News 
 National Rural News 
 Livestock 
 Cattle 
 Beef battlelines drawn on restructure 

Beef battlelines drawn on restructure

04 Feb, 2010 01:32 PM
THE insurgency movement against beef cattle levies hopes to set in motion a complete restructuring of the beef industry that will sweep aside all existing organisations and submit them to a reappraisal.

Led by Inverell processor John “J.R.” McDonald of Bindaree Beef, who helped drive the contentious “truth in labelling” legislation through NSW Parliament last year, the movement hopes to attract more than 1200 beef producers to its February 27 forum in Armidale.

According to Mr McDonald’s daughter and Bindaree spokeperson, Leigh Belbeck, Nationals senators Barnaby Joyce and Fiona Nash and Liberal Senator Bill Heffernan have already agreed to speak at the forum, along with Independent NSW MP Richard Torbay. The forum will be chaired by Alan Jones AO.

The insurgents contend that beef producer and processor profits are disappearing in levies that have done nothing to address declining consumption of beef or cattle prices that have in real terms been flat or declining for 20 years.

“Things have got completely out of hand with all the peak councils and the duplication, the costs, fees, charges and non-accountability,” Ms Belbeck said.

“We can’t keep throwing money without getting results. We think we need a complete restructuring, which means everything.”

“If we’re paying money to any type of entity, we need very clear targets so that we can see that we’re getting value for money.”

But Ms Belbeck said the February 27 forum would not be about “fixating on problems”, but instead focus on solutions.

Bindaree will offer what it believes is a possible path forward, in a statement which according to Ms Belbeck has been crafted with input from beef producers around Australia.

Most of the forum will be dedicated to hearing and collating ideas on how the industry might profitably restructure itself.

“What we propose may not be what we end up with, but it will be a starting point,” Ms Belbeck said.

Early feedback on the event has been overwhelming, she added. “We had more than 1200 producers at the 2004 NLIS protest meeting in Roma, and this looks like being bigger than that.”

MLA chairman and North Queensland cattle producer Don Heatley has also been invited to take the dias.

MLA’s managing director, David Palmer, expects himself and the other MLA staff who will be at the meeting to be under fire, but says he welcomes the opportunity “to explain how we see the world at large and the macro impacts on commodities, but most particularly on beef and how it is caught up in a worldwide malaise”.

“It’s a question of getting consumers in more affluent societies, with greater discretionary funds for food, to swing more purchasing power behind us when confidence returns,” Mr Palmer said.

He cites Australia’s success in carving out markets in Korea and Japan, and holding them in the face of United States resurgence in those markets, as a prime example of levy money reinforcing broad industry efforts — not just through in-country marketing but initiatives like NLIS, which have helped build trust in the Australian product in these countries.

The US beef industry has just launched a US$1 million-a-month Korean marketing campaign around the theme of trust to try to recapture some of the market share it lost to Australia over the mid-decade BSE outbreak.

Australian beef shipments to Japan may have fallen some 70,000 tonnes from the 400,000 tonne plus highs we enjoyed a few years ago, but now is not the time to give up investing in this and other markets, Mr Palmer said.

“The recession will turn around, and it’s a matter of holding the investment and capturing the turnaround.”

