The Problem with Livestock Breeder Representation in Australia

A recent push by Cattle Council of Australia (CCA) for extra funding, due to declining State Farm Organisation (SFO), membership has prompted this blog.

Since 1997 we have had the current Government monopoly in Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA) and CCA etc.

 Livestock producers have funded increased levies (what some refer to as compulsory unionism) , however their returns have remained almost stagnant since the 1980's.

The trickle down effect to producers, when meat prices increase are reaped by those in the supply chain above the producer.

As a result livestock producers are rightly concerned that a grab for some of the money by Cattle Council  is an expectation that we should be forced to help them now that times are tougher, and farmers have lost the confidence of SFO's and CCA in looking after their "interests"

The problem for most livestock producers is they no longer see SFO/CCA as supporting them. Some SFO's have been accused of getting into bed with government to the detriment of farmers e.g. agreeing the natural resource management legislation, accepting funds in relation to leasehold property etc. It would appear that SFO's will continue to decline because they aren't seen as farmer orientated.

The problem with CCA is that they are not a grass roots livestock producer organisation and get involved in meat marketing, trace back, NLIS etc and as a result many livestock breeders are not interested in financially "propping them up"

This results from what CCA are seen to be actually involved in, and where all the costs associated with their activities end up, that is back on the livestock breedere.g.NLIS, LPA and increased transaction levies.

Comments by Cattle Council members indicate that they are confused about whom they represent and what they should be doing, examples from the dialogue on farmonline blogs include:-

a) " I would suggest that stakeholders would include the State Farming Organisations who have funded been the "owners" of CCA since its inception."

NB Not Livestock breeders, CCA's starting fund and reserve are from historical cattle levies.

b) " who then goes into bat for the Australian industry when there is an Ecoli outbreak in Nth America, when steel shot appears in beef products in Asia, when Russians want to renegotiate the price of beef?"

Logically cattle means living beast, but they see their role as looking after what are really meat processing  problems. Where was CCA when the indonesian market was closed by our Governemnt? ( I know the answer )

What is also unusual in CCA discussion paper is the following statement:"

"It is important to provide an “opt out” option as producers must not be forced to pay for national representation (compulsory unionism). Producers must also take on the responsibility of actually joining the national representative organisation as a ‘member’ before they can vote or stand for direct election."

Two points come to mind:-

1) MLA transaction levies etc in effect is already compulsory unionism, but worse because levy payers have to register to vote.

2) Producers must join the proposed organisation even though the current system cannot recognise who paid levies, and how much they paid. That means the system is still open to the current rorts where individuals/companies just claim their right whether it is correct or a blatant lie.

Logically livestock breeders would voluntarily join an organisation that was seen to support their interests. The decline of SFO's is just the chickens coming home to roost.

My questions to you are:-1) Do livestock producers want a representative organisation that is not a government department and represents their interests instead of the current system where transaction levy benefits flow to processors and supermarkets, instead of livestock producers whom paid the levy in the first place?

                                     2) Is the current structure a dinosaur needing drastic evolution?

                                      3) Who actually represents the livestock breeder now?

THE ACT-

PRIMARY INDUSTRIES (EXCISE) LEVIES ACT 1999 - SCHEDULE 3

Cattle transactions

   

   

1   Definitions

                   In this Schedule:

"bobby calf" means a bovine animal (other than a buffalo or a head of lot-fed cattle):

                     (a)  which has been slaughtered and the dressed weight of whose carcase did not or does not exceed 40 kg; or

                     (b)  which has not been slaughtered but which, at the time of the leviable transaction or other dealing, had or has a liveweight that did not or does not exceed 80 kg; or

                     (c)  which has not been slaughtered or had its liveweight determined at the time of the leviable transaction or other dealing but which, in the opinion of the intermediary, would, if slaughtered at that time, have constituted or constitute a carcase whose dressed weight would not have exceeded or would not exceed 40 kg.

"cattle" means bovine animals other than buffalo.

