JOHN HINE AND ASSOCIATES PTY LTD
www.developqld.net.au
Tel: 07 3264 4568
Mob: 0432 027 744
Email: john@developqld.net.au
ABN: 67 157 769 901
74 Ballinger Crescent
Albany Creek Qld 4035
SUBMISSION
GREEN PAPER ON AGRICULTURE
27 March 2014
OVERALL
The current paradigm of Australian farming, the smaller, independent, commodity focussed, family farm, has
comprehensively failed, because;







food imports are rising and food exports are falling.
a significant proportion of our food processing is foreign controlled.
there is limited investment by Australian companies in farming or agricultural processing overseas.
Australia has only one agribusiness company that could be considered ‘international’, ie GrainCorp,
and that escaped takeover only by political action.
Australian institutional investors are reluctant to invest in agriculture and processing in Australia as
compared to overseas superannuation funds, which investing in Australian agriculture and processing.
we now basically have to beg for inwards foreign investment into our farming.
many small farmers are in real personal stress and too many suicide as a result.
The scale of this lost opportunity is seen in that Singapore is now a bigger player in world agriculture than
Australia. Not because of what it produces but because of what its companies own. There is no fundamental
reason why Singaporean companies such as Wilmar and Olam could not have developed in Australia. It is
suggested that there are two key reasons for this failure;


our inward looking, production focussed farm sector.
a less aggressive business culture in Australia which evolved due to complacency from our strong natural
resources endowment.
Another statement of this lost opportunity is recent figures that Australia’s share of world dairy products trade
is 7% compared to New Zealand’s share of 37%. This difference is staggering and shameful.
The current policy focus of State and Federal Governments is based on industries and commodities. Our
national agriculture policy framework should be based instead on businesses and products. This needs a total
reformulation on national agriculture policy.
The above change in policy will have wide ramifications, especially with government support for R&D. The
current Rural R&D Corporations are generally industry and commodity based. We need an R&D support
system that allows a company to do the R&D it needs, when it needs it, without seeking the approval of a
committee which can include several of its competitors.
Copyright John Hine and Associates Pty Ltd, www.developqld.net.au.
Page 1
The whole tone of the Issues Paper is structured around the existing paradigm of the small independent
family farm. This is a fundamental flaw. A White Paper that does the same will completely fail.
A focus on companies and products will also mean government policy will need to facilitate;





market-led production rather than volume-led production.
business skills as well as, if not more important than, farming skills.
new ways to stimulate commercial agricultural research by companies.
new kinds of institutional mechanisms to facilitate agriculture such as cooperatives, networks and new
kinds of company that link several smaller farms that allow easier identification of market
opportunities, easier access to new information, scale of production and better access to finance.
new ways to facilitate investment in rural infrastructure.
These changes are actually underway in that there is widespread farm amalgamation and substantial direct
foreign investment in agriculture. However, it is time to make the above policy changes to make these
changes in farm structure faster and easier and reduce the personal stress from those farmers struggling to cope.
However, these changes will meet significant opposition from the ‘agro-political complex.’ That is, from those
vested interests who gain power, prestige and income from the status quo. Resistance to change will also come
from existing small farmers who will feel threatened and from those who see large numbers of farmers as
essential to the life of rural towns struggling with population decline.
Much is made about growing opportunities in Asia, related to a growing Asian middle class. These
opportunities are likely to be real. However, it is by no means guaranteed that Australia will reap these
opportunities. Key points for Australia in this respect include;


these new customers may well be seeking products not commodities, and we mainly produce
commodities.
international supplies of commodities may rise due to;
o the current, largely small, Asian family farms consolidating and improving practices, giving
significantly improved yields, closer to local customers.
o the significant growth of world class agriculture across South America.
o the largely unrealised potential for modern agriculture in Africa. Some may point to the
unstable political climate in too much of Africa. However, there has been significant
investment by international investors in agricultural land in Africa. The Finlay’s operation in
Kenya that grows and processes 7 million kg per annum of vegetables in Kenya and air freights
them to the UK retail market (http://www.finlays.net/) shows what is possible.
The growing competition in grain from the ‘Black Sea countries’, ie Russia, the Ukraine, Kazakhstan and
others, as they recovered from Soviet-style agriculture, shows that the above possibilities can be real threats.
KEY POINTS FROM THE SCOPE OF THE PAPER
In reference to the list on page 1 of the Issues Paper;

Improving market returns at the farm gate will require a mix of;
o improved productivity.
o a high value product targeted at a specific market.
o improved business skills by farmers.
o commercially focussed R&D.
o improved transport and other infrastructure.
Copyright John Hine and Associates Pty Ltd, www.developqld.net.au.
Page 2
It is hard to see how other factors can improve market returns.

