Prev
Next

Is this the end of the Aussie family farm?

Lucy Kippist

by Lucy Kippist

10 Jan 05:55am

Must Reads

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses - this is a caption

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses

16

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this - this is a caption

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this

53

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it? - this is a caption

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it?

124

Filed under: Farmers, Foreign Investment, Joe Hockey, National Farmers Federation, The Greens

78 comments

Foreign investors have been snapping at the heels of Aussie farms. In spite of Cyclone Yasi, fires, floods, supermarket wars, the carbon tax and the coal seam gas industry, more than $180m worth of blue-chip farming land has been sold in south-eastern Australia since last spring, with continued interest reported from Europe, United States and China.

So Bluey, shall we sell this lot off to China?

In other words, the world is hungry. According to the UN, the planet has 80 million new mouths to feed and by 2050, 70 per cent of people will live in urban areas. It’s no big surprise then that everyone wants a bit of Australia.

Aussie farms are a sound investment. Of the 135,996 farms in Australia, 120,941 operate as agricultural producers. The cattle, wheat and milk industries generate 12 per cent of the national GDP, a rate that’s growing. But if we sell it all off to the highest bidder, what will that mean for the future of Australian farming?

Three men at the big end of town are heading into (a somewhat ironic) self-protection mode. Liberal MP Joe Hockey is pushing for a review of foreign investment guidelines. Senator Nick Xenophon wants the focus to be on selling “the food and not the land”, while Senator Bill Heffernan has argued for the protection of our strategic sovereignty.

Yet, according to the farmers, foreign investment isn’t all bad. After ten years of drought, most farms are experiencing some of the best agricultural conditions to date. And there’s real evidence of life flowing back into farming communities.

Jock Laurie is the president of the National Farmers’ Federation. He’s also been a sheep and cattle farmer for the past 35 years.

He says foreign investment has had a long and quite amicable relationship with Australian farming, mostly because of its positive impact on the market. Laurie says any “increase” in selling off farms is a casualty of the drought; a back-log of debt-ridden people ready to sell and others who are just keen to take advantage of the lucrative deals coming their way.

Carbon tax and the coal seam gas industry are the biggest bugbears for today’s farmer, Laurie told The Punch. The introduction of the tax will make it “even harder to keep farm costs down and profits up” and the increasing influence of the coal seam gas industry has left many concerned and “intimidated” by the dominance of the big companies through the negotiations process.

In this area, farmers have strong public support. A Galaxy poll commissioned by The Greens last November found 70 per cent of Australians supported a “go slow” moratorium on the industry, until the full effects and potential damages of coal seam gas are understood.

But 2012 is not off to a good start. Here in New South Wales, a “fracking” ban imposed by the State Government on the coal seam gas industry, expired on December 31 without review. It’s a huge oversight and one that leaves the industry free to power “full steam ahead,” says Jeremy Buckingham, a NSW Greens MLC.

And these aren’t the only pressures on the family farm. A hundred years ago, children of farmers had little choice but to accept their lot in the family business. These days things are a little different.

The average Australian farmer is between 55 and 60 years of age. In most cases, that’s older than they’ve ever been. Plus, thanks to tertiary education and new career opportunities, the younger generations don’t necessarily want to take over the family farm.

According to Tim Lane, a partner in proAGtive, a rural business consultancy, family farm succession planning has become increasingly complicated, with some families needing up to 12 months of negotiations before reaching an agreement.

“Foreign investment has not really changed how we do things too drastically. It has just offered another level of expectation of what the farm is worth.”

So where does this leave the family farm?

“The younger generations still have interest in continuing on the farm, but they want a road map and some mentoring on how to do that,” says Lane.

Jock Laurie also shares this positive view for the future.

“Family enterprise will stack up because people are committed; they work long hours and don’t pay themselves a large pay packet. I’ve got two boys who will both end up on the land.

“If I didn’t see a future for them, I wouldn’t be doing this,“ he says.

Most commented

431Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
390There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
336Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
266Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...

78 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Nathan says:

      05:19am | 10/01/12

      The “fracking” issue is highly concerning considering it seems the research into the affects is limited at best and what research there is shows potential negative impacts. For some reasons these companies get a free ride to do what they want

      Reply

    • Cate says:

      08:26am | 10/01/12

      Sad isn’t it.  No it is criminal.  The Government couldn’t give a toss.  The Farmers are human and sell to the highest bidder, and big stations are exporting to overseas markets and selling the scrag to the local market.Just so long as these big stations associated with Elders continue to supply the Aussie farmer is gone.  If people are going to eat meat, make sure it is not from a supermarket, but a butcher who is supplying locally.  Meat in supermarkets is toxic.  Only the people of Australia can help same any of our primary industries as Australia is for sale.
      I don’t eat red meat anymore, however I don’t believe everyone has to give it up either.  It is a personal choice along with dairy.  When I did, I only purchased from the butcher and locally owned and produced dairy which I have also given away.  I buy (Hopefully organic, truly, free range eggs and chicken and Australian caught fish.
      We are an island, why are we importing fish??

    • scumbag says:

      02:20pm | 10/01/12

      Cate is barking up the wrong gum tree. Australian consumers have ALWAYS played second fiddle in the domestic meat market. And the beef and mutton farmers have been less than honest about their personal fiscal situation, at least in the public arena. Farmers ‘associated with’  Elders, are virtually controlled by Elders, because they’re in debt to Elders, who finance their loans. Don’t give me that crap about farmers being “only human”. Talk about the ‘landed gentry’!. They’re always alive, and conspicuous in country towns along the east coast over the Great Divide. They’re as much in the same league as Dodgy Brothers cheap car sales as anyone. And don’t believe the crap about “oh, we must pass the property down to our sons and daughters, it’s been in the family for 300 generations”. Well Cate, you’re not going to convince anyone much about your personal preferences, at your commercial level.

    • Against the Man says:

      05:36am | 10/01/12

      Too simple really. What has Gillard done to protect our farm land? Don’t deflect and talk about Howard or Abbott. ALP federal bozos have been destroying Australia since 2007. So what has she done? Too busy carring Kyle’s award to protect Australian’s land I see wink

      Reply

    • Nathan says:

      06:25am | 10/01/12

      Did you actually read the piece at all?