"dairy cattle" means cattle that are, or, unless exported from Australia, would be likely to be, held on licensed dairy premises for a purpose related to commercial milk production, including, but without limiting the generality of the above, bulls, calves and replacement heifers.

"industry marketing body" has the same meaning as in Part 3 of the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 .

"industry research body" has the same meaning as in Part 3 of the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 .

"leviable bobby calf" means a bobby calf to which subclause 6(4) does not apply.

"licensed dairy farmer" means the person having day to day control of licensed dairy premises.

"licensed dairy premises" means premises that, under a law of the State or Territory in which the premises are situated, are authorised for use as a dairy farm.

"lot-fed cattle" means cattle that are, or are likely to be, used in the production of grain-fed beef.

2   Intermediary

                   A reference in this Schedule to the intermediary is a reference to the person required, under the Primary Industries Levies and Charges Collection Act 1991 , to pay to the Commonwealth, on behalf of the producer, an amount equal to the amount of levy imposed by this Schedule.

3   Determining the weight of a carcase

                   For the purposes of this Schedule, in determining the weight of a carcase immediately after it has been dressed, no adjustment of that weight is to be made on account of shrinkage.

4   Related companies

                   For the purposes of this Schedule, the question whether companies were or are related to each other is to be determined in the same manner as the question whether 2 corporations are related to each other is determined under the Corporations Act 2001 .

5   Imposition of levy

             (1)  Levy is imposed on:

                     (a)  each transaction entered into after the commencement of this Schedule by which the ownership of cattle is transferred from one person to another; or

                     (b)  the delivery, after the commencement of this Schedule, of cattle to a processor otherwise than because of a sale to the processor; or

                     (c)  the slaughter by a processor, after the commencement of this Schedule, of cattle purchased by the processor and held for a period of more than 60 days after the day of the purchase and before the day of the slaughter; or

                     (d)  the slaughter by a processor, after the commencement of this Schedule, of cattle in respect of which levy imposed by this Schedule would not be payable under paragraph (a), (b) or (c).

             (2)  Levy is not imposed by this Schedule:

                     (a)  on the sale of dairy cattle for dairying purposes; or

                     (b)  on the sale of cattle at auction to the vendor; or

                     (c)  on the sale or delivery of cattle between related companies, unless the company buying or taking delivery was or is a processor; or

                     (d)  on the delivery of cattle to a processor for slaughter on behalf of the person delivering the cattle if:

                              (i)  the delivery occurs within 14 days after the cattle were or are acquired by that person; and

                             (ii)  the cattle are afterwards slaughtered; and

                            (iii)  the person continues to own the cattle immediately after their hot carcase weight, within the meaning of Schedule 1, is determined or is taken, for the purposes of that Schedule, to have been determined, as the case requires; or

                     (e)  on the sale or delivery of cattle to a processor, if the cattle are not, at the time of the sale or delivery, fit for human consumption, under any applicable law of the Commonwealth or of a State or Territory; or

                      (f)  in circumstances where the ownership of the cattle changed or changes:

                              (i)  as a result of a sale or transfer ordered by a court in proceedings under the Family Law Act 1975 ; or

                             (ii)  by devolution on the death of the owner of the cattle; or

                            (iii)  on the happening of events referred to in subsection 70-100(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 ; or

                     (g)  on a leviable bobby calf on which levy imposed by this Schedule, or by the repealed Cattle Transactions Levy Act 1997 , has already been paid; or

                     (h)  in such other circumstances (if any) as are prescribed.

             (3)  For the purposes of paragraph (2)(a), dairy cattle are taken to be sold for dairying purposes if:

                     (a)  both the vendor and the purchaser are licensed dairy farmers; or

                     (b)  either the vendor or the purchaser is a licensed dairy farmer and the cattle are being acquired for inclusion in, or eventual inclusion in, a herd of dairy cattle.