The concept of ‘fair market returns’ has some attractiveness but it is hard to see what this really means.

Enhanced agricultural exports will most likely come from;
o
o
o
o
o
farmers with good business skills.
farmers working together in cooperatives, networks or companies that allow them to engage the right
kinds of market expertise to identify export opportunities and the scale to meet that demand.
highly efficient farms with low costs of production.
products targeted at specific markets.
efficient infrastructure to get products to market.
QUESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION, as listed on page 6 of the Issues Paper.
Question One: Ensuring food security in Australia and globally.
Regarding opportunities for expanding agricultural production. An equally important issue should surely be
how to increase the value of current production by targeting products for specific customers rather than bulk
commodities.
Regarding being more responsive to demand and access to market information, a key way to address both
issues is to encourage and assist farmers to pool resources by working together in cooperatives, networks,
marketing companies or other commercial structures that allow skilled market analysis staff to be engaged. It
is not realistic to expect that government agencies can supply specific market opportunity information, except
when a customer has approached them with a specific enquiry. Government agencies such as Austrade can
assist by providing statistical data, market trends and useful contacts. It will require a skilled marketing
professional to use this data as a starting point to then identify specific customers requiring particular
products.
Regarding exporting Australian technology and expertise. This would appear to be a major opportunity for
Australia. However, as an example, despite a long history of internationally competitive sugar cane
production and processing, there is limited export of technology and skills in growing sugar cane. There is a
company based in London, Booker Tate, http://www.booker-tate.co.uk/, “a global leader in the provision of
development, management and technical services to the world of sugar, ethanol, bio-energy and other
agribusinesses, having successfully completed some 1500 assignments in 120 countries over the past 50
years.” While groups such as the Sugar Research Institute have a good record of exporting skills in cane
milling, it cannot match Booker Tate. As far as is known, the Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations has no
significant overseas consulting activity.
GRM International (http://www.grminternational.com/) is a large Australian company that has wide
international consulting in agriculture. This company may be able to shed light on why other such companies
have not arisen. They of course may not provide this information, on the basis that they do not want to
stimulate competition.
It may be that a key limiting factor is that much of Australia’s agricultural R&D is done by farmer dominated
Rural R&D Committees. A common theme has been that we should not ‘give away’ our hard won research
data. It may be that the lack of a commercial culture within these R&D committees has limited such
international consulting. Other nations and their farm groups wish to buy such information and if we do not
sell it to them, they will buy it from someone else. Indeed, they are already buying farm information from
others.
Copyright John Hine and Associates Pty Ltd, www.developqld.net.au.
Page 3
There is an International Conference on Agricultural consulting in Brisbane on 8 May 2014, run by Ag Institute
Australia. This Institute may be a useful ally in a formal program to stimulate international consulting. It is
of interest that a senior executive of GRM International is a speaker at this conference.
The Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR, http://aciar.gov.au/) has an excellent
reputation but seems to have a foreign aid focus rather than facilitating business consulting exports.
As pressure on agriculture grows in Asia, and as the international investment in agricultural land in Africa
moves into a production mode, there is a case for aggressively seeking international consulting opportunities
with those investors. Consultants from nations such as Malaysia are active in some Islamic regions of Africa.
There is a role here for State Government trade development groups and Austrade to facilitate this. The
CSIRO is already active in agricultural research in Africa and links they have established could be extended.
Catalysing new alliances and networks of researchers, consultants and consulting companies may be relevant,
perhaps with groups such as the Institute of Management Consultants.
Linking in other areas where Australia has good complementary skills, such as training, rural public health,
infrastructure, environmental management and rural IT may be relevant.
University research groups such as the Qld Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation (QAFFI,
http://www.qaafi.uq.edu.au/) at the University of Qld and the Centre for Tropical Crops and Biocommodities
at the Qld University of Technology (http://www.ctcb.qut.edu.au/) are groups that have considerable success
in winning large research grants from international sources.
However, it may be that the international commercialisation strategies for this research could be developed
using Australian private sector consulting expertise.
Mention is made of developing more intensive agriculture in Northern Australia. This has been a recurring
theme for more than 100 years. There have been a number of high profile failures. Understanding these
failures would be important, including the history of the Ord River scheme. Coping with the large numbers
of insects, birds and wallabies etc that intensive agriculture has had to cope with in the past needs study.
Question Two: farmer decisions for improving farmgate returns.
As above, the key issues are;