      It is basically saying that foreign investment is not a bad thing. Allot of farm land is now being farmed the way that it should be as they can get there hands on the capital they need. When farmers want to sell their land in drought and Australians don’t want to buy it what the hell is anybody meant to do.

      Australia is being destroyed? Now take a deep breath there and come back down to earth, the country can feed its self, unemployment is low, the economy is fundamentally strong and we don’t have serious crime problem. I think maybe you might want to read the section in the newspaper that starts with WORLD NEWS might give you perspective. One example showing how Australia is being destroyed would be nice

    • persephone says:

      06:44am | 10/01/12

      $180 million isn’t a huge amount of money when we’re talking property - I would hazard a guess that it’s not particularly out of the ordinary - particularly when we’re talking about large tracts of farmland.

      Look at the article referenced by Lucy; the two largest property sales listed ($25 million, $7 million) both went to local buyers.

      So it’s not even ‘$180 million of land sold to foreigners’.

      For all we know, there’s no difference between now and 2007.

      You need to show that there’s a problem before you can start whinging that it isn’t being tackled, and there’s very little evidence (if any) that there is one.

    • Economist says:

      08:26am | 10/01/12

      Pers stats below highlight the issue. It’s a non issue. It’s not like we’re exporting the farm, the soil etc. The reason for the investment is that prices of food are expected to rise dramatically over the next 20 years. Australia is a net exporter of food products. These foreigners are not exactly going to demand that we starve and export the food to their nation etc.

      As for talking about Abbott and co., its quite reasonable to do so, given that they’re sitrring up the usual xenophobic nonsense

    • Labor are a bad bunch says:

      11:11am | 10/01/12

      @ Economist and persephone. Where do we draw the line? When 50% is owned by foreigners? Next point - yes they will export food to their country if need be, that is why they are buying it all up. Why is China accumulating minerals and land rights world wide. If you want to hold Abbott accountable that is fine but first get the PM to actually tell us why they have things under control and explain herself. Why do we not focus on the current PM when all she does is get no results? This is an election issue for me. ALP not getting my vote. And using the term xenophobic in the wrong context tells me you are an ALP ranter, all your comments mean nothing.

    • Michael Cinise says:

      11:32am | 10/01/12

      $180 million isn’t a big amount?

      So when your roof leaks a few drops you would ignore it? So when the roof caves in maybe that is the point to panic?

      This is a national security issue and part of a 50 year plan for this country.

      Even if it was $20 million any foreign ownersip needs to be reviewed. It seems the comments on the punch are made by very unAustralian, naive people who just don’t understand.

      Take it from someone who has worked with foreign governments, they will buy us out and enslave us in a second. It is winning a war without fighting.

    • Economist says:

      01:02pm | 10/01/12

      Labb, xenophobia is the unreasonable fear of foreigners, the context applies.

    • Against the Man says:

      01:15pm | 10/01/12

      persephone, thanks for picking the minority side on this issue once again, combine this with the asylum seeker debacle, looks like Labor are on track smile I’m just leading you guys into the perfect trap.
       
      Anyway this is becoming too easy. Oh by the way Economist the fear isn’t unreasonable. If it were there would be no report to hand into the Federal government. Except the lost of points on this one big man.

    • Mahhrat says:

      05:46am | 10/01/12

      And so the malady malingers.

      Why do we sell our assets in this country?  It doesn’t make sense to me.

      Reply

    • Nathan says:

      06:27am | 10/01/12

      I would ask a different question here, what Australians are interested in buying Australian farms?

    • Steve says:

      09:08am | 10/01/12

      Willing seller meeting willing buyer.

      People sell assets because they either no longer want to own them, or the business has gone bust. 

      Non-Australian sometimes buy them because a) Australians dont want to buy or b) they are prepared to pay more. 

      What is the alternative?  Forcing families to keep owning farms (or failing farms) because it is supporting ‘Australianism’.

      And whoever buys the farm (or the mine or the airline or whatever) has to obey Australian laws and regulations and pay competitive wages…

    • Craig says:

      06:15am | 10/01/12

      What is the rate of Australians buying land BACK from foreign investors?

      Without this information the rate of sale to overseas investors is meaningless.

      It would also be interesting to look at the rate of land purchase by Australians in other countries.

      How much land is actually owned by Australians compared to the land area of Australia (and how is it used)? That would be an interesting figure to track over time.

      Reply

    • persephone says:

      06:23am | 10/01/12

      So if the younger generation isn’t interested in taking over the family farm, then is ‘the death of the family farm’ a bad thing?

      As for the ‘foreigners buying up our land’ thing, firstly, you don’t provide any evidence that this is on the increase (there’s two hundred plus years of foreigners owning our land) or that it’s a bad thing if they do.

      Foreigners buying land drives up prices, so the farmer selling up gets a better deal. It brings money into the country.The foreigners then employ people to work the land for them, giving those employees far more security of income than they would receive farming the land themselves.

      And, according to the ABS survey carried out last year, http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mediareleasesbyReleaseDate/F98DB4640388725FCA257905007C152A?OpenDocument
      the amount of land we’re talking about is very small.

      99% of Australian agricultural businesses are entirely owned by Australians.
      89% of farming land is owned by Australians.

      The cruncher? The last survey of this type was done back in 1983/4.

      There haven’t been any significant changes in these figures since then.

      So there’s no evidence that there’s an increase in foreign ownership of Australian farming land.

      Whether family farms have a future is an entirely different issue, and one that ultimately will be decided by the families themselves.

      Reply

    • Brad McT says:

      07:08am | 10/01/12

      persephone a very short sighted view. The government needs to be actively keeping an eye on things. In NZ any land sale over 5 hec to foreigners kicks in a government alert. The Gillard bunch have dropped the ball on boarder protection and this issue isn’t going to be on their radar as they don’t care. It blows my mind that there are Australians like you that just don’t see the forest for the trees.

    • persephone says:

      07:50am | 10/01/12

      Brad

      so nothing’s changed since 1984 and we should get all stressed about it?