             (4)  If cattle are delivered to a processor, otherwise than because of a sale to the processor, for fattening or agistment for a period before slaughter by the processor, the cattle:

                     (a)  are taken not to have been delivered to the processor for the purposes of paragraph (1)(b) unless they are slaughtered at the end of that period; and

                     (b)  if they are slaughtered at the end of that period, are taken to have been delivered to the processor immediately before their slaughter.

6   Rate of levy

             (1)  The rate of levy imposed by this Schedule on each head of cattle (other than a head of lot-fed cattle or a leviable bobby calf) is the sum of the following amounts:

                     (a)  $2.16 or, if another amount (not exceeding $6.50) is prescribed by the regulations, the other amount;

                     (b)  72 cents or, if another amount (not exceeding $2.00) is prescribed by the regulations, the other amount;

                     (c)  17 cents or, if another amount (not exceeding $4.00) is prescribed by the regulations, the other amount;

                     (d)  13 cents or, if another amount (not exceeding 50 cents) is prescribed by the regulations, the other amount.

Note 1:       Paragraph (a) identifies amounts that, under the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 , are destined for the industry marketing body.

Note 2:       Paragraph (b) identifies amounts that, under the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 , are destined for the industry research body.

Note 3:       Paragraph (c) identifies amounts that, under the National Cattle Disease Eradication Account Act 1991 , are destined for the National Cattle Disease Eradication Account.

Note 4:       Paragraph (d) identifies amounts that, under Australian Animal Health Council (Live-stock Industries) Funding Ac... , are destined for the Australian Animal Health Council.

             (2)  The rate of levy imposed by this Schedule on each head of cattle that is a leviable bobby calf is the sum of the following amounts:

                     (a)  48 cents or, if another amount (not exceeding $1.90) is prescribed by the regulations, the other amount;

                     (b)  16 cents or, if another amount (not exceeding 40 cents) is prescribed by the regulations, the other amount;

                     (c)  the prescribed amount (not exceeding 20 cents), if any;

                     (d)  the prescribed amount (not exceeding 50 cents), if any.

Note 1:       Paragraph (a) identifies amounts that, under the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 , are destined for the industry marketing body.

Note 2:       Paragraph (b) identifies amounts that, under the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 , are destined for the industry research body.

Note 3:       Paragraph (c) identifies amounts that, under the National Cattle Disease Eradication Account Act 1991 , are destined for the National Cattle Disease Eradication Account.

Note 4:       Paragraph (d) identifies amounts that, under the Australian Animal Health Council (Live-stock Industries) Funding Ac... , are destined for the Australian Animal Health Council.

             (3)  The rate of levy imposed by this Schedule on each head of lot-fed cattle is the sum of the following amounts:

                     (a)  $2.16 or, if another amount (not exceeding $6.50) is prescribed by the regulations, the other amount;

                     (b)  72 cents or, if another amount (not exceeding $2.00) is prescribed by the regulations, the other amount;

                     (c)  17 cents or, if another amount (not exceeding $4.00) is prescribed by the regulations, the other amount;

                     (d)  13 cents or, if another amount (not exceeding 50 cents) is prescribed by the regulations, the other amount.

Note 1:       Paragraph (a) identifies amounts that, under the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 , are destined for the industry marketing body.

Note 2:       Paragraph (b) identifies amounts that, under the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 , are destined for the industry research body.

Note 3:       Paragraph (c) identifies amounts that, under the National Cattle Disease Eradication Account Act 1991 , are destined for the National Cattle Disease Eradication Account.

Note 4:       Paragraph (d) identifies amounts that, under the Australian Animal Health Council (Live-stock Industries) Funding Ac... , are destined for the Australian Animal Health Council.

             (4)  For the purposes of subclause (1), a cow with a calf at foot are together taken to constitute a single head of cattle.

7   Who pays the levy

             (1)  Levy imposed by this Schedule on a transaction by paragraph 5(1)(a) of this Schedule is payable by the person who owned the cattle immediately before the transaction was entered into.

