Posts

Bugs for Dinner? Not on My Watch!

,

Has the price of a steak taken your breath away recently? That’s because the government wants you eating bugs or lab grown cells, not organic red meat.

In 2022, I confronted Meat and Livestock Australia directly. They were signed up to the crazy plan of ‘net zero’ by 2030.

The only way they ever could have achieved this is by killing off cows, reducing the total number across the country. That means good farm-grown meat would be too expensive for the peasants, but the elites jetting off to Davos every year would be able to afford it.

Three years later, Meat and Livestock have just admitted they are ditching their net-zero 2030 goals, exactly like I told them to do three years ago. Yet, they’re still committed to doing it by 2050.

End the nonsense. Ditch net-zero and make meat affordable for every Aussie house!

Meat and Livestock Australia drops 2030 carbon neutral target | The Australian

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: In the last Senate estimates we had a difference of opinion on the direction of herd numbers, and we’ve still got that.

Mr Strong : Yes.

Senator ROBERTS: I maintained that the only way to meet net zero carbon dioxide targets—and why you’d want to meet that is beyond me, because no-one has given me any proof—under Meat & Livestock Australia’s CN30 program, the Carbon Neutral by 2030 program, is to hold herd numbers at the historically low numbers experienced during the recent drought. In reply you said:

We are very aware that there have been discussions that things like the carbon neutral goal are reliant on limiting livestock numbers or reducing production or profitability, and we completely reject those.

I thank you for your answer on notice regarding herd numbers and I now reference a document you sent me—a Meat & Livestock Australia publication titled ‘Industry projections 2021: Australian cattle—July update’. On page 4 there are herd numbers. Herd size, slaughter and production are all flat—and, arguably, slightly decreasing in the last few years—across the period indicated, from 2000 to 2023, and down from their peak in this period. Am I reading that right?

Mr Strong : You may be, Senator, but I don’t have that one in front of me. What I can do is provide you with the updated projections from earlier this year, which show the projected increase in production and outputs, so increases in herd size and increases in productivity. We can provide that to you.

Senator ROBERTS: Yes, if you could, please.

Mr Strong : We can certainly do that.

Senator ROBERTS: Coming back to what you raised earlier on, in the bottom graph carcase weights are showing an increase of 13 per cent. This does in part reflect the work done by Meat & Livestock Australia on genetics, feedbase and transport. Is that correct?

Mr Strong : In part, yes.

Senator ROBERTS: Only in part? There are other factors involved?

Mr Strong : Yes—like producers’ willingness to adopt new technologies. But I think part of the increase in carcass weight comes from the increase in turn-off through the feedlot sector. An increased number of animals have come through the feedlot sector as a finishing mechanism in the last year or two. That also contributes to an increase in carcass weight.

Senator ROBERTS: Either way, it’s a good job because 13 per cent is a significant increase in productivity and profitability.

Mr Strong : Correct.

Senator ROBERTS: Page 2 of this report says the average herd number for cattle from 2016 to 2021, which included a substantial drought influence, was 26,619. The best year was 2018, at 28,052. Meat & Livestock Australia’s projections are 27,223 for 2022 and 28,039 for 2023. This is down from the CSIRO’s figure of 30 million to 40 million before the drought, which was the point I was making in the last Senate estimates.

Even if the CSIRO figure is higher than you would accept, I fail to see an increase here in these figures. And I’m still trying to see where the increase in the herd numbers component of the 100 per cent increase in red meat production is coming from. Is it true that, unless the herd numbers recover to around 30 million, Meat & Livestock Australia are projecting a permanent reduction in the Australian herd?

Mr Strong : No, it’s not. The paper you’re referencing is not a CSIRO paper. Dr Fordyce is the lead author and he’s previously worked with CSIRO. It was present on their publication site but it’s not a formal CSIRO paper. But that’s an aside.

Senator ROBERTS: But he did work for you?

Mr St rong : Absolutely. And he still does work in a range of different areas. He’s been a very prominent researcher with the Queensland Department of Primary Industries in northern Australia and has done quite a bit of work with MLA and our predecessors over the years.

Senator ROBERTS: So he’s pretty competent?

Mr Strong : That doesn’t mean we have to agree on everything, though, does it? We could also quote other papers—

Senator ROBERTS: No. But, if he’s competent, there’s got to be a reason for not agreeing.

Mr Strong : Certainly. But other papers that have been produced by independent analysts say the herd’s even smaller than what we project.

Senator ROBERTS: Even smaller?

