meat, but people should be free to choose what they put in their mouth and not dictated to by corporations chasing profit.
Taxpayer, I'd be more worried about negative gearings putting their hand in your pocket or the miners which are over 80% foreign owned.
Divide and conquer. The supermarkets don't actually care about ethical or not, this is simply a way for them to justify, buying and on selling, cheaper imported goods over more expensive Aust grown produce.
David, good to see you are trying to be a journalist and use facts and stats in your article, now you need to try to find stats and facts relevant to the topic of your article. Maybe try to tell us why cloning is preferable to current husbandry techniques - which I'm guessing you can't?
All we need from you now is an article saying free range chickens are to root of all evil and you'll have used all your material for the year, since you've already rehashed articles on why gm is good and family farmers are the devil's spawn.
The People's Republic of China seems to be doing a better job than Australia as far as agriculture and food security goes. Look at the investments that Chinese govt related businesses are making in Australia. Australia's problem is we wasted the mining boom when the govt should've used those funds to set up a sovereign wealth fund.
Hydatid, do you really think that allowing gm crops into Tasmania will fix its problems e.g. poor education - do these crops teach in school in the evenings? Wow they are impressive! By producing the same GM crops as everyone else, Tasmania will be a price taker like everyone else. Hardly the recipe for success.
Fredfrog, produce what you customer's DONT want at your own peril, dont come and ask for govt assistance when you go broke.
Give us honest labelling and let us choose what we want to eat. You'll find that wealthier people are demanding GM free and will pay a premium for it. I think this will be a future competitive advantage for Tassi.
"Take away the subsidies paid by the rest of Australia and living standards would plummet"
Take away the $4.5bn annual diesel fuel subsidies from the miners (who are +85% foreign owned) and the billions in subsidies to negative gearers buying investment properties and those markets would collapse also.
I'd rather have support provided to the ma and pa farmers than to real estate investors. At least ma and pa are producing something. The billions of dollars supporting negative gearers provides nothing whatsoever except high property prices.
David, all you seem to write about is articles against free range chickens and for GM food. Why hasn’t any journalist in Aust covered the signing up to the Trans Pacific Partnership which will give US firms the ability to sue the Aust government if we put in laws that impact the sale of their product e.g. similar to the case of Philip Morris suing the govt for having plain cigarette packages.
A good article. A couple of other things,
1. why do people expect to make money farming, look back in history or around the world, farmers were and are typically poor. 2. consumers don't have a connection to their food anymore, its all about convenience and product perception.
Geronimo, there won't be jobs for locals. Under the FTA signed with China, they're allowed to bring in their own workers. There is also an agreement that these workers won't need to be paid aust pay rates.
Yet Aussies keep voting LNP/Labor again and again. You'd think we'd learn. The reality is the Greens are the only ones who would stop this mine.
It'll be interesting to see if the 900 jobs eventuate. Under the new FTA with China, they can bring in their own labour for projects.
Well done David, completely support you on this one.
"potential to bring down Australia’s world-leading agriculture levy system" Is that all these guys contribute, a leading levy system?
What do they pay per litre there?
Not sure if anyone's bothered to read the fine print, but the Japanese negotiated a clause whereby their corporations can sue the Aust government if the government puts in place policies that the Japanese deem will hurt sales of their products, if they win, the tax payer pays the bill. We have essentially given up sovereignty in this FTA.
The Greens are also more supportive of Ag as far as Coal Seam Gas is concerned.
Love the country - sounds like there are huge amounts of excess capacity in grain production. If GM crops bring the yield benefits people talk about this will lead to more grain being produced and prices pushed down further. Niche organic may be the way forward so farmers don't need to compete with global 'commodity' grain producers.
Tough problem, aging farmer population who need high property prices to be able to retire comfortably, high property prices keep the next generation of farmers out (unless they take on unsustainable debt levels as above). Both sides of govts are trying to balance this by allowing foreign investors buy into agriculture. This maintains the high value of property and will allow ag production to continue. Foreign govts through sovereign wealth funds will own the land and new farmers (or landless serfs) will be paid a wage to manage the land.
Why cant SPC get a loan from a bank? With support from CCA this could easily be done. CCA are choosing to go for a hand out instead.
Good quality, competitve products are crucial to exports.
The Aust govt (both sides) aren't good at negotiating FTA's, look at the car example with Thailand. we import thousands of cars a month from there but they import around 100 a year from us. Hardly equal access.
Where does the 0.9pc come from? If this increases to 1.1pc will the neighbour pay to clean it up to get back to 0.9pc?