improved business skills amongst farmers.
farmers producing products for specific customers rather than bulk commodities.
new ways to stimulate commercially focussed R&D by cooperatives, networks, companies etc.
new ways for farmers to work together such as in cooperatives, networks, companies etc.
better infrastructure to lower cost to market.
New ways to facilitate commercially focussed, locally relevant R&D and Extension may be to stimulate the
establishment of local, farmer owned RD&E companies such as the Birchip Cropping Group, see
http://www.bcg.org.au/. This group employs some 20 scientists, economists and other professionals to do
locally relevant applied research and encourage the spread of results through its members.
There is of course a need to undertake larger, public good basic research projects such as are now done by the
CSIRO and universities and this will need public funding.
Copyright John Hine and Associates Pty Ltd, www.developqld.net.au.
Page 4
Regarding drought preparedness, it is suggested that modern land management practices such as precision
grazing will be key issues, linked of course to sound business planning systems.
The increasing demands of supply chains for third party certification of good environmental management will
drive the adoption of these new land management systems.
Groups promoting such sound environmental management and providing certification include;





the Global GAP (Good Agricultural Practice) program, driven especially by European supermarkets.
the Forestry Stewardship Council, for forestry.
the Marine Stewardship Council, for fishing.
the Rainforest Alliance.
the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, with membership including MacDonald’s, farm industry
associations and many large international agribusiness companies. MacDonald’s has announced that they will
be requiring certification from this Global Roundtable for its beef supplies from 2016.
No amount of tinkering with ‘fair market return’ concepts is likely to have any significant difference. Yes, it is
hard to see how retail milk prices of $1 a litre can come from economically sustainable farming but it will need
strong negotiation by corporate groups of farmers to generate change with supermarket chains.
New risk management tools may well be needed but farmers will need to be prepared to pay for the specialist
business and natural resource management advice they will need to fully use these tools. Drought management
will presumably need better financial management and better natural resource management tools. A recent
legislative amendment took Farm Management Deposits out of the rule that said that a bank account not
accessed for seven years is closed and the money sent to consolidated revenue. That such accounts may have
sat unused for seven years suggests these funds may not be being used effectively.
Cooperative and other commercial groups bringing farmers together could be a means of encouraging greater
investment off-shore in agriculture by Australian groups. This would increase the diversity of income streams
of farmers participating in such investments. A greater analysis of why Australia has not spun out a Dole, Del
Monte, Cargill or Louis Dreyfus would be interesting.
Ways of assisting smaller, often older, often marginally viable, farmers exit the industry with dignity are
needed. The powerful emotional attachment to the family farm has to be recognised. New kinds of
companies where several farms pool land and equipment to form a company with a Board of Directors may be
part of the solution. Changes to local government policy to allow existing small farms to cut out a small block
say 1-2 hectares to include the farmhouse so the rest of the land can be pooled into a company may be needed.
Question Three: enhancing better access to finance.
Again, the overwhelming issue is how to facilitate profitable farmers. Profitable farm businesses with sound
business plans for the future are generally can access finance, as with non-farm businesses.
The same issues apply with finance as with other aspects of farm business, namely;




market-led production rather than volume-led production.
business skills as well as, if not more important than, farming skills.
new ways to stimulate commercial agricultural research.
new kinds of institutional mechanisms to facilitate agriculture such as cooperatives, networks and new
kinds of company that link several smaller farms that allow easier identification of market
opportunities, new technology, scale of production and better access to finance.
Copyright John Hine and Associates Pty Ltd, www.developqld.net.au.
Page 5
The data on drought relief schemes, where seemingly only a minority of farmers are eligible, and some
applicants are deemed non-viable, suggest that some farmers do not have the management skills to cope.
This is no different to any other sector of business. The owner operator may have adequate farming (or
engineering, building, plastics etc skills) but lack of business skills can lead to business failure.
We have to be honest with our analysis of farm issues. In Australia, we encourage people to try starting a
business but it the business turns out not to be profitable, then there are really only three options;



manage the business differently to make a profit.
close the business before losses are too great.
stay in the business until bankruptcy.
Farming is no different.
Setting up training, systems and institutions to facilitate profitable farming through improving business skills is
the only real way forward.
As before, the key issues are;



