MLA pushed on lobby groups

MLA pushed to take a stand on producer lobby group drama


Stock and Land Beef
Meat and Livestock Australia managing director Richard Norton: "We need to be very careful in asking MLA to get into agri-political areas."

Meat and Livestock Australia managing director Richard Norton: "We need to be very careful in asking MLA to get into agri-political areas."

Aa

MLA distances itself from agri-political role

Aa

BEEF’S most influential body, Meat and Livestock Australia, (MLA) does not rely on peak producer bodies to consult with levy payers.

Since a senate inquiry into the grassfed cattle levy four years ago recommended an overhaul of producer representation, MLA has moved to set up a number of avenues to allow direct consultation with its levy payers, according to managing director Richard Norton.

Following the recent collapse of efforts to consolidate peak representative bodies in the cattle production sector, Mr Norton was grilled at a recent senate estimate hearing in Canberra on the issue.

While adamant that MLA had no agri-political advocacy role, therefore making it inappropriate for the service provider to be commenting on representative group dynamics, Mr Norton did say a strong peak industry council providing strategic direction on what producers wanted MLA to work on was “in the interests of the industry.”

Whether he believes that is currently being provided by Cattle Council of Australia (CCA) is still left to the imagination, despite forceful pressing on the part of Queensland Senator Barry O’Sullivan.

The estimates hearing of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee raised the fact the implementation process put in place by the former Minister for Agriculture, to create a new direct-elected, unified advocacy body for cattle producers, had failed.

CCA walked away from the process in January, saying it would instead put its resources into enhancing what currently exists. The big producer body has the support of state farming organisations but MLA has not weighed into the matter.

Other breakaway producer groups have vowed to continue to put together a new body, which effectively means two major advocacy organisations will eventually exist - precisely the opposite of what the senate inquiry recommended.

The new body has been named Cattle Producers of Australia and its drivers say it must replace CCA as it had been well-established CCA’s current structure was inadequate.

Senator O’Sullivan indicated a sign from MLA on whether that was or was not the case would go a long way to guiding producers and sorting the mess out.​

Mr Norton replied: “I think we need to be very careful in asking MLA to get into agri-political areas because that is something specifically not part of their charter.”

Senator O’Sullivan said the fact MLA provided funds to CCA justified an interest in its structure.

Mr Norton explained: “We have a service agreement with CCA, and other peak industry councils, whereby funding goes to services around capability building within the respective council. CCA would contest that money is keeping them afloat.”

Senator O’Sullivan said the fact was “there is a serious void of representation of cattle producers in this country.”

Aa

From the front page

Sponsored by