Mr Strong : Yes. Those papers are by private commercial analysts. They are widely read and get quoted to us as much or more than this paper does. But the herd size isn’t the only driver of productivity. As you said, it’s about being able to increase carcass weights, increase value and increase productivity. One of the things that Dr Fordyce has been involved with is the NB2 program that you mentioned. The ability to increase cows in calf, decrease cow mortality, increase calves that survive and increase weaning weight in reasonably modest levels—a decrease in cow mortality by a couple of per cent, an increase in fertility by a couple of per cent and a 10-kilo increase in weaning weight—has a material impact on northern productivity not just in numbers but also in value. The herd size is an important number to help us with our planning and projections when we look at a range of things; but it’s only one of the contributors to productivity, profitability and how we get to a doubling of value for the red meat sector.

Senator ROBERTS: Looking at agricultural producers, whether it be livestock or crops, there’s certainly a huge increase and improvement in the use of science to guide it. That’s become a wonderful productivity improvement tool. But it still comes back to basic arithmetic. If herd numbers are not growing, after allowing for improved carcass weights, the only way to increase the value of red meat production by 100 per cent, after allowing for the 13 per cent carcass weight increase, is for price increases of 87 per cent.

Mr Strong : No, it’s not. Chairman Beckett mentioned our trip to Darwin two weeks ago. One of the great things we heard about there was the use of knowledge that’s been gained over the last 10 or 20 years by the industry. There were a couple of fantastic examples of the use of phosphorus as a supplement in phosphorus-deficient country. For the same cow herd size, there was a halving in cow mortality and a 30 per cent increase in weaning rates. Herd size is not the only way to increase productivity. When you think about ways to make significant improvements in productivity, it actually becomes a minor factor. Being able to produce more from what we have, regardless of what we have, and creating and capturing more value from that is much more important than the herd size.

Senator ROBERTS: I accept that it’s a laudable goal to increase the productivity, capturing more from what you have.

Mr Strong : Yes.

Senator ROBERTS: So, if herd sizes stay flat, are you able to provide me with the breakdown of where the 100 per cent increase in red meat value will come from?

Mr Strong : We can provide you with some.

/5 Comments/by

One Nation secures victory for live exporters

,

A One Nation motion asking the Government to rule out an appeal to the Federal Court decision that the 2011 Live Export Ban was unlawful, received a majority vote in the Senate today.

Senator Roberts moved the motion after the Government indicated they would appeal the decision.

Senator Roberts stated, “This decision should ensure the $750 million in compensation is paid to farmers whose livelihoods were destroyed by the Gillard Labor Government’s decision to suspend live cattle exports in 2011.”

“I call on the Government to honour today’s commitment and ensure families who have suffered financial hardship receive their compensation without further legal delay.”

Live exports are a fundamental part of our country, our economy and vital to regional Australia.

Senator Roberts added, “No Australian industry should be closed down overnight based on falsified reports, no consultation and with indifference to people’s livelihoods.

“The Government needs to pay the compensation now and restore confidence and security to the live export sector.”

200616-One-Nation-secures-victory-for-live-exporters_

/by

Liberal & Nationals caught faking support for farmers

,

In 2011 the Gillard Government banned live cattle exports costing farming hundreds of millions of dollars.

Recently the Federal Court ruled that the ban was invalid and the government should pay compensation to farmers.

Today the Liberal and Nationals tried to introduce a motion claiming that they support the live cattle industry.

Well, I decided to see how firm their commitment was to farmers by introducing an amendment to their motion.

Take a listen and see what happened ……..

Transcript

Hi, I’m in Parliament House, Canberra. And I just wanted to bring you up to date with something that’s happened today. It goes back to the Gillard government’s capricious ban on live cattle exporting that hurt, devastated cattle industry right around the country.

Back, well, almost 10 years ago, 2011, I think it was. Anyway, it was recently ruled by the federal court to have been invalid. And compensation is to be paid to farmers around the country. Which is wonderful news.

So, the Nationals, led by Senator Canavan, it seems, decided to put a motion in the parliament, into the Senate today. And the motion said, “That the Senate “notes the federal government’s commitment and support “for the live animal export trade.”

So, we thought, okay, before that motion gets up, we’ll add an amendment. And our amendment says, “And calls on the government “to rule out appealing the federal courts decision “that Labor’s 2011 suspension of live cattle exports “was invalid.”

In other words, we want to make sure that the government does not appeal it. And so, as soon as I stood to move that amendment, it was denied. I was denied the formality of moving that. And Senator Cormann did that. he’s the leader of the government in the Senate.