improved business skills.
new business models, such as cooperatives, business networks etc.
new ways to facilitate commercially focussed R&D.
New kinds of banking systems offering lower interest will be hard to develop as interest rates are almost always
reflective of risk. If a farmer has a history of not being profitable, then that farm business is likely to be seen
to have a higher risk and so warrant a higher interest rate.
Australian farmers could always follow the example of Dutch farmers a century or so ago and start their own
bank, perhaps based on credit union principles. The successor to that Dutch farmer bank, Rabobank, still
farmer owned, is an outstanding success and presumably a significant source of income to descendants of those
farmers.
An analysis of why Australian finance institutions, including superannuation funds, are reluctant to invest in
Australian agriculture would be of value. Overseas institutions are actively investing in Australian agriculture.
One Canadian superannuation fund has even invested some $30M in an agricultural R&D facility in
Melbourne. This suggests that long term issues are not as important as some suggest as R&D has a very long
term outcome. It would be intriguing to know if there are any regulatory etc issues affecting how Australian
superannuation funds make their decisions.
Links with overseas companies with good market links may be relevant. For example, the meat processor Teys
Bros has partnered with the US agribusiness Cargill.
Question Four: increasing the competitiveness of the agricultural sector and its value chains.
As stated before, the overwhelming issue is how to facilitate profitable farmers. Profitable farm businesses
with sound business plans for the future, as with non-farm businesses, are more likely to be competitive and be
able to identify and address issues beyond the farm gate.
The same issues apply with finance as with other aspects of farm business, namely;


market-led production rather than volume-led production.
business skills as well as, if not more important than, farming skills.
Copyright John Hine and Associates Pty Ltd, www.developqld.net.au.
Page 6


new ways to stimulate commercial agricultural research.
new kinds of institutional mechanisms to facilitate business growth such as cooperatives, networks
and new kinds of company that link several smaller farms that allow easier identification of market
opportunities, easier access to information, scale of production and better access to finance.
Farmers working together in cooperatives, networks or in new types of company structures;



are more likely to be profitable businesses.
are more likely to have access to the kinds of information needed to identify and improve on-farm systems.
will have the ability to identify competitiveness issues in their supply chains and to work with other players, eg
transport companies, to address these competitiveness issues.
Market power issues can be addressed by farmers working together to balance the power of larger buyers.
In other words, attention to sound business development issues.
No special schemes are needed beyond;



current Farm Management Deposit systems that allow money from good years to be held over for bad years.
possibly new cooperative legislation that allows for greater flexibility of operation, including having non-farmer
investors and Board members.
new ways to allow more commercial R&D to be done by individual farm businesses, cooperatives etc. A simple
way for this to happen could be to reduce current R&D levies, and the matching Commonwealth funding, and
allow farm businesses access to the same R&D tax incentives that other businesses can access.
Regarding overseas approaches, surely examining cooperatives and similar mutual structures has to be an
option. Danish Crown, Rabobank, Flora Holland, the Spanish Mondragon, the American CHS and the other
several thousand US farm cooperatives would seem to be worth greater scrutiny.
An examination of the issues raised by the United Nations in their recent International Year of the Cooperative
would be useful.
Comments have been made about enterprise bargaining (EB) issues at companies such as SPC Ardmona.
Other commentators have called for a return to industrial awards as too many EB agreements have been too
generous for the workers. This is the exact opposite of perceived wisdom of 15 years or more ago. It may be
that companies need to improve their negotiating skills and perhaps prompts a revisitation of employee
ownership schemes.
Question Five: Enhancing agriculture’s contribution to regional communities.
Again, the issue is to facilitate profitable farmers through application of sound business development methods.
This has been expounded in depth above.
The key to sustainable regional communities is profitable local businesses. A large number of marginally
profitable farmers is unlikely to sustain a regional town.
Profitable farmers would be more likely to;



be able to better pay contract workers and so attract more such people to stay in regional towns.
use the services of marketing specialists and other agricultural consultants and so enrich regional communities
with people with higher skills and greater incomes.
have capital to invest in tourism and other local businesses.
Copyright John Hine and Associates Pty Ltd, www.developqld.net.au.
Page 7
Tourism linked to farms in some way is a logical way forward, given that farmers would own or lease much of
the land on which exists indigenous cultural heritage, unique flora and fauna and cultural heritage linked to our
farming past and which could form the basis of new regional tourism attractions..
Question Six: Improving the competitiveness of inputs to the supply chain.
Again, most of the questions posed would be addressed if our farmers were more business focussed, with better
business skills, and had better ways to work together in commercial contexts.
Responses to other points are;