      I will remind you that Australia has always had foreign ownership of land. (Lord Vestey, for example, owned 63,000 square miles).

      There is nothing to indicate that this is an increasing problem (if it is one at all).

      And the fact that the ABS released the first survey on foreign land ownership since 1984 in September last year shows that the Gillard government is paying more attention to this issue than the previous government did.

    • Nathan says:

      07:51am | 10/01/12

      @Brad
      Typical right winger, if somebody doesn’t agree with you they must be wrong. NZ have a whole different set of issues, namely their farming land per hec is allot more valuable for farming than here so they have to be careful.

      WTF does border protection have to do with it. Just so you know if the government persisted with Nauru that would be a failure as boat people are well aware that 70% of them ended up in Australia or NZ.

      Foreign investment increases capital in Australia, farms that would of gone under are now operating and employing people this surely is the most important issue.

    • AdamC says:

      09:16am | 10/01/12

      Persephone, excellent points.

      I agree entirely, to the extent that I have nothing to add!

    • fairsfair says:

      10:28am | 10/01/12

      Well said Persephone.

    • Little Joe says:

      06:38am | 10/01/12

      I really do not understand this policy.

      In many other countries only allow for the leasing of land by foreign investors.

      Reply

    • Kate says:

      08:06am | 10/01/12

      I agree. Also, I would like to know the full extent of foreign ownership. I think most people would be quite shocked to learn how much food producting land is already owned by overseas interests.  $180m worth of land bought in a spring is not the whole picture.

    • Lucy Kippist

      Lucy Kippist says:

      08:15am | 10/01/12

      Morning all, thanks for your comments. Realise this seems an oversight, but in truth this kind of data is near impossible to find. According to Jock Laurie, nobody has a real hold on exactly how much and where and what is being sold over an extended period of time - I’m guessing this will be part of Hockey’s proposed investigations. If anyone has info to correct me/this, I’d love to hear it.  And another piece can come of that. In any case what I wanted to emphasise here was the farmer’s real concerns - which above all things appear to be CSG and keeping costs down - not foreign investment.

    • persephone: says:

      08:57am | 10/01/12

      Kate

      Read the article linked to in Lucy’s piece.

      $180 million is the total amount of land sold, not the amount of land sold to foreigners.

      The only two land sales cited are to Australian buyers.

      There is absolutely no evidence of any kind to suggest that foreign ownership of land is increasing (which might be why Lucy can’t find it).

    • RyaN says:

      09:54am | 10/01/12

      @persephone: “There is absolutely no evidence of any kind to suggest that foreign ownership of land is increasing” yes because your corrupt commie government is hiding this from the people.
      Nothing like a propaganda agent trying to pull the wool over your eyes, they all look the same.

    • Brad McT says:

      07:13am | 10/01/12

      I’m surprised the Federal government is so casual about this whole issue. Australian future food and water supplies plus national security issues plus sovereignty issues at stake. I know the next time an election comes around the Gillard government will be kicked out with great pleasure by my Australia! This country has enough of this illegit government and their lack of action in protecting our interest.

      Reply

    • Nathan says:

      08:15am | 10/01/12

      Believe or not the issue you talk of has been around since before 07 and who was in power then? The LNP is not suddenly go and change all these things that they haven’t in the past.

      Foreign owners don’t want to run it into the ground they see it as a business that needs to be profitable. As far as water security goes have a look at the stupid cotton farmers and how much water they use to produce a commodity that can be done else where without the impact on the environment and water supply. To me the idea of growing crops that require the ground to be flooded in Australia is a joke

    • acotrel says:

      07:24am | 10/01/12

      @Persephone
      ‘So if the younger generation isn’t interested in taking over the family farm, then is ‘the death of the family farm’ a bad thing?’

      What exactly IS the younger generation interested in doing besides drugs and playing computer games ?  It seems to me that lamenting the passing of the ‘family farm’ is as futile as lamenting the passing of our manufacturing industry.  It is not especially a Gillard government problem, it is the outcome of the plastic way we’ve all decided to live.  I wonder what ‘tertiary education’ the young pursue these days ?  It is certainly not involving science or engineering, in any case if you want a career using that, you’ll be looking for a long time.  Where are our ‘entrepreneurs’, the young people starting industrial projects ?  Oh I forgot, our tertiary institutions don’t teach project management.  Too bad, Australia is about to curl up and die, because we can no longer ACHIEVE !

      Reply

    • persephone says:

      09:06am | 10/01/12

      actorel

      some broad generalisations there!

      My nephew has just completed his apprenticeship on a dairy farm, so it’s not necessarily a case of young people not wanting to work in agriculture.

      But why farm for yourself, when you can enjoy the same lifestyle without the risk?

      As for young people in general, I think you’ll find they’re interested in the same things young people have been interested in since the dawn of time.

      Civilisation has managed to struggle along despite this.

    • MD says:

      09:18am | 10/01/12

      “Oh I forgot, our tertiary institutions don’t teach project management. “

      Then what the hell am I studying?

      Another fool blaming the younger generation for everything. Your lot runs the show remember?

    • amy says:

      10:08am | 10/01/12

      acetroll…dont go there..

      just…dont…...nope…gotta go there

      OK, , WHAT is wrong with computer games?

      no…seriousy….WHAT? ohh thats right

      NOTHING…not a damn thing,

      but anyway Im sure what your trying to say other then “the children thease days…” ohhh get off your high hoarse, really peopel have said that about you at one point Im sure

      anyway, I grew up on a farm, my brother (and me) had no interesti in farm work..he now studies in psycology in Melbourne (Yeah Im sure that just gave you a heart-attack from sheer rage)

      my brother is not a farmer…its just not right for him

      its not a bad thing nowdays that we have the opertunity to go and study what ever silly thing we want….its our choice in the end..and up to us to do what we want

    • ago says:

