Recent comments by: angry australian
Tom, if Turnbull is the best the Libs have got the Coalition is stuffed. This is the man who was prepared to embrace a dubious expensive plan to trade pieces of paper for the "right" to pollute. He didn't even consider how many extra Australian jobs it would send offshore, as if the present policies of both parties haven't destroyed enough.
Agribuzz with David Leyonhjelm
David how much have farmers and the taxpayer contributed to this super expensive work for the dole scheme for researchers,industry and government bureaucrats over the last 20 odd years? $4 billion?$5b? $6b? $7.5b? Does the word billion even mean anything in Canberra any more? Who are the beneficiaries? Certainly not farmers or the taxpayer. If farm profits were going up due to these schemes, the taxes paid would make a hole in our deficit.Despite $billions to the MLA domestic red meat sales are dropping,AWI hasn't increased the price of wool and GRDC waste money, the whole show needs review!
David L, to complete my comment isn't R&D supposed to be about enhancing farmer productivity and profitability? Next time you're in Estimates you may wish to question just in which century those spending levies anticipate that happening? I have seen no huge increases in either profitability or productivity brought about by the likes of MLA,GRDC,AWI or the rest of the illegitimate brood that Canberra has spawned. In fact I can make a very strong case that all our primary producers are going backward. Until levies are tied to profits and not turnover there is no incentive to fix any problem!
David L, while identifying the levy payers and making it democratic is very important, remember the road to hell is paved with good intentions. You say,that farmers are currently paying over $500 m in levies, just exactly do they get for it? Fancy buildings in Sydney,Canberra etc,expensive bureaucrats and other assorted hangers on! R&D of dubious economic value and heaps of Board Members dining out first class! I will say it again for your benefit, there are only so many $ you can take out of farmers before financial stress closes in on them. For many that is now,the system is broken
The user pays levy system has already all but destroyed one industry,the fishing industry , I seriously doubt whether farming can hold on.Successive governments have been conned by the Sir Humphreys.There is only so much money you can take out of a kg of beef or lamb or a tonne of grain before the farmer doesn't feel financial stress.the claim is its for the betterment of farmers,the question is after 24 odd years where are our financial gains? The only winners from this system are bureaucrats, government and industry and research institutions. This "fraud" needs cleaning up!
RAG rural Aus doesn't despise paying a market rate for labour. We despise carrying people who believe we owe them a living.
We currently are forced to spend $billions annually propping up government mandated research from which we get a negative return, so that won't be missed. Buy your food from wherever you like but seeing as you don't produce anything that's of any value to another nation, how are you going to pay for it? Mining's hurting, manufacturing is stuffed and your service economy is a fraud. Few foreigners are buying our services except education which is heavily subsidised.
Well said Mike Logan.Comparing us to NZ, their pay structures are different,less bureaucracy,cheaper power,less distance to ship product, workcover is cheaper, super etc., the list is endless. Until we start stripping back the impediments to profitability across the whole production chain the producer will have to take sub par prices. I don't believe our processors are so incompetent that they haven't identified greater opportunities, I do believe that they have the problem of complying with so many stupid laws they can only pass the cost back to the producer in the form of poorer prices.
The part I find the most amusing about this whole levy argument is the party that is so opposed to compulsory unionism and slush funds is actually jamming a similar system down the throats of our primary producers.
Do we need a Royal Commission?
Let me add that the majority of our politicians have never had to find the money to make a wages cheque, never had to put their cojones on the line for a business and are looked after by the political machine even when the fail. How many of the MP's dumped in the recent Qld or Vic elections will seek employment that will open their eyes to the way the rest of the nation lives? How many will get directorships, in business or charities? Or government boards like the MDBA? Our 2 major political parties now no longer represent the Australian way of life, probably indicates why people are ambivalent.
The problem is far too many politicians with no life skills on both sides of parliament, at all levels, state and federal.
No Mick Youngs, no Doug Anthonys, no Wilson Tuckeys, no common sense.
Too often the resume reads "Uni, BA or LLB, adviser to the Howard etc etc Govt or adviser to Minister A, before being awarded a safe seat where they sprout rubbish parrot like and that's the right wing of politics. On the left it reads Uni, law degree, organiser for XXXX Union, adviser to local ALP member, safe seat, same outcome as the Libs.
Issues that affect us aren't understood by these people.
One bloke does it Sam it's a niche, two and it's a commodity.
Where businesses like those you've named have real value to the broader farming community is that it lets the population at large, which now seems to only believe in what they get off the internet, know that primary producers aren't all rapists and pillagers of resources like water and land or cruel exploiters of animals and their products.
We have a very necessary job to feed our nation.