land, water and other farm inputs will be best deployed to drive productivity if farmers enthusiastically adopted
modern land use management systems, as are being included in the various third party certification schemes
outlined under the response to Question Two. At present, some farm groups seem to be resisting these
schemes and portraying them as cost burdens, rather than enthusiastically adopting them as cost saving
measures. The Reef Rescue program to reduce soil erosion and herbicide and fertiliser run-off to the Barrier
Reef lagoon in north Qld is proposing what should be standard practice. Soil erosion is surely unsustainable
and reducing herbicide and fertiliser use via sensible management practices is a cost reduction step, not a
burden. The cost reductions that the grain industry has achieved from controlled traffic farming and other
precision farming systems have been significant and have often given better yields.
the skills required in the future will be best identified by commercial farming operations rather than by
governments. New internet based training delivery systems would be relevant for regional Australia. Having
regional high schools and TAFE colleges with the flexibility to work with farming groups to develop traineeships,
apprenticeships and other training systems is important. The environmental scan work done by the Agrifood
Skills Council provides some very useful guidance on general rural skills needs.
attracting workers to agriculture requires the same steps as in any other industry, offer adequate pay and
career prospects. No amount of promotion of job opportunities is likely to work if pay and career prospects
are not there. Again, adequate pay and career prospects come from commercially focussed, profitable farmers.
specific research needs are best identified by commercial farming operations and local RD&E groups such as the
Birchip Cropping Group. There is little role for government and industry groups here. Current R&D
Corporations commission a lot of good science but whether it is the right science is another question.
longer term research projects will often be initiated by university, CSIRO and others but close liaison with
commercial farming groups will be important in ensuring not only relevance but take up of results. These
longer term projects should have commercialisation strategies built in as early as possible.
appropriate irrigation, transport, storage and distribution systems and other infrastructure will be best
identified by commercially focussed farmers, who will have well developed, long term business plans.
Governments will have a role in providing some funding, as with the infrastructure for other industries, but not
the sole responsibility. New ways to make such infrastructure funding attractive to superannuation funds need
to be considered. Well-developed infrastructure plans that are sound business opportunities would
presumably also be attractive to farmers.
Comments were made in the Issues Paper on the generally poor soils in Australia. Surely, such poor soils
require high quality scientific management. If our soils are low in organic matter, then there are well known
systems for increasing soil organic matter.
Regarding electricity use, surely solar power is part of the options package for farmers in Australia.
Regulations for new kinds of cooperatives could equally apply to facilitate farmers working together on
collaborative solar or wind projects.
Question Seven: Reducing ineffective regulation.
I have little comment to make here except to say that it is becoming clear that supply chains (eg supermarkets,
food manufacturers and restaurant chains) are becoming a greater source of ‘regulation’ than government.
Copyright John Hine and Associates Pty Ltd, www.developqld.net.au.
Page 8
By way of example I cite;


the Woolworths SQF 2000 food safety system, required of all providers of fresh and processed food to
Woolworths and which, if anything, requires a higher standard that the Australia New Zealand Food Standards
Code.
the various environmental standards as listed in the response to Question Two, on page five. A pertinent point
is a recent article in The Weekend Australian on the topic of World Heritage listing of some areas of Tasmanian
forest. The Commonwealth Government had suggested some areas in Tasmania may be de-listed. The green
movement and several timber companies oppose this. The timber companies opposed de-listing as they felt
this may affect Forestry Stewardship Certification of the timber they sold. They saw this Certification as a key
element of their marketing. Lipton tea packets state that the tea is grown under Rainforest Alliance certified
practices.
There is an issue in that food processors can be subject to multiple food safety audits, from local government
and each of their major customers eg various supermarkets, manufacturers and restaurant chains. This is
unnecessary and adds to costs. In the UK, the British Retail Consortium has developed a solution to this by
organising agreed third party certification. There may be a role here for government to broker a similar
solution, perhaps with the Australian Food and Grocery Council.
Some in the farm movement, including some in the National Party, have suggested that third party
environmental certification for farmers is an unnecessary burden. This is a miss-understanding from two
points;