      07:29am | 10/01/12

      this article highlights the direction we, as australians are heading in.
      both sides of politics have long been taking away from us, firstly by removing tariffs and the dsturction of the manufactoring industries, now the job is being done on agriculture, we are lucky that we have never gone hungry, but as a result dont value food security,
      the murray darling basin plan dosnet give adequte value to the production of food, but puts the enviroment, way way in front,
      the only industry that is being supported is mining,
      what happens when the reources reach thier end?
      with both farming and manufacturing they could continue, but mining is the process of getting it out of the ground, and once it is out, you dont get any more, it is finite.
      now there may well be plenty of naysayers who say that we cant compete with the bric countries of brazil, india and china, but do we really wont too.
      i enjoy the fact we have a good free education system, where everybody has the right to learn how to read and write, and have too the oppurtunity to achieve,
      i enjoy the fact that we have free health care when it is needed,
      neither system is perfect but its better than most other countries
      we cannot compete with asia when it comes wo wages, but they dont have the standard of living we have
      the people in govenrment (of either side) should forget all this globalistion bullshit and start looking after our own,

      Reply

    • dancan says:

      07:44am | 10/01/12

      When I first started reading this my first thought was “damn farmers selling out Australia” but I take that back. 

      Between all the pressures of farming and constant back end rogering farmers have to put up with from coles and woolies, can I blame them for saying yes when an overseas investor offers them 100%+ of current market value for their property?  No I can’t

      Reply

    • Frustrated Farmer says:

      10:06am | 10/01/12

      Thank you, dancan, for such a level headed response. You are so correct in your summation. We take a pretty rough deal from these major buyers. The sad part of our story as primary producers is that we don’t have anyone to pass the costs on to.

      If someone wants to buy my land, I will go. The last 4 years has destroyed my family: constant droughts & floods, low commodity prices, artificially high exchange rates and excessively high interest rates. Between Tony Burke removing exceptional circumstances support (this was not easy to get& please note the EXCEPTIONAL) , Joe Ludwig’s ignorant handling of & damage to export markets, Kevin Rudd’s selling out of our dollar value and Wayne Swan’s inept management of business interest rates,agriculture has suffered irreparable damage.

      Add to this the propaganda put out by Green groups including PETA & their ill-informed kind, food production in Australia is in jeopardy. Jock Laurie may suggest that the world will need feeding but he neglects to mention the massive exporting of produce by Indian companies who have purchased Australian farmland. This produce leaves our country with no value-adding and essentially tax free.

      How can we compete with that?

    • acotrel says:

      08:07am | 10/01/12

      @ago
      ‘the people in govenrment (of either side) should forget all this globalistion bullshit and start looking after our own, ‘

      I don’t believe ‘forgetting globalisation’ is the answer, and ‘looking after our own’ can be taken too far. The Japanese didn’t have a problem re-industrialising after WW2.  They set up their Ministry of Technology and Industry, and picked the eyes out of every industry on the planet.  I have my doubts that any Australian politician would be competent to lead such an organisation.  If you look at what Kim Carr’s and Sophie Mirabella’s capabilities might be, it’s really a bad joke !

      Reply

    • davo says:

      08:17am | 10/01/12

      Foreign investment in agriculture (renewable) is bad.
      Foreign investment in mining (nonrenewable)  is good?

      Reply

    • Static says:

      08:25am | 10/01/12

      People on here are blaming the ALP and the Libs when it comes to our farms being sold etc,but I think the elephent in the room is the LNP.yes the party that was the country party. What have they ever done for the farmers?. Oh sorry I forgot, Clive Palmer owns them now.

      Reply

    • Farm Raised says:

      10:00am | 10/01/12

      I think you need to look more into it before you make this assumption.  Now i admit that the the nationals can be quite usless at times and go totally of the plot. I remember watching Barnaby Joyce fire up into a tireade about the labour government when someone asked him for the contact details of the PM office so they can send a Letter. But have a look look at how many Pollies represents such a large area? Not many.  The Nationals do understand the issues facing farming it just that they are not listined to much.
      Now why should i vote for the ALP when their Agriculture Ministers as basically been missing for the last few years.  I actually had to tell my mum that the person on the screen was the Agriculture Minister.  If you looked back at the news reports when the cabnet Joe was menention briefly that he should have gone but not why.  Secondly why should I vote for the ALP who have introduced laws that have caused the goal post to be moved back a few years .  the people in the city who are in a simialar finacncial situation are not taxed the same way in fact they are better of because the investments are not being used to pay of loans or buy expensive equipment.  I am not whining about i am just saying it doesn’t give me a reason to vote for labor.

      The Greens policy on agriculture seem in thory actually good.  But i have nevery actually seeme them talk or do anthing aobut them.  in fact some of the laws seem contradictory to the current city greens dogma.  i would need to see the greens to grow more sensiable to vote for them.

      Nationals are not the best party for the country they can be quite useless but the tohers are really useless

    • Against the Man says:

      09:43pm | 10/01/12

      I guess you expect the opposition to make policy? Or maybe you don’t believe in the illegit Gillard government? Can’t blame LNP till they win the next election. Till that time keep taking aim at the Gillard bunch smile

    • Dieter Moeckel says:

      09:23am | 10/01/12

      The family farm was sold of years ago. Not only to multinationals but to Australian incorporated companies who then sell on to foreign multinationals. Ucharonidge and one other was the only family owned property on the Barkley until recently, now Ucharonidge is also foreign owned first bought by Packer then sold to an English firm.
      I fail to see the logic in selling off the farm, private ownership of land is an abomination. By all means sell the right to use the land but not the land itself. The ownership of land should in perpetuity be vested in the people of the country not private or corporate or multinational interests.
      What is the value of owning the suburban quarter acre when you can’t leave it visit the vast open spaces owned by private interests, or you can’t access the coast because access is owned by private interests.
      Selling of the farm inevitably leads to self inflicted imprisonment.

      Reply

    • jhamiltonwa says:

      10:03am | 10/01/12

      Yes, Dieter, why oh why can’t we see how wonderful countries without private ownership are and how happy the people are who live in them? It’s not as if we even have to look overseas to see how well your proposed model works, we have the shining example of our remote aboriginal utopias staring us in the face.