Really PorcaMiseria, I will give you any odds you want to name on that prediction. I cannot envisage over a billion Chinese or 1.6 billion Muslims forgoing the need to eat meat.Let alone the vast majority of the rest of the world population, bud you really need a lamb chop the lack of iron is affecting your thinking.
Well said Sam. You cannot appease terrorists, the industry has to rid themselves of the Chamberlains and let in the Churchill's, for there can be no peace in our time.
The fishing industry has all but disappeared up its own a*** because it thought it could deal with people like De Brito, for them their income is safe, many are teachers,nurses,academics and public servants.As Qlander alluded they are religious zealots and to them the ends justify the means.
A matter of opinion
As for a cost benefit analysis what is the rent in Civic roughly $500-600 a sq. metre? For that sort of money you could just about buy Eden,Bridport and Devonport! As I have previously said AFMA has no need to be in Canberra,they have no role in making policy( although 2 out of the last 3 MD's believed differently).It is just an administration role that can be done from any reasonable sized town
PBE if you are going to do a cost benefit analysis you will want to be quick. The way the fishing industry is imploding under the weight of micro management and government enforced cost we won't need AFMA in 5 years as there will be no industry. How many shark fishermen "surrendered" licences 3-4 years ago because of licence fees or how many SE Trawl fishermen will survive this years 30% increase in levies? Why isn't the Government asking why AFMA is apparently "ignoring" a Ministerial Direction in regards to industry profitability or alleged overfishing of pink ling?
PBE, firstly read the explanatory memorandum that went with the FMA Act to see the intent of Parliament was the fishing industry would be the constituent clients. Then there are the written and verbal assurances from McColl and Stevens before AFMA was formed. But seriously are you really suggesting that we continue bankrupting an Australian industry so that ignorant bureaucrats can live the manner in which they've become accustomed in a major city? That a bloated bureaucracy that has more employees than license holders can continue to do as it pleases?
PBE, your defence of AFMA and whether it should be relocated is as poor as the arguments put forward today in a national newspaper by John Kerin defending his "legacy". How many industries can survive a 30% increase in levy costs like AFMA imposed on some sectors this fishing year? AFMA sits in the rarefied air in Canberra away from its constituent clients and have no idea what is happening in our fisheries either financially or ecologically. As a model to manage natural resources I will argue that alongside the MDBA its a total failure except for the employment of bureaucrats.
PBE, let me also add we don't need what are virtually overpaid clerks jobs being done in the high rent district of Canberra's Civic when the same job can be done by computer from say Eden, Devonport or Bridport. Fisheries policy is supposed to be made by the Department, although some would argue they have ceded that role to AFMA. The "Geelong Star" is a perfect example. Day to day management our fisheries is supposed to be done by AFMA. I don't think any AFMA managed fishery, Scallop, Shark, Squid, SET, GAB, Bluefin, ECT, Western Deep, EC Tuna, Small Pelagic etc is ahead of the financial ledger since 1992.
PBE actually both jusidictions are as bad as the other and both major parties are a disgrace in regard to fisheries (mis) management. It costs more to manage our fisheries from Canberra than the return to the nation by any measure. the SE Trawl industry which was a $100m industry in 92 is now struggling to top $50m.How can an industry pay 2015 costs with half of 1992 turnover? As for political decisions, both major parties made the same commitment prior to the last Vic election. In fact, in my opinion the Libs have arguably been far worse for our pro fishing industry than Labor!
Peter Holding, the MCA, NFF etc need to be in Canberra if they intend to lobby politicians and influence government policy. Mobs like the R&D corps are a form of red tape and taxation on our primary producers deciding how to allocate "research" dollars. The job can be done from Nome, Alaska. In my opinion Barnaby has put the cart before the horse. There should be a review of the alleged benefits of pouring so many industry and taxpayer dollars into R&D over the last say 20 years. Anyone can do research, but unless our industries and nation profit, what's the point?
A well written article, Vernon. Take the case of our marine "managers". Most have never met a fisherman, dealing with peak bodies who also haven't met fishermen. The fishing industry has a good case to say that it is far worse off today than when the AFMA Act was instituted in '92. Some industry estimates have put job losses at 10,000, mainly in rural towns like Pt.Lincoln, Portland, Eden or in Tasmania. There have been papers written showing that the cost of management is greater than the return to to the industry or taxpayer. Perhaps you should be asking do we need an AFMA, FRDC or AIMS?