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
well done mr. mcdonald. it is time to take a knife to the top heavy bureaucratic gravy train the beef industry has become. start by abolishing mla and handing the nlis to the feds to run with all costs being absorbed by the taxpayer.
Posted by john from tamworth, 4/02/2010 4:38:56 PM
About time, nothing worse to hear mla overseas sitting in the corner having a few beers whilst private sole operators are flat out getting contracts, at a meat industry day. Also we have Sam promoting lamb, who promotes beef? Whoever does the Macdonalds pr and marketer should be poached to work for Aust Beef. MLA has been sitting back and expecting contracts to fall in their laps, and with my bloody money.
Posted by tj, 4/02/2010 6:03:08 PM
As usual whinging farmers attacking the very system that enables them to get a seat at the international meat market. Attacking the system with short term views failing to see the real value in MLA. It may not be perfect, but it is the envy of the world that Australia has foresight to establish such organisations as MLA. The majority of producers just voted to maintain the levy. Why should the industry be responsive to radicals. Mr McDonald's credentials do not auger well for any atttempt to improve the national beef industry and anyone who thinks his truth in labelling legislation was actually a step forward is even more misguided. Before you criticise the MLA you need to actually understand its function and the responsibility.
Posted by folf, 5/02/2010 6:57:38 AM
The reality is that red meat markets have grown but our market share has declined. It is also a fact that development and population growth have been a feature in our region over the past decade and that the consumption of protein has increased exponentially too. History says that consumers in new markets with discretionary funds need to be aware of products and want quality foods that continuously produce good eating experiences. Therefore, I believe that a modest investment in strategic marketing and promotion of quality systems such as MSA would result in the ABI reaching the target markets that Palmer now says are important. It mystifies me that David Palmer from MLA should continue to promote only NLIS, which despite a $500 M investment, has produced a wasteful system that costs producers money and decreases their efficiency. I suggest that you promote MSA as aggressively as you have NLIS and you'll see the results you want. Why not develop a new marketing plan not a new industry structure, which will have more chance of reaching the customers with products they want ...Paul.
Posted by agribiz, 5/02/2010 8:12:33 AM
Well done to 'JR' & his crew - I too am sick of paying levies to fund the 'boys club'. Not only am I funding the MLA club, but the GRDC dinners as well. NLIS has yet to prove itself as little more than a source of info for ABARE & ATO & now JBS want to add the cost of vaccinations to the producer. Obviously 'folf' is on the board of the MLA and is worried about losing his paid-for-by-the-producer dinner and drinks. I do understand the function of the MLA - I just don't think the MLA understand its responsibilities. Bring on the forum & transparency in the industry.
Posted by Oh please!, 5/02/2010 8:49:46 AM
When I do my budgeting every year and look at where the costs and returns are, the piddling amount that goes towards the levy doesn't rate a second look. In return I at least have a marketing and research presence without which we would be going backwards at an even faster rate. I can't come to grips with the amount of money that seems to float around the cities for jobs seemingly far less challenging than beef production, but we in the bush need to recognise that if we are going to compete in the global world we need to have good people in this system. My disquiet with our present system is the seemingly overbearing guidance the feds demand in return for their contribution to the R&D buget which means we spend a lot of time and effort pandering to societal research that really doesn't help profitability or sustainability in the long run. (At the same time as State govts run their R&D arms to oblivion.) Considered boat rocking is a useful process - terrorist attacks on our industry structures is just plain stupid.
Posted by savannan, 5/02/2010 8:58:58 AM
JR must be living in dream world. If you actually look at what ABA says it contradicts itself all the time. Bellyache Brad and the good old boys need a reality check. As to saying the taxpayers pick up the tab for our industry the only picking up that's done is to get those off the floor laughing when they look at this rubbish. Like "folf" says, we just supported MLA with the levy so where apart from Inverell is the dissent? If JR is so concerned for our industry, pay what they say the returns should be at the saleyards to producers. Not likely. ABA has been rejected by sensible producers for years, stop carping and be positive then you might get some traction. The Land is having fun with all this rubbish and we the producer are looking the mug more and more everyday. Like I said get a reality check and get back to farming. What does it cost industry (MLA etc) in terms of time and manpower to be constantly cleaning up ABA messes? Sure enough challenge MLA and industry bodies but do it from inside the tent not out in the sun. Has JR and Bellyache attempted to discuss his issues with the bodies he is attacking on a face to face level or do they always do it in the media?
Posted by angus, 5/02/2010 9:10:00 AM
It seems that producers regularly "beat up" the war cry of mismanagement of industry levies etc. Inevitably this takes the focus of the business and management decisions that could make a real difference. We need only to have a look at the results of grower revolts (led always by a vocal minority) in the wool industry to see that these type of actions are self destructive. While it makes good newspaper copy, ultimately it reflects poorly on the industry. I am also worried about the inclusion of Joyce, Nash & Heffernan; they will simply promote a populist point of view, receive the appluase and then move onto something else.
Posted by beefy, 5/02/2010 10:37:15 AM
Angus – perhaps you could explain exactly where in the article that either the ABA or Brad Bellinger is even mentioned. Me thinks you have another agenda. While you are at it, could you please explain, in the absence of full nationalisation of the livestock and red-meat sectors, exactly how a legislated, fully vertically integrated structure was ever going to work in the first place, given the potential involvement of 100,000 plus individual and varying businesses ?? On the other hand, I’ll lay London to a brick that you have never laid eyes an actual schematic of this current structure.
Posted by Fair Go, 5/02/2010 11:52:39 AM
We must have democratic systems that lets everyone have a say but only the agreed common points being priorities. Any system that is democratic will need to have an elected group of producers sitting on a national body, each putting forward their local producer's wants and concerns. Those producers need to be elected by the other producers in that state or region. Then that big national producer group can find the consensus points from producers right across the nation, and use this to direct and control the levy pursestrings of MLA and also talk directly to the federal government. Only in this such a system can local issues go up through a vetting system by elected producers acting for their fellow producers, in order to affect the federal government laws, funding an also the MLA or whatever service companies are in place. We must have this democratic system.... oh but one thing, we already do. It called Cattle Council. If you don't like what they are doing then find out from NSWFA or VFF or NTCA or Agforce who the representatives on CCA are. And then have the character to stand against them in an election and let your fellow producers be the judge on the merits.
Posted by Skeptic, 5/02/2010 12:13:00 PM
1 | 2 | 3  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
04 February, 2010
POLL
Q: What level of trust do you have in the claims made by environmental campaigners?

Total
(5%)

High
(12.7%)

Moderate
(6.2%)

Low
(21.3%)

None
(54.8%)

Total Votes: 1310
Poll Date: 31 January, 2010

Most popular articles

ELDERS NEWS MREC FW



Queensland Country Life







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...