    • Farmer's Friend says:

      09:46am | 10/01/12

      “But 2012 is not off to a good start. Here in New South Wales, a “fracking” ban imposed by the State Government on the coal seam gas industry, expired on December 31 without review. It’s a huge oversight and one that leaves the industry free to power “full steam ahead,” says Jeremy Buckingham, a NSW Greens MLC”

      Any evidence to support this? Greens propaganda does not count.

      What are the risks to farming from fraccing that occurs in proximity to highly saline aquifers (i.e. not useful water) at 1000m below surface? Farmers use ground water and highly productive aquifers at circa 100m below surface. Fraccing in Aus is v different to USA - given nature of coal seams. Please do some research to support your arguments.

      Gov has been studying aquifers for 50 years - has a fairly good handle on potential risks to farming land. This would be apparent if you had done some research.

      Farmers’ concerns about CSG relate to property values and access to resources. Farmers are concerned about having CSG companies come onto their land to explore for gas - which is permitted by law. The state owns the resources below the surface.

      Concerns about risks to farming land are not well founded but are being exploited by anti-CSG lobby. Since when have the Greens supported farmers’ rights?

      Also - fraccing ban extended until April 2012. Again, a little research may be useful next time.

      Reply

    • Shane says:

      09:57am | 10/01/12

      hey so mining companies are allowed to sell off what they dig out of the ground to the highest offshore bidder yet farmers aren’t allowed to sell their ground to the highest offshore bidder?

      it doesn’t matter who you sell to, either the local company that’s owned by an overseas corporation or someone in china, the fact is that it’s a free market and famers can do whatever they like. shall we get the government to regulate our lives even further with more legislation saying what we all can and can’t do or legislate just against miners and farmers?

      if i’d struggled to run the family farm for the past 15 years but now while experiencing a boom time, someone offered me 3 times what I thought my land was worth - who wouldn’t jump at that? I doubt you’d find anyone with the strength to say no. Hell, i’d take my millions and probably invest it back into those same companies through an offshore family trust or find some other way to minimise my tax like every other bloody millionaire in this country does. Who the hell wouldn’t do that? You’d me mental not to.

      Reply

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      10:51am | 10/01/12

      Don’t get me started on the subject of family trusts and tax avoidance. There is a special hell reserved for these kind of people…..

    • Robert says:

      10:56am | 10/01/12

      Have to agree that foreign ownership is not the problem. Regardless of who owns the farm the produce will go to the same markets and exports will be the same. Letting mining companies destroy these farms is the real danger.

      Reply

    • Shane says:

      11:05am | 10/01/12

      there’s a hell now for people that don’t want to pay tax? get real. from income tax to GST on goods that we buy using money we’re already taxed on, to stamp duty every time you buy a used car or house (again, using money you already paid tax on) through to the countless other federal, state and council taxes, fees, tariffs, duties, the Government doesn’t deserve a cent more than you pay. And if you find ways to make that even less, so be it. The Government blindly wastes money because it’s a bottomless pit for them.

      If people that oppose that go to hell, I want no part of your f**ked up religion pal.

      Reply

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      11:40am | 10/01/12

      No wonder Australia is so f**cked up with attitudes like yours. Sure let’s all not pay tax and watch the infrastructure and services go to crap. The problem is that you want to be a freeloader and are trying to justify it. I don’t want any part of your civic responsibility because you don’t have any. Good day to you, sir.

    • Labor are a bad bunch says:

      11:15am | 10/01/12

      Xenophone, Heffern have a point. I find it interesting to see the ALP hardliners on the Punch are just like their leader Gillard: willing to sell out Australia for their own gain or point of view! I hope they keep it up, the ALP loss at the next election will be catastrophic!

      Reply

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      11:39am | 10/01/12

      The selling the farm issue is no big deal and no more important than any other Australian industry that has been lost, with accompanying skills, to more long term thinking foreign governments.  Our stupidity (this has been going on for many, many years) and deviousness is well represented by Joe Hockey’s hypocrisy and point scoring; by calling for a review of foreign investment guidelines at this time.  History shows that the conservatives are far better at selling the “farm” than the Labor Party. 

      I believe Xenophon’s intentions and motives are real on this issue but Hockey and Heffernan, peeuw.  Why didn’t they (in fairness, Hawke and Keating Governments were just as bad) do something when Howard was in power when Singapore’s smarter leaders, through its various Government owned / controlled companies, started buying any Australian quality business that they could find.  Our leaders at the time must not have realised that Singapore Telecommunications, Singapore Power and Temasek are Singapore government owned instrumentalities.

      I personally find it ironic that the farmers are complaining when there are no more adamant and vocal supporters of free trade than a farmer.  They are the first to complain about the likes of Japan, USA and the EU when trade barriers are imposed to protect their own farmers.  They are the first to complain when they can not use foreign ships (cheaper crews) to transport their goods by sea around Australia.  They are the first to complain when someone wants to bring in foreign apples or any other produce.  They are the first to buy a Mercedes when their cheque comes in after a good crop.  The farm itself is only another commodity to be bought and sold to whoever will pay.

      The Australian farmer has made complaining an art form with their hypocrisy and selfishness.  They do not give a breath of support when other Australian industries go down because of cheap imports.  They will complain endlessly about their neighbour selling his farm to overseas interests but you just try to get in the way of them and a Chinese buyer with a wallet full of money, and see how you go.  They will probably then want a subsidy or taxpayer handout to keep the farm in Australian hands.

      The Australian foreign investment guidelines are too important to be a political football and point scoring opportunity for the Government or Opposition.  The FIRB guidelines, like so may other issues, should be approached in a bi-partisan and holistic manner, However I am not confident that we are capable of doing this important work.

      Reply

    • scumbag says:

      04:07pm | 10/01/12

      Absolutely. The FIRB guidelines seem to be another toothless tiger, when it comes to the DEFINITION of it’s own guidelines, Another QUANGO organisation, funded by you and I, the forelock-tugging taxpayer.

    • RyaN says:

      11:51am | 10/01/12

      Well its time to put pressure on your LNP members now to put in place a policy where no non-citizen can own land in Australia.

      While you are at it, no dual citizenship also.

      You are either in or you are out, simple as that.

      Reply

    • marley says:

      12:24pm | 10/01/12

      @RyaN - I don’t agree at all - and for very personal reasons.