Tcup Storm, Brence, that's my point, farmers are getting the same prices they were getting 30 years ago because they are competing with the 17 million farmers who also produce commodity GM crops and are hence at the mercy of the market. Produce a more niche product e.g. organic and you'll get a premium from a loyal customer base.
It’s funny, in the article on drought assistance, one of the pro-gm bloggers is complaining that they are getting the same prices for their crop as they were getting 30 years ago. I reckon there will be even more downward price pressure once more people produce GM crops globally, especially if GM allows farmers around the world to produce more. The smaller scale organic grower will be the winner here, getting a premium over GM crops.
X Ag Socialist it makes perfect sense. The owner of the bull has an obligation to ensure it remains on his land, as it is the responsibility of the grower to ensure GM crops remain on the growers land. If your product is tainted by the bull, the owner should compensate you, not cry that the standard for what a pure bred angus is is too tough because the neighbour won’t keep his stock on his land. What effort has Baxter gone to to prevent contamination?
Overtly label the front of any product saying "contains GM" and I guarantee your sales will drop to nothing.
The point is GM producers can't control the spread of their crop. This is about ownership and property rights. Back to the cattle example, if my belted galloway bull broke the fence and bred with your black angus herd, the sale yard would not pay you for the offspring. Why can't we have a 1% tolerance for angus that have been cross bred? As the owner of the Galloway I would need to put measures in place to stop my bull coming to your property. Why can't GM farmers respect others?
Deregul8 – It’s got nothing to do with organic standards. We don’t have laws which say vegetarians must tolerate a level of meat in their food. The issues are about property rights and the right for consumers to buy GM free. GM growers can't contain their crop. Would you be ok if my cattle ventured onto your land every day to feed? Talking about tolerance levels in organic is just an attempt to confuse the debate.
Give us honest labelling and let consumers decide what they want. I guarantee any product that clearly states it "contains GM' wont sell.
Oliver wrote "there is no problem in getting rid of GM canola . All you have to do is spray with one of the many available herbicides that will kill it". Doesn't that mean the producer will no longer be organic if they need to spray chemicals on their crop every year to destroy the GM plants? think about it.
The thing that tells me there is something wrong with GM is that the people who use it are trying to push it onto people who dont want it. Give us honest product labelling and let the consumers decide what they want!
Had Enough Huek, what about the Marsh’s right not to have GM crops on their land? If my cattle came wondering onto your property you’d have the right to tell me to get them off your land. This is no different, only once the GM crops have taken root there is no way to get them off. I really can't understand why the pro GM mob feel the need to push GM onto people who don't want it!
by all means grow gm, just please give us labeling so we can choose to buy it or not.
Cassandra, there is no obligation for the people who fund studies into gm to publish studies that don't back up their claim that its safe. you can have 99 studies against gm and 1 for it, they only publish that one study.
the title should read China well palced for Aust wheat. The falling dollar will make Aust assets more affordable for foreign investors.
Boonah Bob, you can change the weather, cloud seeding is actually very common.
Have GM, but give us clear labelling so we can choose not to buy them.
MichaelB, and the case won’t be determined in an international court, but by a panel of representatives, some of which can be from the country of the aggrieved company.
Grow GM if you like, but please label your products so I can choose not to buy them.
Can I ask all Land readers to read about the Trans Pacific Partnership, the free trade agreement the govt is signing with the USA. The Aussie press is not covering the topic, but it will allow US companies to sue the Aust govt if they enact laws which they deem damaging to their products (e.g. labelling on cigarettes), the US will be drug companies will be able to dictate prices of pharmaceuticals, parallel imports of goods will also be banned.
The Land, please cover this topic!
The only reason there will be a gas crisis is because firms producing gas will be exporting it to get a better price rather then selling it domestically.
'The virus is not the highly pathogenic H5N1 strain, which has killed humans, nor is it closely related,' so some chooks got a cold, sounds like a huge overreaction. More people die slipping in the bathtub each year than have died in the last decade from bird flu.
I'm confused, we have been told by our leaders that Asia and China need food and Australia, with the help of foreign investors buying Aust farms, can help supply them with food. Why then are we importing food from the countries that we are meant to be supplying? Has someone been lying, will the foreign owned Aust farms actually send food to these countries only for it to be processed and sent back to Aust?
A good point was made in another article. "Irradiation approvals in Australia would not benefit our farmers in the long term; approvals will facilitate importation of those irradiated foods from overseas".
This is going to be another win for the organic farmer.