if a large customer says they require a certain environmental certification, this is generally non-negotiable.
Suggesting this certification can be avoided is not only futile but could be damaging to our farmers and food
processors. In a global market, if our companies cannot supply environmentally certified product, other
companies will be sought who will, even if they are overseas.
sensible certification systems actually save farmers and food processors money as they reduce energy, water,
fertiliser and other inputs and reduce waste. The results of precision farming and controlled traffic farming in
the grains industry is an example here, these practices have significantly reduced energy by minimising tillage
and reduced fertiliser water and pesticide use, saving money, and reduce soil erosion, another benefit, as well
as improving yields. The results coming from early work on precision grazing from several universities and
CSIRO suggest the potential for better land use management, higher numbers of grazed animals, healthier
animals and costs savings.
Question Eight: enhancing agricultural exports.
A question posed is how can industries and government enhance exports? The answer is to focus on
companies or cooperatives or networks not industries. An industry focus is an out-dated focus.
An industry focus is also generally a commodity focus. We need companies exporting higher value products
not industries exporting lower value commodities. As noted under Question One, the ‘Black Sea Countries’
and South America are already commodity competitors and Asia and Africa may be commodity exports as their
agriculture modernises. India is now exporting beef and wheat, after being a wheat importer for many years.
Australia’s good reputation for food safety has been a major export selling point to date, especially following a
series of food safety scandals in China. However, continued vigilance is required as one serious breakdown
can leave a lasting bad impression. Again, balance is an issue as too rigorous a system of inspections could
lead to complaints of over-regulation.
Increasingly, food processors want products not commodities. Some Australian abattoirs are already sending
different cuts of meat to different markets to suit local requirements. Different grain processors also need
grains with specific starches and proteins in defined proportions, again products not commodities.
Copyright John Hine and Associates Pty Ltd, www.developqld.net.au.
Page 9
Figure 6, p30, projected demand of ASEAN for food, showed the greatest growth in fruit and vegetables. It
may be difficult to match the costs of fruit and vegetables grown in Asia except for very high quality products.
Australia has counter-seasonal advantages to Asia but so does much of South America, Africa and New
Zealand. Linking Australian horticulture producers with those in East Africa or Chile may be of benefit.
Companies, networks and cooperatives that bring together farmers in the same and perhaps different regions
can not only have the scale to supply individual customers but the capacity to engage specialist staff to identify
these customers and identify specific infrastructure gaps, skills needs etc.
Regarding free trade agreements (FTA), these should include the potential to invest in agricultural production in
the country to with which the FTA is being developed as well as the ability to export agricultural services such
as consulting and infrastructure provision by Australian companies. Access to complementary services to
agriculture development such as education and training, public health, information technology such as satellite
land use management and financial and legal services should be included.
No comments are made on biosecurity issues except on the current ban on imported pig ova, semen and
embryos. This is in place to prevent the import of a disease of young pigs. However, this import ban means
that Australian pig producers cannot access the world’s best pork genetics. The countries from which Australia
already imports partly cooked pork for bacon from Denmark and for ham production from Canada already have
this disease and yet are competitive in pig production so as to export pork to Australia. The sole basis of the
ban on imported pork genetics may be to prevent the import of fresh, uncooked pork. Australia may need to
look at how it produces pigs competitively. If Demark and Canada can produce pork cheaper than Australia
with their long, cold winters, we surely should be able to meet that competition.
The Australian Institute of Export has a range of well-developed seminars and workshops to assist businesses
with export. These could be extended for use by farm businesses. Adaption for on-line delivery, as webinars
and other internet based delivery systems may be needed.
Regarding assuring biosecurity, it may be relevant to require third party certification of all imported food
products that they met Australian standards. This is required of local producers so could not be seen as a
burden under WTO rules etc.
Question Nine: Assessing the effectiveness of incentives for investment and job creation.
The current government programs and incentives are based around small, independent family farms and
industries. These programs and incentives should be based around businesses, not industries.
The Farm Financial Counsellor program is supported.
State Government business and industry departments, ie those supporting non-farm businesses, have developed
an excellent, comprehensive range of small business programs based on workshops. Some are available via
webinars. These could easily be adapted for use by farmers. Many of these workshops are delivered using
local exports eg accountants, solicitors.
Some industry associations, eg Growcom in Qld, are encouraging horticulture farmers, or their wives, to
undertake Diplomas or Certificates in business. Such programs should be extended.
An examination of how cooperatives have worked in Europe and the USA would be useful, together with
considering why cooperatives in Australia have not done well in the past. An examination of information
gathered by the United Nations for their Year of the Cooperative in 2012 would be useful.
New ways to assist in commercial R&D are also needed. Comments have been made in responses to
Questions Two and Four.
Copyright John Hine and Associates Pty Ltd, www.developqld.net.au.
Page 10