      I got my residence visa in Australia in 2005, sponsored by my Australian spouse.  We bought a house a few months later.  Your rule would have denied me, a legal permanent resident, the right to own my own home.  That’s not right.  Owning a home is a big part of making me (and any migrant) feel they have a stake in this country.

      And I got my citizenship in 2009.  But I’m a dual national.  I may even go back to Canada some day, for example if my spouse were to pass away.  Your rule would force me to make a choice either not to become an Australian citizen, or never to live again in my country of birth.  Sorry, but again I don’t agree.  I love both countries, I pay taxes in both, and I don’t see why I should have to make an unalterable choice about where I’m going to spend the next (hopefully) 30 years.

      And anyway,  how many Australian-born Aussies go and work in the UK or in Europe not on the basis of work permits but on the basis that they can get a British/Italian/Greek/Dutch passport through their parent’s citizenship?  Should they be forced to renounce their Aussie citizenship if they do so?  Or should we all just realize that the world is a more fluid place than it was a generation or two ago, that people move around, and that our society should accommodate that reality.

    • Kurisu Sonsaku says:

      12:24pm | 10/01/12

      @ RyaN - I’ve never understood dual citizenship, in Japan you can only have dual citizenship until your 22nd Birthday. Property laws are a lot different to Oz too.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      01:11pm | 10/01/12

      @RyaN- I agree with you. Furthermore Australian citizens that are absent from Australia for more than two years should have to reapply for immigration back into Australia. Either you are in or out.

    • AFR says:

      02:41pm | 10/01/12

      Marley - I know we’re getting off topic, but your words were spot on for me. I’ve got friends who have moved to Australia and very much love the place. They take a great lifestyle from Australia, but also contribute just as much and often moer in return. I think its ridiculous that they should have to swear a sole allegence to one country over the other for the rest of their lives.

    • RyaN says:

      03:45pm | 10/01/12

      @marley: So if Canada goes to war against Australia, who do you fight for?

      Fact is that there is no reason why you cannot continue to live in Australia as a permanent resident however if you cannot commit to the country then why should you be allowed to vote on its future if you can just upsticks to Canada if we get a dropkick dictator because you voted for them.
      On the house thing, if your partner is Australian then put the house in his name, simple. If you aren’t an Australian citizen then don’t buy a house here, if you don’t want to commit to being an Australian citizen then why should you commit to owning land or a house here?

      I too am an immigrant but I am certainly no fence sitter with a foot in whatever country offers me the easiest place to run to. Besides that, there is no reason why you cannot reapply to be a citizen of Canada if you so decide to move back there based on your birth certificate, at the same time you would renounce your citizenship of Australia. Am I missing something that might stop you from never being able to live in your country of birth again?

      I 110% agree with Shane from Melbourne also, if you don’t want to live here then why should you be allowed to remain a citizen. If you are an Australian overseas applying for citizenship of another country then you should by default lose your citizenship of Australia as you have made your choice.

      Take a look at when Israel and Lebanon had a little tiff, every Lebanese man and his dog was “Lebanese as” until the bombs started dropping then all of a sudden they were “true blue” Aussies and screaming about having to be rescued.
      No way this should ever be allowed, you are either in or you are out, period!

      @AFR: In this theoretical case, no one would telling them they have to swear allegiance to stay here, there are many permanent residents from foreign countries. The incentive to become a citizen would be to be allowed to own land and vote.

    • RyaN says:

      04:04pm | 10/01/12

      @Kurisu Sonsaku: Japan clearly has it right then, I am sure that foreign investment companies don’t come along and buy up half of Japan, use the land for their own exploits benefiting the people of the country the company originates from taking those benefits away from Japan.

      Clearly we in Australia here have a lot to learn, perhaps we are just too arrogant to learn.

    • Kurisu Sonsaku says:

      07:23pm | 10/01/12

      Eggssakly RyaN;

      If you wish to have citizenship, then you should only be entitled one citizenship, your new country or your original country there can’t be two choices.

      Yes there are strict criteria for non-citizens getting property, as it should be too. Things such as you can own the structure but not the ground it sits on., you can buy an apartment but have no claim other than the 36 or 74 tatami in floor space.

    • marley says:

      06:06am | 11/01/12

      @RyaN - if Canada and Australia go to war, I would support whichever country I believed to be in the right.  I have never accepted the American premise of “my country, right or wrong.”

      On housing, what if I’d been on my own as a new migrant?  Are you saying I shouldn’t be allowed to own a house?  Or that I should have to gift my partner half the value of a house without having my name on the deed?  That doesn’t seem right to me.

      As for reapplying for Canadian citizenship, there’s this little matter of having to qualify for immigration first.  Getting citizenship back isn’t automatic.  If it were, people would renounce their citizenship and get it back all the time.  And that would make your argument meaningless, because giving up citizenship would be a gesture without significance.

      As for the Lebanese, well, perhaps the issue isn’t that the Lebanese all went back to Lebanon;  perhaps the issue is that they were able to get their Aussie pensions paid outside the country, and also that Australia felt it had a responsibility to its citizens there. There’s nothing that obliges Australia to offer assistance to dual nationals in their second country of nationality, you know.  That’s a choice Australia chooses to make, not an obligation under international conventions.

      There’s another aspect too which perhaps you haven’t considered.  I lived in Australia for several years legally as a non-resident.  I only started to feel a commitment to the country when I became a legal resident, and especially when we built our house.  That said to me, this is permanent, this is where I’m going to live for the forseeable future.  Becoming a citizen gave me an even deeper commitment to the country.  If I’d been denied these things, I don’t think I’d feel half as committed to Australia as I do now.  Would that really be a good thing? 

      To me, the bottom line is, by all means place restrictions on land and property ownership by non-resident foreigners but leave permanent residents and dual nationals, and even Australians living abroad, the right to own property here.

    • RyaN says:

      09:20am | 11/01/12

      @marley: So what you are saying is that if Australia were to end up in a war and you didn’t agree with Australia’s position you would be a traitor?