He did that. And he said, the reason was because this amendment had only arrived with him and other senators in just minutes before. Well, the reality, the truth is that it was in the Senate chambers on every desk an hour and a quarter before. An hour and a quarter.

Plenty of time to consider it. So, what I noticed was, as soon as I sat down, Senator Canavan jumped to his feet, and said that he wanted to make a short statement. And that short statement said that he was talking with the government about not appealing.

So what we’ve done is we’ve forced them to recognise that they should not appeal. But we’ve had Senator Cormann contradict the truth. And we’ve had Senator Canavan apparently reacting to this. So that’s yet another way we get things done in parliament, even when they tell us to shut up.

/by

Create the Office Of An Inspector-General of live cattle exports

,

I spoke in favour of the creation of the Office Of An Inspector-General of live cattle exports.

The purpose is to provide certainty that the welfare of the animals is being respected while at the same time ensuring the commercial viability of the cattle export trade.

Animal welfare is crucial to farmers because farmers care for their animals.

That’s why farmers have poured tens of millions of dollars into educating people who handle their cattle overseas. I was following, in the speaking
order, a vet who said that core to the farming business in cattle and sheep is weight and that farm animals lose weight under stress. It is in the farmer’s financial interest and their own moral and ethical interests to look after animals.

That’s why farmers care for animals.

Transcript

As a servant to the people of Queensland in Australia, I want to speak in favour of this bill. Yet while I speak in favour of this bill, I want to explain two core contradictions that this bill highlights. First though, Madam Acting Deputy President, an overview. This bill provides for the creation of an Office of the Inspector General of Live Cattle Exports. The purpose is to provide certainty that the welfare of the animals is being respected, while at the same time ensuring the commercial viability of the export cattle trade.

Firstly though, animal welfare is crucial to farmers because farmers care for their animals. That’s why farmers have poured tens of millions of dollars into educating people who handle their cattle overseas. I’m following in the speaking order, a vet who’s just said that the core to the farming business in cattle and sheep is weighed and farm animals under stress lose weight. It is in the farmers’ financial interests and their own moral and ethical interests to look after animals. That’s why farmers care for animals. That’s why farmers have poured tens of millions of dollars into educating foreigners on how to handle cattle, Australian cattle overseas.

I can think of people like Bryce Camm that I’ve met in Central Queensland and in Darling Downs – bright, experienced, knowledgeable, committed. He points out things like export competitors, sophistication of farming these days. This is not just a simple matter of putting a few cattle on a boat, it is a very scientific business. Thinking of Linda Hewitt in Central Queensland – energetic, savvy, dedicated, and knowledgeable again, and similarly concerned about government interaction or interference in the business.

So Madam Acting Deputy President this bill is importantly not just about farm products, farm animals, it is about confidence in the cattle industry. Because with confidence graziers invest. With confidence graziers employ. With confidence graziers earn export earnings right across our country and that benefit comes through in the wealth of our nation Madam Acting Deputy President.

Some background facts. The live cattle trade generates $1.2 billion in export earnings, with $620 million being returned to the local economy. This employment is critical to local economies from TI in the north to Thargomindah in the south-west, from Cooktown in the north to Cunnamulla in the south-west. This employment is critical to local economies and in particular the Northern Territory and the northern parts of Western Australia and Queensland. Yet it’s important right across the country, not just in the Territory as Senator McMahon has just talked about her own state, but right across the country because the flow-on effects, as I’ll discuss in a minute.

But in the Kimberley for example, 700 local Aboriginals are provided with jobs by live cattle exports. Even the ABC noted that this job is “All these blokes know.” The live cattle export allows Australia to breed tropical, heat-resistant breeds of cattle in Northern Australia to be exported to Asia where they are generally grown-on locally. A lot of countries to which are live cattle and sheep are exported do not have refrigeration and people need to buy their food daily. And that means we’re looking after a need of theirs in their country. So this means the live cattle trade helps our economy, but it also helps economies right across Asia and the Middle East. It helps them with employment and also with domestic herd quality. It helps these countries overseas to help themselves.

Madam Acting deputy President, the graziers and employees like these Aboriginal stockmen loved these cattle. They respect these cattle because their income comes from the cattle and because they are living creatures as well. The demonization of the live cattle trade is an insult to good and decent and caring people. There is another perspective here that I want to add. As chair of the Select Committee on Lending to Primary Production Customers, I learned firsthand of the damage the banks and receivers do to so many cattle and so many rural producers. Yet I learned of more. I learned of government tipping farmers over the edge due to government interference in the Murray-Darling Basin, stealing a farmer’s property rights, the live cattle export ban, that flowed right across our country. It didn’t just affect the north. It affected the old cattle producers right around the country.