Burrs under my saddle
Let me add Pete that the biggest mystery in Canberra,is what do the 4000 odd at DoA do? Our forestry policy is a mess, our fisheries policy is worse, no one knows where sugar is going (besides the Chinese). We have outsourced the MDB to a qango that seems more interested in saving the world than farmers, we have more hangers on than a dog has fleas with R&D, marketing organisations etc. Everywhere across Australia rural employment and profitability is down and too many country towns seem to be living on life support of the dole and pension.Rural Australia seems to be just holding on by luck
Pete, you're almost onto it. There is no easier job than spending other peoples money.Annually we are wasting well over a $billion of farmers and taxpayers money propping up a system of dubious worth.We pay an ANNUAL compulsory levy, which appears to increase greater than the inflation rate, for R&D and marketing of primary produce. No auditing is done of the process to see whether farmers are getting value for money, it seems to be just a tax to prop up research institutions andbureaucratic jobs. I suspect that if we shut down the MLA's,GRDC's etc the impact on farmers wouldn't be noticed
Yeah Max, he might want to read notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress .com and just consider someone else's opinion first
Grumpy, I'm sorry if my comments didn't read well. I didn't intend to malign Pete or his endeavours. The criticism is aimed at all of us, who have allowed the hoi polloi to dictate the agenda. We are all voters not the likes of the NFF and when I receive letters from MP's and Ministers from both sides politely suggesting that I address my issue through my peak industry body usually my blood boils. An industry CEO cannot address an issue like an individual, think Robb, Craik etc. Even when we send good reps to Canberra they seem to be seduced by the power.
The last thing rural Australia needs is another political party! Got a problem, get off your butts and do something about it.When was the last time any of you took your grievances to your local MP or 10 Senators? When have you challenged the crap written by Fitzgibbon or O'Sullivan in their blogs. Why are you content to let Governments dictate the agenda by telling you they only want to deal with the likes of NFF or the respective Farmers and Graziers Assoc? I don't want my voice diluted by those who want to fly to Canberra and drink the chardy that I pay for. Pete isn't the answer.
"Our rural industry will never truly be free from the shackles of debt ........... " Barry our banks are in business, they aren't a charity, when they were truly bankers they lent money on silly things like profitability and the ability to repay, they'd give an overdraft to tide you over a quiet period.But we won't truly be free until you stop spending my money for me and allow me to be profitable. Why do I need compulsory levies to fund MLA's,AWI's etc and the Ag Dept as well? We don't need both, you are breaking rural Australia to prop up a R&D regime of dubious benefit to our farmers
... will be spent on more funding for bureaucrats. Many of the measures that do actually help farmers are actually budget measures that should be in the Budget.You want to really help our primary producers Barry start stripping back a lot of the unnecessary laws that Parliament has forced on us in the last 20 odd years.for these are the things that have eroded our profitability/productivity. As primary producers and price takers we have no ability to pass on the costs that Canberra forces on us and our industry. The only real use I can see for your White Paper is in the toilet!
Barry, what puerile self serving garbage!How can the Abbott Govt claim any responsibility for increased prices for produce other than by dragging down the value of the $A.You've told us what you can't control ,what about those you can?Like the 4000 odd in the Dept, and the who knows how many 1000's, in RDC's,statutory bodies, industry bodies etc who are expert in making road blocks for primary producers that government then cynically wants primary producers to pay for under some bogus "user pays" arrangement . This package does nothing to improve profitability/productivity, most of the $4 b...
The Coalition "field of dreams". If they build it people will come. Really Barry? Know where Lakeland is, between Cairns and Cooktown, near ruined the Foysters couldn't and wouldn't be done today.What has been the economic return from the Ord? Will the nation ever get back the initial investment? What are you going to do about the EPBC Act that will make land clearing a red tape disaster as every earth worm suddenly becomes "critically endangered"? Or stopping future state governments implementing another "Wild Rivers Act"? Unless both major parties sign on Baz you're dreaming
Barry, like most pollies you're just so full of it. The Coalition has been just as responsible for destroying rural economies as the ALP! Your opening few paragraphs talk about the transfer of wealth from producers to the non producing state sector. Comparing us with a world that may be in technical Depression is just propaganda. Barry, to please urban voters, the Coalition did as much damage to the forestry and fishing industries and to, farmers in the MDB with your MDBA, as Labor. Now that mining has all but collapsed you are bereft of ideas. Barry, til we are profitable we won't play your game.
Barry, you just have no idea. The coalition is just as bereft of ideas as the opposition.
blame everything except the incompetence of the bureaucracy and the ignorance of you politicians for the destruction of our primary industries. Where are our once proud fisheries and forestry industries? Gone, micro managed to death by politicians pandering to green lobbyists and inner city professionals' wives. And what hasn't been destroyed by them as done over by bureaucrats, government and industry, creating rules justifying their existence. farming will be next. Barry, less talk, more action.
Farm-edge farm profits are mainly being squeezed by a system that primary producers cannot adjust to, and that is the wage and social welfare policies of governments, Coalition and Labor.