      “On housing, what if I’d been on my own as a new migrant?  Are you saying I shouldn’t be allowed to own a house?  “
      That is exactly what I am saying. You should not be allowed to own a house until you have made a commitment to become a full citizen of Australia forsaking all other citizenships of any other country. It may be inconvenient to you but it means security and people who are genuinely committed to Australia.

      “there’s this little matter of having to qualify for immigration first. ” So what, you were born there, you have a birth certificate, going through immigration would not be an issue. Are you saying that its the inconvenience of having to make a commitment to a country that is the problem then? Its surely isn’t all about your convenience is it?

      “I only started to feel a commitment to the country when I became a legal resident, and especially when we built our house. ” which feeds directly into the citizenship part, if you are going to commit to a house, then commit to the country, easy as.

      “If I’d been denied these things, I don’t think I’d feel half as committed to Australia as I do now.  Would that really be a good thing? “
      If the basis of your commitment to Australia is being allowed to own a house and be allowed to have citizenship in another country where you can run to if the going gets tough here then yes it would be a good thing because really does Australia and its people want that sort of “commitment”?

      I could even agree on your argument on property ownership of permanent residents, this could be restricted by allowing ownership of permanent residents who reside 10 months or more of the year in Australia and is your only property where you live, no investment properties.

      I most certainly would never agree with dual nationality, this to me is reprehensible and indicative of cowards who would sooner run than stand and fight for this country when they going gets tough.

    • marley says:

      02:34pm | 11/01/12

      @RyaN - well, I don’t reckon it’s very likely that Canada and Australia would come to blows, but if they did, and if I thought Canada was in the right of it, I guess I’d be in the protest marches.  Or I’d pick up sticks and leave.  But no, I would never commit treason.  There’s a major difference between refusing to support a country if it’s wrong, and betraying it.

      As for all the property argument, well, if I don’t have rights here, why should I feel committed to Australia?  Why should I want to be a citizen of a country that treats me as an unwelcome visitor?  The Germans did that with the Turks, and it hasn’t worked out well at all for them.  So, I could sit here for years, feeling no loyalty whatsoever.  Or I could be a citizen with property and a feeling of commitment to Australia.  I know which is the better option for Australia.

      As for giving up citizenship and just going back to Canada - ah, no. If you renounce your Canadian (or any) citizenship, you’re not a citizen any more.  You are a foreign national and have no more right to enter the country and stay there than any foreign national.  You have to get an immigrant visa first.  Your birth certificate isn’t enough. 

      And I think you missed my point about dual citizenship.  If the government of the day chose to kowtow to dual nationals for the sake of a few marginal Sydney electorates, is that the fault of the dual nationals or of the government?  If dual nationals make unreasonable demands on Australia for protection in their country of second nationality, it’s not because they have a right to Australian support, but because Australia has allowed them to believe that they will get it.  Save your rancour for the government on this one.

    • acotrel says:

      06:09pm | 11/01/12

      @Ryan
      ‘@marley: So if Canada goes to war against Australia, who do you fight for?’

      I don’t trust those New Zealanders either ! And the Italians have a history of being on the other side ! Perhaps we should immediatly start checking passports ?
      ’ ‘While you are at it, no dual citizenship also.

      You are either in or you are out, simple as that. ‘

      They didn’t check my passport when I returned from Tassy, a while back - just bloody slack !

    • Samantha says:

      12:01pm | 10/01/12

      Most of what I would like to say has already been said, but I’ll just add my two cents’ worth that I have noticed hasn’t quite been said:

      As @dancan and @Frustrated Farmer said, the constant push from multinationals or other corporations to ensure their prices are low (NOTE the recent push for low milk prices in supermarkets) means that farmers are consequently having to sell their produce to the highest bidder at substantially lower prices than they once did.  Woolies and Coles will not miss out on profits by keeping their prices down, but the farmer certainly will by being forced to sell goods cheaper.

      My dad is a potato farmer and he, along with several others, were forced to confront McCains Foods because McCains were trying to “ensure farmers were more competitve on the global market”, in other words, they were trying to half the price per ton of potatoes, meaning that whatever little profit they would make would basically be wiped out.

      I don’t think some of you people realise that the reason why people such as myself or my siblings do not choose to stay on the farm is not because we don’t want to, but there is no living to be made off it.  It’s a lot of hard work for very little return.  Sadly, it’s all my father knows and so I know that if the farm goes, he will never be the same.  Same with a lot of the stations up here in the Territory, several of them are being bought up by foreign countries at lower prices than what they are worth.

      I just wanted to point these out because there seems to be some very academic responses here that have very little real-world understanding.

      Selling Australia to the highest bidder means that one day, our beautiful landscape will no longer be owned by Australians.  And that might just mean that whenever you want to enforce land-ownership laws in the future, we may not have a leg to stand on.

      Reply

    • Against the Man says:

      01:21pm | 10/01/12

      Real World Samantha you got my vote, but I noticed no one has still acknowledged my point of what is the government of the day doing about it. They can’t address that point as it will be another nail in the coffin of our current pathetic fake federal government wink

    • Pat says:

      01:29am | 11/01/12

      Samantha:
      It one looks back just several decades ago , let’s not forget to remember that time under a federal Labor Government when the Minister for Agriculture’s expertise for the job,  was wait for it….. being, but a former train locomotive driver!!!! L.O.L (Wasn’t his name -  Scholes?). That of course should also ‘set off’ our friend Arcotrel here,  to go ballistic!  Presently farmers are caught in a two pronged ‘pincher effect’ . A useless Federal Labor Government that only cares about saving its traditional union member and voter base, in the cities. The rural environment is only important to them to be able to talk more B.S - about Gillard’s hghly politicized climate change agenda.  Secondly, the other concern is   the rampant rise of those two monster groups Coles and Woolworths controlling 80% of what Australians buy , for food. On top of which, these two monopolistic retail marketeers not only want to sell the goods but then go and also produce their own rival competing goods under things like the aggressively marketed Woolies ‘Select’ label. To drive other manufacturers not only off shelves but out of business. Yet I suspect these now mid priced Select ‘glam’ labelled products are just the same old plain “Safeway Home Brand” products in different prettier colored packaging,  at a dearer price!  Who ‘s conning who?  A great deal of these own house brands are made up of foreign ingredients . Of course,  under that misleading label ruse claim: “Made from Australian,,,,,,,and IMPORTED products” .What percentage of ‘which’  - we are never told. Even ‘Made in New Zealand source labeling’ is now used as a convenient back door for these two Corporations to cover up (for example) the fact . of say some frozen fish / vegetable or canned product - is actually coming via Asia to NZ then to Australia.  Want to eat some included processed Basa fish,  bred in some holding tank on an Asian sewerage farm???!! 

