Those working in our primary production industries have long been telling us; Canberra’s policies have real consequences in the paddock.
A University of Auckland study found rapid transitions to renewable energy are raising food production costs and lowering agricultural output across OECD nations.
Former energy infrastructure commissioner Andrew Dyer’s comments about renewable projects causing anxiety in rural areas are spot on.
Farmers feel the pressure as these projects compete for agricultural land.
Add in Labor’s “Nature Positive” agenda and you can understand the growing feeling of uncertainty and concern that it will add complexity to existing challenges.
Despite Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek’s promises to make Australia a “world leader in nature repair”, what we actually have is an ill-framed half-way house.
The grand Nature Positive Bill will set up a new federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to enforce the same flawed laws everyone agrees need reform.
Creating the EPA before finalising the EPBC Act reforms is like planting seeds before prepping the soil. Is it any wonder Minister Plibersek has so far failed to negotiate the passage of this bill with either The Nationals and Liberals or the Greens.
Labor’s failure to resolve key differences leave the agricultural sector, worth billions, on shaky ground. The practical implications of the reforms are stark.
The framework could require multiple approvals for routine practices and the proposed climate trigger creates further uncertainty for farming operations.
Even before these reforms are passed, approval rates for environmental assessments have dropped from nearly 95 per cent under The Nationals and Liberals to about 80pc under Labor.
Planners of irrigation and storage infrastructure encounter delays, leading to lost growing seasons and missed market opportunities. After approvals are granted, there is no assurance.
Minister Plibersek, through her decision on the Blayney gold mine, has demonstrated her willingness to halt projects at the last minute.
Those in the sector need stability to invest in productivity improvements but reforms threaten to create more barriers. The proposed penalties are especially concerning.
Fines potentially reaching hundreds of millions of dollars, along with jail terms for violations, are risks to farmers already operating on tight margins. These harsh measures could tie their hands and make it harder to adjust to environmental changes.
Labor’s focus on city voters and countering the Greens is leading to stricter policies that block economic projects and favour environmental activists.
Instead of collaborating with farmers, these moves are obstacles to progress.
The Nationals and Liberals have called for reduced time frames for environmental assessments, with a maximum number of days for the process. This would provide more certainty for long-term planning while keeping environmental protections on track.
Unless Labor resolves the issues in its Nature Positive agenda to balance legitimate environmental protections with farming realities, communities will continue to face regulatory uncertainty and rising costs.
Albanese must choose whether to support those who feed the nation while caring for the land or side with inner city interests whose understanding of agriculture often stops at their local farmers market.