When you are a price taker any impact on your gross profit impacts severely.It's no coincidence that every time the mandated rate of super has gone up,so have the number of participants in primary industry, this has been seen most severely in the fishing industry where in some areas there have been a near total decimation of the industry.
When compounded with other anti rural profit laws the impact is awful
I've been inside the tent that is Canberra Barry,you can keep it.
I soon learned that "consult" was an amalgam of "to CON while inSULTing you".
The problem becomes that too many industry reps suddenly think that how easy is this, hang around the Holy Grail and I too can be a pollie. And CEO's of industry groups end up becoming more important than the group they should represent, look at the last 20 years of reps from the NFF.
The message to politicians then becomes sanitized because a problem in say Qld may not be the same as one in W.A.
Pollies have to go back to listening to their voters
Thank goodness a politician who might finally be starting to "get it".
Without profit there is little employment,so no taxes for politicians to spend on community needs like hospitals,schools and roads.
As for the communication issue Barry, many primary producers feel that being forced into an organisation is little different to compulsory unionism,especially when that involves compulsory levies.
Too many politicians have become insular and don't want to deal with the voters who elect them,preferring to deal with peak bodies, this applies more so to urban Senators on rural issues.
Seeing as I am cutting up crook at you Barry, and your article is about green groups why don't you get rid of those phony "accreditation" schemes being offered by those same green groups.
In my opinion only government should have the power to accredit an industry. Anything else is a sham, but we have WWF sponsored groups like the FSC,MSC,Aquaculture Stewardship Council and now a Round Table on Beef all wanting to be in the financial loop.
It is hard enough for our farmers,fishers and foresters to make a profit now without paying these new parasites.
Out of the shadow
More garbage from a politician who chooses to remain ignorant of fact and common sense.
Water policy especially in the MDB isn't settled, if it was we wouldn't have Senators Madigan & co running around talking to people, we wouldn't have Heff and Wong ranting and we still haven't found a workable solution to a complex problem.
Infrastructure improvements are only useful if there is water and no one has ever been able to convince me you can sell a ml of water from say Deniliquin and move it to say Qld! As for squandering $billions on buybacks what a poor use of taxpayer $'s.
Not sure what point you're trying to make Frank. We all know what the Coalition haven't done re Levies recommendations, White Paper,NLIS ,paperwork burdens, labour scarcity etc in fact it's fair to say that Barnaby has talked the talk but.....Even the FTA's are an intangible asset in the immediate future. If we don't get the profitability of primary producers up we can forget about export. On the other hand our alternative write BS and don't want us to see their plan until about 5 days before the next election. Industry should be in a position to evaluate,criticize or commend ALP policy now
Joel there is spin, then there is straight out BS. I'm not committed to either the ALP or the Coalition, but at least I know what the Coalition stands for. I got sick of waiting for you to use this blog to let us know what Labors rural policies were so I went to your website http://www.alp.org.au/regionalaus tralia and what did I get? Spin layered in BS. No policies, no concept of how you are going to help rural Australia, nothing about increasing farmer profitability or drought policy. Joel apart from your rural forum have you even been to rural Australia in the last year?
.... big farms were the way to go why did the likes of Cubbie go broke? Why can't Macquarie make a decent return on capital invested? One size doesn't fit all Joel what may work in Tassie will starve you in the Kimberleys.Quoting figures of output by value is disingenuous, what about profit? Or what about people employed? An orchard at Shepparton may not turnover as much as a station in SW Qld but the community return may be so much higher.Joel when I see the uni lecturers, researchers and others you foist on us farming or fishing for a living then I'll believe we are doing it wrong
More dross from the wannabe Minister. Joel there is a huge difference between schooling and education. Both parties, but yours has been by far the worst, have kept people at school, and then after a while at uni or college because you had no idea how to employ them and didn't want to pay them unemployment benefits. Now we have a nation of overschooled but uneducated knuckleheads. Joel we adapt to meet our circumstances, if we aren't planting wheat perhaps we have changed to canola or pulses,maybe we're running sheep.You cite figures without having a clue then irritate by lecturing us. If....
And then Joel there are the constant secret "taxes" on Australian employers to help the ALP's union mates. These make us uncompetitive with our trading partners,which means "our"jobs go offshore. Secondary producers have gone offshore because they couldn't compete with nations that aren't paying our exorbitant level of wages, generous super, onerous OH&S and the worst of the lot, bogus training and accreditation schemes that seem to train no one, but create lots of bureaucratic jobs that need to be paid for! If we have all these "trained" people why do we need 457 visas?
