Farmers left in the dark as department fails to clarify new nature laws
Senate estimates hears concerns that the deal to pass new nature laws could include removing the off-road diesel fuel rebate.
Farmers have raised concerns the deal between the Greens and Labor to pass new nature laws could include getting rid of the off-road diesel fuel rebate, Senator Bridget McKenzie says.
The diesel fuel rebate refunds the fuel tax paid by businesses, particularly those using large amounts of diesel off-road, such as in mining, agriculture and fisheries.
Senator McKenzie told Senate estimates earlier this week that “we are all” receiving messages from farming advocacy bodies and individual farmers concerned that the recent deal between Labor and the Greens to pass changes to the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act would include getting rid of the rebate.
However, when Ms McKenzie asked if a deal on the fuel tax rebate was made with the Greens as part of negotiations, Assistant Agriculture Minister Anthony Chisholm said: “It’s not something that I’m aware of.”
Greens Senator and spokesperson for agriculture Peter Whish-Wilson said: “To my knowledge this was not raised in negotiations, and there certainly is no deal.
“It looks like more misinformation or disinformation from the National party.
“The Greens have long campaigned to end subsidies for big mining companies but not for farmers.”
Also in estimates, agriculture department heads were unable to provide details on how producers who intended to manage vegetation regrowth on their properties would be affected by the new nature laws, rushed through the Senate last week.
The nation’s farm leaders continue to grapple with what the new laws will mean for the sector, with groups such as the National Farmers’ Federation remaining “bitterly disappointed” and without any clarity.
Queensland producer lobby group, AgForce’s general president Shane McCarthy has previously said producers were gravely concerned about changes to the 15-year limit on “continuing use” of agricultural land, a provision that recognised that management of regrowth, something particularly imporant for Queensland producers.
QUESTIONS UNANSWERED
The Senate hearing also heard the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry did not specifically quantify - ahead of drawing up the Agriculture and Land Sector Plans earlier this year - how many hectares of productive farmland, nationwide, were expected to go into carbon sinks to meet the government’s net zero goals.
That sector plan underpins agriculture’s role in the economy-wide reductions targets.
The Senate rural and regional affairs and transport legislation committee also heard from Tasmanian Senator Richard Colbeck that the forestry sector was left in a high degree of uncertainty about its future, due to both the new nature laws and emissions reductions targets.
Senators Matthew Canavan, Malcolm Roberts and Colbeck asked departmental heads a series of questions requesting more information about what work was being done to quantify these impacts, from the government’s nature laws and emissions targets.
Many questions were taken on notice or deferred to other departments.
Senator Colbeck queried what net environmental gain new nature laws were seeking to achieve in regard to forestry, and gave his view that native logging would provide greater benefits for water quality, biodiversity and emissions reductions, and no chemical use, compared to plantations.
“I understand why industries, (are) feeling a whole heap of uncertainty because they - the agency that has oversight (DAFF) - often doesn’t know what’s going to be applied to them,” Senator Colbeck said, in relation to new requirements.
Senator Roberts asked if DAFF would publish a hectare estimate for how much farmland would be locked up for carbon sequestration plantations under the government’s emissions reduction targets.
DAFF deputy secretary Matt Lowe told the hearing the department did not have that figure.
ABARES executive director Jared Greenville said ABARES was now doing work to estimate how much land this may require, and what impacts it would have on agricultural production.
In relation to nature laws and what it would mean for producers managing regrowth under previous continuous use provisions, department representatives referred the questions to the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water.
Senator Matt Canavan said clarifications on what the nature laws meant were “essential to ensure producers have certainty during the transition period”.
