Farmers left out in cold as Federal Government claims credit on climate change

The Warialda Standard, Page: 5
Wednesday, 12 July 2006

Chair of the NSW Farmers' Association's Conservation and Resource Management Committee, Louise Surge says Australia can only claim to be meeting its greenhouse commitments because of restrictions imposed on agricultural land, primarily native vegetation restrictions. "Australian Greenhouse Office reports show that agriculture is effectively subsidising the greenhouse gas pollution of other industries, leaving family farming businesses to foot the bill for other industry sectors," Mrs Burge said. "There is no compulsion on these greenhouse emitters to pay agriculture for the burden imposed, In fact Government policies have created this inequity via agreements made in relation to the Kyoto Protocol, where potential future carbon credits schemes can only apply to vegetation planted or regrown since 1990 should Australia sign the convention," Mrs Burge said. Mrs Burge says the real sting in the tail comes from the Federal Government's recent change to the taxation arrangements in regard to renewable fuels.

"On the one hand Government policy is directing industries, including agriculture to become more greenhouse efficient - yet supports policies that don't fully recognise the environmental importance of renewable fuels such as biodiesel that can help reduce carbon dioxide emissions by up to 70%," Mrs Burge said. "Now, with many farmers wishing to reduce their fuel costs and reduce their impacts on the environment, Governments should be aware of the benefits of renewable fuel and support the use of biodiesel as a way of meeting international emissions," Mrs Burge said. Mrs Burge is also concerned that a report by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) due to be released in December will place yet more of the greenhouse burden on agriculture and still fail to address the major greenhouse pollution caused by the energy and transport sectors. "COAG's report may well find farmers facing new restrictions on the use of fertilisers or having to find solutions to prevent their cows passing too much wind," Mrs Burge said.

"In New Zealand a flatulence tax on cattle almost became a political reality. If Australia heads in this direction, the cynicism of government will be confirmed - why should they take on the powerful mining, energy and transport sectors when it is politically easier to impose the burden on farmers?" Mrs Surge concluded.