Just what do you and the ALP stand for Joel? For about the last 30 years both sides of the political fence have been prepared to sacrifice rural Australia to appease inner urban elites but the ALP is by far the worst.You destroyed 10's of 1000's of jobs in the forestry & fishing industries, your economic vandalism on livex to Indonesia and in the MDB has severely impacted rural communities and you support the transfer of wealth from productive primary producers to prop up a huge bureaucracy in R&D of dubious benefit to those who foot the bill.Now you are trying to justify your position on this
Been to a butcher shop lately Joel? Did you talk to the apprentice kid? Bet you didn't! While you and your fellow politicians have been sucking up to the over schooled,and creating empires in Nth Sydney squandering about $2b pa in industry and taxpayer funds our primary producers are facing a downturn that will be caused by a skills crisis. Who is training butchers and slaughtermen? Butchers I talk to all say that governments have made it too hard to train an apprentice.Similarly in the fish game, no trained filleters, skippers or crew, we're exporting fish to return to Australia to sell.
The real trouble with politicians and bureaucrats is they aren't really smart enough to ask the correct questions to write a White Paper. Why aren't our primary industries booming? This nation once rode on the farmers back, now most farmers are struggling,why is that? Why doesn't the White Paper address the issues that count? If we can grow oranges as cheap as Brazil,tomatoes as cheap as Italy,sheep cheaper than NZ,cattle and dairy we always have excess supply over domestic demand.Why can we fly fresh fish in from NZ cheaper than our own fleet can produce it? These are the issues that matter
So Joel now that I've castigated you for successfully turning productive jobs in 1992 into,arguably, a drain on the economy in 2015 let's look further at AFMA management of fisheries.It's been estimated that some 10k jobs have been lost from fishing and related industries since 1992. The Howard Govt WASTED some $240 m unsuccessfully patching up YOUR mess.No new vessels have been built in several fisheries since the early 1990's. And how must the operators of the Geelong Star feel about the Small Pelagic Mgment Plan,used as a political football by all sides while they pay an est $200 k pa?
Nico, I'm neither prejudiced against education or science. I do have an intolerance of over schooled fools who are prepared to squander industry and taxpayers money without a clear objective. Serving me up unproven and untested reports from the internet, most of which I surmise you have neither read or comprehended, as FACT is galling.If you mistake my criticism of your arguments as abuse I'm afraid it just displays ignorance on your behalf. You have not answered any direct question put to you, especially the one about 30-1 (3000%). Nico don't bother responding I had you at checkmate ages ago!
Nico I don't trawl through the internet looking for any vague references to support a weak case like I have seen you often do. My definition may be wide but nonetheless accurate, I can also make a distinction between education and schooling.As for that comment on no one mentioned 3000% you are technically correct, but when i learned maths a 30-1 return equated to 3000%, after all you did say "Every analysis by economic professionals like Deloitte says that the return on dollars invested in science is up to 30-1." didn't you? Don't need water or snide comments from you Nico....argument closed!
How convenient Nico that you brush over my picking out the flaws in your debate i.e. 3000% return on investment, the squandering of taxpayer funds on climate change, Western Government massive defecits etc.
Your assertion that "Science is not a consumer product" is astounding,everything has to be paid for. Civilizations have been destroyed by governments living beyond their means, and science is no different whether that is by taxes or some other method is for others to decide.
When your assertions match real world reality perhaps then I will consider your arguments valid.
Let me add Nico, if anyone is threatened that people are questioning the economic value of SOME OF the "science" being practiced by modern day practitioners it is you.
Your stubborn defence of the often indefensible is a constant throughout your posts. But I'm sure you will find some obscure reference on the internet to have another snipe at me!
Ever sweated over whether a wages cheque for employees would clear the bank Nico? Or worried about meeting a loan payment to the bank because this years sales weren't as strong as you forecast?
Science doesn't threaten me, it's just another tool.But when the cost of the tool is greater than the return, then I start to question what I'm paying for.
As far as I am concerned subsiding science is no more beneficial to our economy than subsidising the likes of Holden. If we won't subsidise high employment generating jobs like the car trade why should we subsidise science?
Spare me the overschooled and uneducacted BS Nico you're sounding like a 19th century snake oil salesman.
If economists knew the question let alone the answer Bernanke and Draghi would pull the Western World out of the mire it's in! Now you're claiming a 3000% return on investment, what are the pros in my super fund doing ? Part of the reason the EU is well in the red and US is running a $18 trillion dollar deficit wouldn't be the subsidization of public science? And when will the world get ANY economic return for the $squillions wasted on climate change research? Is this our rich reward?
Nico, you keep making these outrageous assertions you can not back up except by citing documents not only of dubious value,but which you probably haven't read or comprehended.
You claim that "that investment in science brings good dividends", well down at the coalface where the people are writing the cheques for this "science", the tale is apparently different.
If the "scientific community" was so confident about its ability it would need no taxpayer or industry funding for it would be certain of its ability to "sell" me its finished product.
