Farmers are concerned about potential changes to backpacker rules

It’s been a ritual for decades, contributing to rural economies and workforces. But farmers fear changes to backpacker visas could see the cultural rite dry up.

Stonefruit grower Angus Ferrier, with backpacker workers Eleanor Smith and Kilian Hoeckman on his property west of Stanthorpe in southern Queensland. Picture: Lyndon Mechielsen

Farmers are concerned there will be severe worker shortfalls and a drop-off in the number of visitors to rural communities if the ­federal government cuts a long-established visa scheme to incentivise backpackers to head into the ­regions for work.

The 88-day work incentive within the Working Holiday Maker program was scrapped for British backpackers on July 1, putting at risk about 25 per cent of the annual $1bn the scheme contributes to regional economies.

Now there are fears the incentive, which stipulates that working holidaymakers must work in certain industries for 88 days in a regional area in order for their visa to be extended by a year, will be cut for other nationalities too.

The government is considering the move under its proposed migration reform but farmers say it could lead to significant shortfalls in the ability to find workers and would potentially cripple the agricultural sector.

National Farmers Federation acting chief executive Charlie Thomas said almost 12,000 working holidaymakers had chosen to work in agriculture in the second half of last year.

“People are expecting pretty significant workforce impacts on farms, particularly in horticulture and fresh produce,” Mr Thomas said. “But the community impacts are possibly more significant. It’s $1bn that will be wiped out of ­regional economies with the stroke of a pen.

“We’re open to alternatives, but you can’t just rip the rug out from underneath farm businesses without anything to replace it.”

He said the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme, which provides visas for workers from Pacific Islands, did not offer the same flexibility or benefits.

Griffith University researcher Kaya Barry, who has spent years studying the backpacker workforce, said the language in a recent government discussion paper about reforming the visas was “ambiguous”. But she warned ending the scheme would have massive consequences.

“It would be devastating, not just for people in the industry, like growers, suppliers and transport providers, but for local communities as well,” Dr Barry said.

“Rural communities, particularly smaller communities, rely on backpackers not just for ­labour, but for tourism and … the local economies.

“The other visas just don’t fill the flexibility that backpackers offer for communities.”

She said claims backpackers took local jobs were not realistic, and added that any exploitation issues had fallen significantly.

Orchardist Angus Ferrier regularly employs backpackers to help harvest the stone fruit and tomatoes he grows in Queensland’s southern Granite Belt district. He said many of the backpackers would not otherwise have been enticed to leave the ­cities or coastal areas if it weren’t for the visa requirement.

“Horticulture is a very dynamic industry, and while I appreciate how the PALM scheme works for some farms … there are a lot of small and medium-sized horticulturalists who need more of a free-agent, short-term style of worker.”