Prime Minister Gillard’s knee-jerk reaction, her capricious reaction in cancelling the live cattle trade after footage of foreign workers abusing our livestock emerged, caused terrible losses in the industry. These are now the subject of a $600 million class action lawsuit. Gillard’s reaction, Prime Minister Gillard’s reaction was to the ABC’s fabrications and sensationalism. It’s a pity that our farmers aren’t media savvy, because they would have been countering this a long time ago.

Yet farmers around this country are waking up. One thing that farmers won’t do though, unlike the Greens and the activists, the farmers will never tell lies. They’re using facts. And I want to commend their dedicated families, the communities that were cleaned out by the banks as a result of government facades. And now we’re entering even more dangerous territory because when a drought hits, it is often necessary to export cattle in this manner to save them from being put down. That option must available to farmers. This is, live cattle export is actually an animal welfare benefit. So One Nation are committed to ensuring live cattle and sheep and all animals are treated with the same respect overseas as they are treated in Australia and that’s why we support this bill. Farmers livelihoods, as I’ve said, requires care of animals. Yet the Green ideology says the reverse. I’ll discuss that further later this afternoon.

I got further now though because we are committed to ensuring not only farm animals but farmers and all Australians are treated with respect. So let’s consider the Liberal-Labour legacy that’s devastating agriculture. Here are just some of the things that I can list. The stealing of farmers’ property rights in 1996 under a Liberal government done with a deal with the Borbidge National Party government in Queensland. The Liberal federal government and the Borbidge state government. That was done as a result of the UN Kyoto Protocol. It was based on no data that the UN produced and it was based upon later implementation through the Labour party in the state of Queensland, a Liberal-Labour duopoly.

The lack of investment in water infrastructure is crippling our industry. We can see that now everywhere. A prominent Liberal, who I won’t mention, for whom I have some respect, was asked by a friend of mine just last week, “Why didn’t the Liberals invest in building dams 10 years ago?” And the answer was staggering. “Because we didn’t need them 10 years ago’,” was the answer. What rubbish. We need investment now to protect the future. Talking with a farmer in southern Queensland, who was talking in turn with a Chinese buyer in Japan, that’s how the international connections work. He was being told by the Chinaman that the problem with the Australian agricultural product is a lack of consistency. Not quality because our quality is better than anywhere else in the world. It’s the consistency of delivery, and this drought now stands as a beacon for that. So we need investment in water infrastructure, we need proper allocation of water.

Then we think about and some of the allocation has been affected by the UN’s Rio de Janeiro Declaration, which was based not on data, which has been implemented by the Labour government, followed by Liberal governments, and that was 1992 onwards.

Then we have energy policies, we have a drought and as I’ve said many times we have farmers in central and southern Queensland and north Queensland not planting fodder in a drought because they can’t afford the water prices. We’ve got cane farmers similarly worried about their energy prices affecting their farming, and the energy that’s crippling our country, the energy prices that are crippling our country are due to the UN’s Kyoto Protocol, the UN’s Rio de Janeiro Declaration, and the UN’s Paris Agreement – all based on no data, all due to the UN, and all implemented by both the Labour Party and the Liberal Party.

And now we have an insane government action in Queensland where the state Labour government is putting in severe penalties and restrictions based, again not on data, but on UN Protocols and on a consensus statement. Not science, a consensus statement. We’ll have get a cup of tea or a few beers and come up with a consensus statement.

Then we talk about the fishing that’s being decimated. Fishing industry decimated right around our country following UN Kyoto Protocol, following Rio de Janeiro Declaration in 1992 from the UN again.

Forestry, the same, no data to back it up, but now the Queensland Labour government wants to smash the forestry industry in south-east Queensland.

And then they’re just the specifics that are hurting agriculture in my state. And then we look at tax, we look at economic mismanagement, budget cycles now becoming ways of getting favours. And as a result, we see rural and regional Queensland being smashed. It’s not foreigners doing this, it is decades of the Liberal-Labour duopoly government.

Madam Acting Deputy President, we need real action, management and vision for the farmers of Australia. As I said, from TI to Thargomindah, from Cooktown to Cunnamulla, rural areas need the support of these restrictions, these artificial government imposed restrictions removed. Thank you, Madame Acting Deputy President.

/by