Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee, , 3:15:16 to 3:26:36
Debate over the lack of financial incentives for rangeland beef producers to reduce emissions and the specific challenges of net zero transitions.
Topics: Agricultural emissions, Beef exports, Climate change
Speakers: Speaker 21, Speaker 20, Speaker 12
method. But and certainly MLA and others can uh from RDC's can can sort of talk to their investments they've been making that go beyond uh just acute method uh sort of options and and that includes extensive R&D that addresses uh sort of productivity uh enhancing uh practices on on farm which also have an emissions uh dividend uh but address the triple bottom
>> all of that but it's of course as you understand very expensive to be changing genetics and herd composition and uh and so my concern is is that we've identified that 80% of agricultural emissions come from livestock. Uh and yet here we are four years into this government's term and still producers are have no no tool available, no incentive available. uh you know I'm I am trying to highlight this for for the community that we're expecting the agricultural industry which is already a very low margin business already struck by lots of natural disasters and other things at the moment and yet the government remains um completely flatfooted on what programs are acceptable to Australian
producers. uh c certainly the the challenge with agriculture this is not unique to Australia is that emissions reduction uh is is challenging it's a hard to abate sector that includes in the in the livestock sector as well uh and I think this was was canvased in the agon sector plan as well that over time we expect it will be a suite of stacked solutions that will help uh sort of bridge that sort of that gap between uh what's commercially viable and the type of technologies and practices that might reduce emissions over time. Uh but in the meantime, there are uh productivity driven uh sort of opportunities that that are available to the livestock sector and that goes to where the the red meat sector has invested a lot of its R&D uh where there's a there's a a a dividend that addresses prof profitability and productivity but also uh extend to uh emissions reduction particularly reductions in emissions
intensity production. So every other sector seems to be getting incentives under the CIS under you know there's there's lots of money being thrown around to reduce emissions except it seems to for the agricultural sector and my concern is is that some of those stacking opportunities you talked about are reveating existing agricultural land which will actually be less agricultural production and uh I I don't expect you to, you know, there there is no other way to address to there is no other way to paint this apart from there is currently no methodology for beef cattle producers to have an ACU system to reduce emissions. and they are um now saying we cannot continue spending money on these changed uh productivity measures and others if we're not going to be able to achieve an acute at the end of it
>> there there is certainly no silver bullet uh senator we would agree with that in terms of achieving major stepdowns in emissions reductions but again where we started this conversation it was very much premised around the fact that the sector is very well positioned globally as a export-driven uh sector in the economy its credentials are very favorable compared to our competitors and that's a good place to be and I think also acknowledge that while there are you refer to other programs in other sectors that are have significant uh sort of funding allocations those sectors are also uh have significant regulatory impulse around achieving emissions reductions whether it's a safeguard mechanism uh the renewable energy target uh in the transport sector as well they they have that is where the large uh the vast majority of decarbonization across the economy is happening now and has been for a number of years and will happen over the next sort of 5 to 10 years as well. So that's that's a reflection of where the investment is going because that's where uh decarbonization uh has the greatest potential in the short to medium term and in the meantime it's about getting the foundations right across the sector in agriculture so that as technologies become viable and acmethods will will be a a part of the toolkit available to the sector over time as well then that sector continue to add to its current credentials and and make improvements too. So it I don't think doing nothing is is is sort of a fair reflection of of what the where the sector is at. It's sort of laying the groundwork acknowledging that a lot of the the decarbonization effort is happening elsewhere in the economy and in time the sector will be best placed to to uh contribute to that net zero
transition as well. So, do you think that the agricultural industry should be alarmed given that the uh Albanesei government's increased the emissions reduction target from 43% to I'm not sure if it was 60 or 70 where Minister Bowen landed um by uh 2035 if I got that number right. So, you know, this is an increasingly short runway and uh at 18.4% 4% of emissions. The agricultural industry is becoming increasingly alarmed that that there will be um more punitive measures to force them to reduce emissions but yet not pathways that they can they can fund that investment in R&D and others.
Senator, um I think as we've as we've kind of um discussed in previous estimates, um there is there is no target um set for the agriculture sector itself. Um the targets an economywide target and um we we think there's lots of opportunity for agriculture in the net zero economy. Um while we're talking about a specific ACUE method, there is significant opportunity for producers one to enhance their farming systems through things like re vegetation or plantations or sort carbon and there is
>> so I'm sorry to interrupt but you know that that just in places like rangeeland systems where most of the broadscale cattle production is the opportunities to reveate is zero. zero um or or close to zero because of rainfall, soil types, all those other things. And if you were going to reveate, it will reduce your productivity because you'll have less fod production and other um other feeds. I mean, this is I I'm not having a go, but this is we've got to be very careful not to continue talking in motherhood statements about opportunity and growth and blah blah blah when the reality is is that these producers have no pathway. And whilst you said that there is no uh inclusion for uh agriculture in safeguards and those other um punitive programs yet. Surely surely in order for the government to increase emissions reductions, they will have to turn their mind to agriculture very soon. Um it's 9 years away from this this increased target. We're still only at 28% emissions reductions, which is the same as what it was under the Morrison government. So I I this is a statement. I don't expect you to respond to this, but that's the reality of where we are. nine years away from this new target, no ACUE method, no assistance with increased um increased investment and yet producers are being told, "No, don't worry about it. You can reveate." Well, that's less productivity, less profit, or you can um uh you know, soil soil carbon again, not available to rangeands producers. So, you know, I'm I'm just trying to bell the cat. we've got a real problem looming and the delay again for the beef herd methodology method I think is a massive massive
flag. So certainly maybe um and and I appreciate it's a comment Senator but I do want to reassure you um that we do take I guess the opportunity for agriculture really seriously in the net zero economy um and and and while I appreciate your comments there's obviously a range of farming systems across Australia um where where carbon opportunities are real um and we're seeing whether it's rege or saw carbon or plantations taken up not at the expense of productivity and in fact complementing the farming system to enhance productivity. Um I was reading in the the farmer of the year finalist awards a range of different farmers that have taken up those opportunities have talked about um the revenues that they can derive from um from carbon markets as well as productivity enhancements.
Well, I um I understand what you're saying, but the vast majority of our biggest export being beef is in rangeand sectors where those opportunities are not available. Uh we know that the vast amount of beef comes from Queensland, Northern Territory, Northern Western Australia. These are not places that have access to the sort of programs that are available in Tasmania and New South Wales and coastal Victoria. So I think we have to be very real and very careful that we do not make too many statements that are um describe a different part of Australia to the places where our biggest beef exports, our biggest agricultural exports come from. Um anyway, I'll I'll
>> maybe if I could just add one one more comment, Senator, which is just to reassure you um in relation to the work of the Iraq and in relation to their consideration of the agriculture sector. I'll be meeting with the chair later this week and um we look forward to that being an ongoing discussion to continue to explore opportunities for emissions reduction in the livestock sector
>> and remembering that there is less than a handful of registered people underneath under that methodology. It's been delayed since 2024. We are now December of 2024 I think it is. We are now um nearly 18 months later and these producers have nowhere to go and it is not good enough for the government to keep to have delayed and not provided clarity and opportunity for these producers when they're the ones who are going to get it in the neck first. Um Senator Colbeck, you had a follow up