AGRICULTURAL
LAND — CROPS AND TREES
1010. Hon Dr STEVE THOMAS to the Minister for Agriculture and
Food:
I
refer to the Minister for Agriculture and Food's comments at the
Australian Association of Agricultural Consultants' Outlook
Conference last week that the state's $10 billion agriculture industry
needed to stop worshipping the false god of crop yields and give up 20 per cent
of its cropping land to plant trees.
(1) What compensation will the
minister offer farmers to give up 20 per cent of their land for cropping?
(2) On what
modelling was the figure of a 20 per cent reduction in cropping land arrived at
by the minister and can she please table that modelling?
(3) What effect will the 20 per cent reduction in
cropping land have on farmers' income and the state's economy
as a whole?
Hon
ALANNAH MacTIERNAN replied:
(1)–(3) Golly gosh, member!
Thank you for that question and thank you for channelling your inner Jim Chown!
Several members interjected.
Hon ALANNAH MacTIERNAN: Or
is it that the member is dancing to that —
Point of Order
Hon TJORN SIBMA: I have a point
of order.
Several members interjected.
The PRESIDENT: Order! It is
Thursday at jacaranda time. Hon Tjorn Sibma has a point of order.
Hon TJORN SIBMA: I think
that answers need to be concise and should not dwell on previous members of
this chamber in any way.
The PRESIDENT: Thank you,
honourable member. As I understand it, it was an interjection prior to being
given the call, but I will ask members to focus on the questions and answers
for the remainder of question time, if they possibly can. There is no point of
order.
Questions without Notice Resumed
Hon ALANNAH MacTIERNAN: It may well be that the member is dancing to the
tune of the well-known troglodyte Trevor
Whittington, who of course is opposed to the whole concept of carbon farming.
The member has not correctly quoted what I said. This was a full-day forum
about carbon farming and the opportunities for farmers in carbon farming.
During question time, I was asked up to what percentage I thought we should be
looking at and I said that it was possible to give up to 20 per cent perhaps in
some areas. The response from Trevor Whittington was that this is just completely outrageous. Farmers are actually
doing it; they are entering into contracts with a whole range of people to do it. In some areas, they are doing up
to 50 per cent. I was really interested when I was in Albany meeting people to
talk to the Pech family from North Stirling Downs. They have already committed
to putting 7.7 per cent of their land
into tree planting. We saw our good friend from the Pastoralists and Graziers
Association ''Bad Tony'' getting out there and being so distressed by the idea that
there might be co-benefits from tree planting. Some of these co-benefits were
being contested. I would like to table a couple of articles. This one from the
CSIRO says —
We
conclude that non-crop vegetation in a good condition is critical for
developing solutions for improving biological pest control and reducing
the risk of pest outbreaks �
That is a recent report.
The PRESIDENT: Order,
minister. You are seeking leave to have that tabled.
[Leave granted. See paper 899.]
The PRESIDENT: Minister, you
are, of course, coming to the conclusion of your very concise answer.
Hon ALANNAH MacTIERNAN: I am.
This is a very important matter. A second report from the CSIRO found that,
generally, native vegetation appeared to serve as a source against natural
enemies. Paper after paper refers to the
co-benefits and how we can increase productivity and give farmers a return from
carbon credits and, at the same time in the remaining farming lands,
really see a significant increase in productivity and profitability.
The PRESIDENT: Order! Thank
you for the end of your concise answer, minister. I ask you to have regard to
standing order 105.