Question Nico, why does the taxpayer owe your lot a living? When is the Australian scientific community going to pay its own way? I have read many Deloitte type reports of the type you are citing, my only comment is I often find that they tend to heavily favour those who commissioned the report, so I won't bother with this one.As for my industry, I can only wonder about the $billions,government and industry funded, that disappears annually in the gurgler called R&D yet our primary producers are no better,maybe even worse off!
There are lies, damn lies then there are politicians that don't know what they're talking about!
So Mr Truss what exactly does " “We know that for every dollar that the government invests in rural R&D, farmers generate a $12 return within 10 years,” mean? Is it inflation adjusted? Can you show me audited figures from an accountancy firm to support the comment? Or,is it, one of those BS comments put in by advisers to make it appear that the particular pollie knows what he's babbling about? Warren,IF there was that rate of return, government wouldn't need levies the tax take would be ample!
Excellent summary Matthew, well researched. Take a few dollars out of petty cash and buy yourself a beer!
You may also want to email a copy of this article to all those MP's and conservation groups that wish to fix something that isn't broken!
Go a step further Phillip. Is the GRDC paying a dividend to growers, either directly or through lower levies, for whatever profits are being made? It seems that the farmer is always throwing the party, but if anyone dare ask for a fair share for his investment the apologists dive on to justify why this shouldn't happen.
Why does GRDC need a southern office? It's basic job is evaluating and allocating funds to research projects,researchers or institutions not building a bloody empire.The GRDC should be where it can perform its duties with the smallest financial impact on levy payers. If Joyce lets this absolute waste of farmer levies go through he may as well resign in shame.
James why should there be an increase in travel costs unless the public service and the Boards of R&DC's are on an industry paid for junket.The role of a R&DC is to evaluate and prioritise research projects, nothing else. With modern day communications, internet etc it can be done in an old fashioned phone booth.Even having a Board is a dubious use of industry monies. Many of these organisations should be wound up or amalgamated as they aren't meeting the needs of industry as envisaged. Barnaby should be looking at a cost/benefit analysis of R&D corporations.
Don't be silly WTF, where is the benefit in that sort of research for organisations like CSIRO and our unis? Biotech/GM,like climate, is nearly guaranteed funding for life. Engineering solutions that actually may solve a problem and enhance farmer profits are absolutely not to be considered
Nico how arrogant and patronising of you. That's just the way you over schooled true believers are when someone challenges your faith,play the man not the ball.I can only play with the deck I'm dealt so hardly any use in me worrying about 50 yrs+, I won't be there!Also are you inferring that the human race is dumbing down and the next generation won't be capable of solving problems left by their predecessors? I cynically note that great believers in global warming aren't afraid to buy beach side property or leave a carbon footprint 10 mile wide,i'll stick to dealing with the weather!
Jeffito, you are part of the problem not the solution. By my calculations GRDC has taken well over a $billion off our grain growers. Based on turnover not profit and it's an open ended cheque where is the cost/benefit analysis? As for the IP, if CSIRO had achieved a great outcome with the GM wheat that was destroyed by the ferals wouldn't they have licensed or sold the results. What gives them the rights to the money, farmers money paid for it surely they are entitled to at least 50% of the return. Nico, don't get personal, you don't know me or am I questioning your occupation.
Jeffito what part of my comments are you struggling with? The climate change example was just that, I don't give a rats about the climate change debate except on how it affects me now.
What I do strongly object to is the massive annual transfer of wealth away from farmers to the scientific community without any regard about how it benefits farmers.Are farmers part owners of any intellectual property that may occur? Are farmers profits and productivity increasing because of this research? Why do farmers pay for research based on volume, not profit? I'm sorry if its all too hard for you.
Nico, I have been consistent, if you feel that I'm holding the "scientific" community to account, the answer is a strong yes.
Get it straight, we allegedly set up groups like GRDC to improve farmer returns. If governments are deceitful and claim they are matching the investment while directing their use,who needs them. What the government does with its share I don't give a stuff but what is done with farmers angers me.Until these funds are tied to productivity and profit increases I will continue to lobby against them.
Nico, another staunch "believer". I stand by my comment for I may know about the system and have seen "scientists" create "problems" to research. When it's been pointed out that the research was going to cost more than the alleged problem, it doesn't deter them. As for Southern Ocean research ships, Southern Surveyor almost bankrupted CSIRO and the Feds had to bail them out by making it a National Facility. the "Investigator" its replacement already has lemon written all over it. If GOVERNMENTS want to spend taxpayer dollars on such research, that's fine, just DON'T levy industry
Jeffito, UC, progress and all the other apologists or employees of GRDC, DAFF, CSIRO etc. that are the beneficiaries of industry monies, let me spell it out. I object to the massive transfer of wealth from our primary producers to prop up R&D or MLAs etc where the is no discernible outcome to the producer. Too often researchers see these pots of gold and the look for problems that "need" to be solved. If they are so confident of their abilities why don't they solve the problem first then sell me the solution as a Bayer etc does? How much has GRDC spent in its lifetime, how did we benefit?