             (2)  Levy imposed by this Schedule on a delivery of cattle by paragraph 5(1)(b) of this Schedule is payable by the person who owned the cattle immediately before the delivery.

             (3)  Levy imposed by this Schedule on the slaughter of cattle by paragraph 5(1)(c) or 5(1)(d) of this Schedule is payable by the person who owned the cattle at the time of the slaughter.

8   Regulations

             (1)  The Minister may, by notice in the Gazette, declare a body to be the body whose recommendations about the amount to be prescribed for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a), 6(1)(b), 6(1)(d), 6(2)(a), 6(2)(b), 6(2)(d), 6(3)(a), 6(3)(b) or 6(3)(d) of this Schedule are to be taken into consideration under subclause (2).

             (2)  If a declaration is in force under subclause (1), then, before the Governor-General makes regulations for the purposes of the paragraph to which the declaration relates, the Minister must take into consideration any relevant recommendation made to the Minister by the body specified in the declaration in relation to that paragraph.

9   Transitional--regulations

             (1)  This clause applies to regulations if:

                     (a)  the regulations were made for the purposes of a particular provision of the Cattle Transactions Levy Act 1997 ; and

                     (b)  the regulations were in force immediately before the commencement of this clause.

             (2)  The regulations have effect, after the commencement of this clause, as if they had been made for the purposes of the corresponding provision of this Schedule.

10   Transitional--declarations

             (1)  This clause applies to a declaration if:

                     (a)  the declaration was made for the purposes of a particular provision of the Cattle Transactions Levy Act 1997 ; and

                     (b)  the declaration was in force immediately before the commencement of this clause.

             (2)  The declaration has effect, after the commencement of this clause, as if it had been made for the purposes of the corresponding provision of this Schedule

Views: 2227

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

and another on the CCA blog-

 

Rob Moore Comment 3 3 May 2012, 7:47 AM Edit (0m 00s)

Good morning Sam-I can see from the little video that you are a keen young fellow with the best of intentions. I used to be like that too but the years and the battles give one a thick skin and a good bs detector on these matters which come down to "reality v perception". I have many opinions and Jed Matz asked me to contribute here. I don't want to dominate with negativity but you would have to conceed that the blog opinion is that CCA is redundent and misguided. I feel it is weak of the staff there to let you carry the can on your own- Where is Inall, McDonnel ,McCamley etc?

This topic-Blue sky Research! -where do I start! We have corrupted science for many many years to come, in this country due to the AGW-CC hoax that has absolutely been debunked and inspite of that we are about to saw our leg off with a carbon Tax. SHAME on AGFORCE, Shame on NFF,-CCA....I have tried relentlessly to get you people to take a stand against this nonsense in the last two or more years. I offered to shout anyone at Agforce -tickets to Lord Monckton's Brisbane talks. Even called in to see who was coming before hand. The flat earth blinkered view forbade anyone coming to get enlightened. No sooner was Rudd PM and he gave MLA $26.8M to look into cattle emmissions. This was extra to their normal running budget of around $170M. Of course they weren't going to say that the cattle emission cycle is neutral -he's your money back- were they! Bribes and cash for comments in the greatest hoax ever to be put over the Aust population and now we have our major Processors with Million $ liabilities and guess who will pay. Well done - thanks for nothing in the representitive stakes.With pathetic judgement like this they couldn't be trusted to run the school tuck shop much less a multi Mill R&D program . What is worse is MLA has Flannery on it's books and he has his bib in the trough on this Target 100 bs - more cattle methane R&D. It is neutral -I can send you two reports for NOTHING.

The meat owners should market and research for themselves and the "Livestock" owners only want to be profitable which are commercial variables and have nothing to do with "ponzi" Carbon Farming Initiatives or cows that dont fart!

just put this on the CCA blog-  


Rob Moore Comment 2 17 May 2012, 7:53 PM Edit (8m 04s)

Baden- you make good points here. I have three in their early 20's and a couple of years ago there were a useful group of back packers and they had a good little group to have a bit of fun in what is an isolated area.