Who is kidding who here?
Kay Hull may have been a great local member, she may even be eminently qualified but do we really need Chairs and Boards to spend farmers money? These RDC's are a direct tax on our primary producers to fund research of dubious value or return to the funders and we waste the money on "Jobs for the boys".
When do we say that the system in place is an expensive fraud on our primary producers and taxpayers? And, why isn't this function being done by Barnaby's Dept?
Chester fiddles while his electorate burns!
Darren doesn't your electorate cover the important fishing and tourist town of Lakes Entrance, while you are stuffing around on a pipedream AMSA, which is part of your portfolio, is running around the country telling the fishing and boating industries industry how they are going to help send them to the wall. Many small business operators are looking at a 300% increase in government imposed fees.
Perhaps it's time governments looked at these, "statutory authorities" and how cost efficient they are from an industry viewpoint
I also notice behind the good Senator is a sign that says "BRING BACK COMMON SENSE"
How about he start looking at some on the rules and regs that impact on productive people like farmers just to create jobs for pencil pushers in Canberra.
Or maybe he could have a word to Barnaby about the recommendations from the Senate inquiry into grassfed levies. Or perhaps he can ask what 4000 odd do in the Dept of Ag?
One thing is for sure, there aren't too many in Parliament, left or right , who know what common sense is.
Well his "illustrious" predecessors in the Coalition were asleep at the wheel with the formation of the Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal now it emerges that they may also have been asleep at the wheel with the takeover of all shipping registration from the States by AMSA, a move that looks like costing small family operators an ongoing small fortune in commercial fishing.
Higher government costs is absolutely no way to create "JOBS & GROWTH".
Why do our politicians want to destroy our producers and replace them with bureaucrats?
What absolute bs,pity Abbott didn't stay as PM maybe he would have got rid of some of these retirement homes for past their use by date and failed MP's.
When do these privileges stop?
They are a massive impost on farmers and the taxpayers and the benefits ,if any, are dubious.
The question needs asking all the RDC's are doing a function that was performed once byb the Department, what the heck are the 4000 odd in the Department doing?
What a load of rubbish, as many people have found throughout history, appeasement does not work.
"Social licence" is a fraudulent term being bandied about by a rabid,well funded minority to try and influence the majority.
Inevitably the "social licence" argument can be defeated if sound arguments are put. "Prohibition" for example was passed on a "social licence" argument.
The problem is apologists weaken those being attacked, would ceding any ground make the likes of PETA or AA go away? Would they be satisfied? Of course not, they would be emboldened to push for more. Paula think again!
Jock, I believe Wendy Craik was a particular favourite of The Nats when Warren Truss was the Minister.
I know several people involved with the MDB and professional fishing who were not too sorry when she moved on.
Philip wait until the EU FTA. I'm sure there isn't anyone smart enough in Canberra to deal with the EU.
Subsidised ag and fish products like Italian tomatoes,spaghetti,French jams,Danish pork, Belgium butter, Norwegian salmon,Scottish cod are already pouring into this country but our lamb and beef are on quotas!
Then if you get around the quotas , I know of several other protectionist laws to keep us out!
Until we send the Germans,French and Italians a strong message by putting quotas on their cars, our chances of cracking their markets are near zero
How bad if the NFF going, I always thought Brisbane Ave was just a branch office of the Nats,but not even Jock likes them.
The first question an incoming President has to ask is "What are we doing for THIS countries farmers?" followed by "How are we helping to make them profitable?"
You can't just dust off the annual press release at Budget time saying "We saved the diesel fuel rebate"!
Too many bad rules and regs that impact on profitability have got through because the NFF appears to be a rubber stamp for the Dept and the other regulators like MLA,AWI etc.
Why wouldn't farmers leave in their 1000's.
It was recently reported a builders labourer in Melb or Sydney can earn $150k a year +super+holidays+rdo's+......, how many farmers earn that?
Much of that period also coincided with the mining boom, many farmers with their work ethic went FIFO for a far better wage than farming.
Plus, now government policies,have just simply made farming uneconomic. I read yesterday where it was said "An economic model where the people who take most of the risks and do most of the work receive the poorest return is not sustainable." sums it up.
What absolute malarkey, the consumer will in all likelihood pay nothing. How many farmers work on a "cost plus" business model? No farmer works out his wages + costs + profit margin then bills the end user, they generally produce product which they send to market and let the forces of supply and demand dictate the return. How will we measure the alleged benefits of the research that is proposed? These levies, while they appear well intentioned , will only erode the profitability of more Australian farmers.