Career path is a bit of a "false hope" term as the work is often character building and difficult. For teen agers and even under 30's - it is often a great experience to get out on a company place for a year. Family places are a bit of a lottery- kids could be treated like family or slaves and all points in between. There was a fightening accident at a place my daughter was working at last year involving a back packer ( she saved the person's life) and there will be a long drawn out blame game which could see the landowners loose everything which would be totally unwarranted.

I undertook to pay mine $1000 per week which tested my capacity but they all earn two to three times that flying about the country as they know how to work. I just get their week off from time to time and my wife and I branded 700 big calves recently and I know that if we didn't have a well developed property and NO Debt- we would be stuffed. This is why I get so irrate at all these experts from MLA and CSIRO and DPI sprouting all the motherhood nonsense which has zero effect on our daily lives if but to choke us down even further. Let us get a consistent $2.50 per kg liveweight for our quality product and all would sort itself out in no time. Come on CCA - push THIS instead of chasing fairies at the bottom of the garden!

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Just Grounds Community is a social network

Members

Forum

The Galileo Movement 2198 Replies

Started by Geoff Brown in Climate Change. Last reply by Stephen Cox 3 hours ago.

Migrants, Terrorists and Social Service Payments. 149 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in General. Last reply by Stephen Cox 3 hours ago.

Wind Turbine Power - New Survey 22 Replies

Started by Geoff Brown in General. Last reply by Stephen Cox 3 hours ago.

Will Craig Thomson retain his seat ??? And will Slipper's slip up be the end of Labor ? 259 Replies

Started by Jan Courtney in General. Last reply by Dr Caroline Wright 4 hours ago.

Interview with Dr. John Colquhoun 3 Replies

Started by Sarah Lamonte in Health. Last reply by Sarah Lamonte 6 hours ago.

Authorities say 'Gladstone Harbour water is OK' - but nobody's told the fish 2739 Replies

Started by John Mikkelsen in Environment. Last reply by Jeff Hutcho 7 hours ago.

USA TROOPS IN TOP END AND DEEMED TO INCREASE 132 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in General. Last reply by Stephen Cox 7 hours ago.

China farm purchase sparks land-grab fears in New Zealand 3 Replies

Started by Rory Donnellan in General. Last reply by Barbara lee 8 hours ago.

What are you reading? 238 Replies

Started by Ian Macrae Yeates in General. Last reply by Jan Courtney 11 hours ago.

WWF to Tell Australian Cattlemen How to be “Sustainable” 414 Replies

Started by Joanne Rea in Agriculture. Last reply by Dale Stiller 13 hours ago.

PEOPLE'S EXPERIENCES WITH HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS: THE POSITIVE AND THE NEGATIVE (STREAM 1) 61 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in General. Last reply by Barbara lee 13 hours ago.

Play pen - come one come all for only fun! 568 Replies

Started by Cate Stuart in General. Last reply by Jeff Hutcho 14 hours ago.

Our Political Foundations 430 Replies

Started by Ian Macrae Yeates in General. Last reply by Ian Macrae Yeates 16 hours ago.

Who is Ron Paul? 155 Replies

Started by Dale Stiller in Politics. Last reply by Barbara lee 19 hours ago.

Barnaby Joyce - Water MP - Attention 214 Replies

Started by John C Fairfax in General. Last reply by Jeff Hutcho yesterday.

United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda 21. 802 Replies

Started by vivienne skeen in Politics. Last reply by Stephen Cox yesterday.

The Problem with Livestock Breeder Representation in Australia 182 Replies

Started by John Michelmore in Agriculture. Last reply by Rob Moore yesterday.

PEOPLE'S EXPERIENCES WITH HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS: THE POSITIVE AND THE NEGATIVE (STREAM 2) 27 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in General. Last reply by Dr Caroline Wright yesterday.

© 2012   Created by Rob Moore.   Powered by .

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service