Bush fly we don't claim to be owed a living! Our nation expects us to produce food of the highest order at the cheapest cost, which I don't quibble with. As a nation we enact laws, such as cradle to grave traceability of food that adds enormous cost and paperwork to our product. Then free market morons expect us to just sit back and allow product in from another nation that may not meet the stringent codes we operate under. And then a genuine idiot makes a nuisance of himself lecturing us on " your lifestyle living decisions have to be paid for by other hard-working Australians."
The RSPCA expects to be able to take taxpayers money and then label any scrutiny as “infuriating and insulting”. Lynne Bradshaw when you take government money you are fully accountable to the taxpayer. If it is found that you are using that money for political purposes or to conduct agendas contrary to the wishes of the government and taxpayer then Parliament has to decide on the sanctions. If I had my way, groups like the RSPCA would get no taxpayer funding, not even fees for service, for any service they provide,like animal inspection, is really the role of government.
Can I please write the plan and receive $1.35 m.
Step 1 Buy Bullets
Step 2 Hire Shooters
Step 3 Bait and trap whats left
Step 4 Invoice Government for $1.35m
How much would I get for implementing my plan?
I wonder if they would also like me to write a plan for feral goats,donkeys,pigs,deer, cane toads, horses, cats........! I would never have to work again.
Would $1.35 m be stretching it too much for that alleged panther in Victoria or the Nullabor Nymph?
Apparently Just Me,Katrina Love and all the other pro AA supporters who fill this and other sites with their spite, the end may not justify the means. After over 2 months the RSPCA is still to lay charges in the greyhound case, because the way the alleged evidence was gathered may be illegal, and there are grave doubts whether it will stand up to legal scrutiny.Victoria Attorney General Pakula said he had "no intention of extending exemptions for secret video surveillance" to the RSPCA. Although the police may not have been unhappy about how evidence was gathered the DPP may think otherwise
Bloody rude of JoanneC,Stop TAC,Katie et al to want to dictate to Government how to run the Nation. ESCAS is a >$6 m tax on our cattle producers to appease the left wing loonies. I suggest if you people who are intent on destroying yet another Australian industry with even more rules and regs you start stumping up your own money, not farmers or taxpayers, to fulfill your wishes.
Katrina, when you start "bending" laws you enter a slippery slope to dictatorship.But then again, having read the garbage from many of the alleged animal welfare supporters that doesn't seem to trouble you.
Katrina, your comment is a load of garbage.I do not support ag gag as such, for I am passionate about freedom of speech. But I am just as vehemently opposed to vigilantism and dropkicks who believe "The end justifies the means". No it DOES NOT, we have laws that have stood the test of time, we have enforcement agencies ie police,RSPCA etc. People have the right to go about their lawful business without zealots like you wanting to trample over human rights.We have a right to not have their property trespassed upon, and to secure against damage. We don't live in Napoleon's dictatorship
Lulu that's a cop out and you know, selectively picking the case you want to highlight! PETA sat on a video for months,so did AA with the greyhounds.Where are the sworn complaints to the authorities in these cases,where are the eye witnesses prepared to stand up in court? If the agencies charged with protecting animal welfare aren't doing their job, and in many States it's the RSPCA predominantly, then you should strongly complain to your local MP or Ombudsman. In my opinion AA and PETA only use these videos as a way of raising revenue, otherwise they'd offer the evidence to prosecutors
Kettle,pot,black. This coming from an organisation that is remunerated by several states to "enforce" animal welfare laws. And yet seemingly the ABC and AA can find alleged cases of cruelty the RSPCA are incapable of finding or prosecuting. Bidda Jones I strongly suggest your mob clean up their own backyard or is this just a way of deflecting scrutiny from the RSPCA's failings?
Actually Sen. Back perhaps your best line of inquiry should be we have these laws, both anti trespass and anti cruelty are they working or not? Or, are they being exploited by people who are trying to justify their not for profit status? Which is definitely within the purview of the Commonwealth. If it is the former, get a please explain from the States, if it's the latter deregister those bodies who are breaking laws
Sen. Back the road to hell is paved with good intentions. We have both animal welfare laws and trespass laws, if they are no longer relevant get rid of them. Don't dress up Ag Gag laws as a bio security measure or whatever other camouflage to make yourself look relevant . What needs to be said is there is no room for vigilantism, and it's the job of the relevant authorities to investigate claims of animal cruelty. Any trespass on private property by vigilantes is also an offence. Both these laws are state managed. The big question Sen.Back is who's going to pay?
What I found significant about this article was the absence of the letters GRDC!