      THE TIME HAS COME FOR AUSTRALIA TO ENACT THE EQUIVALENT OF THE U.S SHERMAN ANTI -TRUST LAWS

      And used in regard to not only the restrictive practices in production / manufacture and retailing of Australian food in Australia but also for other deals made elsewhere, that curtail a PROPER open food market place.If someone wants a classic example how far reaching those U.S Laws were,  think or study the history of the stranglehold 50’s U.S movie studios had on film - right down to as far as controlling even the making of local films as well as theaters plus the restrictive distribution of all films then generally seen in Australia. Right down to your local suburban picture house.  The present foreign .rural land acquisition and food distribution problem is just a mirror example of such grossly unfair trade practices. Woolies and Coles should be forcefully made to divest their interconnecting conflict of trade interests. Pronto! And all their ‘friendly donations’ to all political parties carefully examined and scrutinized

      Big question…has Gillard and her cohorts ‘the balls’ to do it?  Since she ain’t no modern day Iron Lady, that’s for sure! And whenever the likes of Dick Smith get in on the act periodically, by appearing on T.D.T or A Current Affair renewing his lease on ‘his 5 minutes of fame’ bemoaning people not ‘buying Australian’ !, I find it totally hypocritical…After all he sold his own Dick Smith electrical business chain,  to foreign interests! I see again, he has been ‘skirting the media pack for similar ego driven self -attention’ lately, over the recent closure of that Victorian tomato sauce factory.  What a media harlot!.

    • Carl Palmer says:

      12:22pm | 10/01/12

      There is no doubt that arable land is being purchased by foreign interests. Whilst in Europe I was having a chat with my wife’s relatives who told me they had sold big chunks of their prime land to Asian interests. They also confirmed that this had been going on for quite a few years and was widespread. The farm in their back yard - and which was in their families for 50+ years was now owned by China.

      It doesn’t surprise me therefore that given that trend and recent reports in the media that it wouldn’t be going on here. As Lucy has quite rightly pointed out, Australia is big and has lots of land.

      The issue for me is this, why would we not be incentivising our farmers and aggressively growing the market? We are constantly told that we will be running out of food in the not too distant future because we will have an additional trillion mouths to feed.  Huh? We have a growth market that we can tap into in a big way and we………..? 

      I fully support Hocky, Xenophon and Heffernan propositions. We do need to have a crystal clear understanding of who is buying and owning the land. Focusing on the food and protection of our sovereignty makes complete sense to me. Like the CSG issue, I very much doubt that foreigners will have the same love, respect and continued sustenance of our land compared to what these great farmers have demonstrated over many many years.

      Yes I think there is a problem, but it is very solvable.

      Reply

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      12:23pm | 10/01/12

      Gee, this globalisation thing really worked out, eh??? 
      Samatha, you are talking protectionism, which is a sin against humanity for our crop of political masters, so blow @dancan and @Frustrated Farmer.  You are a late joiner of the “industry that got away” class in the school of the lowest common denominator in the race for the bottom. Tough titty boys and girls, get used to it.

      Reply

    • Samantha says:

      01:02pm | 10/01/12

      I must say, Gratuitous Adviser, your words are rather heated for what is essentially a discussion.  My sincerest apologies if I offended you in any way by stating my opinion that contrasted strongly with yours.

      I think I can sum up my point by saying that we just need to make sure that our nation remains ours, no matter what sort of trade exists.

    • peter says:

      12:28pm | 10/01/12

      Chris Vedalgo of the age has been trying to get a picture picture of foreign investment in the real estate market, but his FOI requests have been sandbagged. Don’t expect any straight answers from either side.

      Reply

    • Leigh says:

      02:47pm | 10/01/12

      It’s certainly “no big surprise then that everyone wants a bit of Australia. Aussie farms are a sound investment”, but it is a surprise that even Australian politicians are stupid enough to let them have it.

      If the foreign owners falter, our idiotic politicians will probably sling Australian taxpayers’ money at them, in the same way they dole it out to foreign car makers and various other industries that have gone broke, gone home leaving more unemployment, and not repairing the taxpayer handouts.

      Seriously, responsible Australian taxpayers should be interviewing political candidates; candidates shouldn’t be preselected by political parties who are more interested in putting in their mates –  usually lawyers or union hacks, with absolutely no qualifications necessary for running a country.

      Reply

    • A Weary Farmer says:

      06:39pm | 10/01/12

      Foreign investment has always been part of Australian agriculture but is becoming imbalanced. Here are some facts: Last year alone China purchased another 70,000 hectares of land in WA, it grows wheat which goes directly to China. It also owns a quarter of Southern Australia’s water.

      Qatar now owns hundreds of thousands of hectares of blue chip irrigation country in Eastern Australia where it produces lamb which is shipped directly to Qatar. Working through Australian companies like the Wentworth Group, most sellers have no idea the buyer is a foreign sovereign fund, certainly local producers cannot compete with that.

      After 26 years of so called free trade and the great millenium drought Australian farmers are reeling. Other countries are buying us out at an alarming rate - they can’t believe their luck, and our stupidity. This needs to be addressed immediately.

      Try this. Check around your home for Australian owned and produced goods. You’ll probably find just one - the food in your fridge. In another 10 years you won’t even find that. Happy Year of the Australian Farmer…

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      10:45pm | 10/01/12

      If the Australian farmer wants to sell out to overseas interests, well, it’s his land, so good luck to him, but I don’t want to see them and their families waving their aussie flags at the side of the road at the next Anzac march.

    • A Weary Farmer says:

      09:38am | 11/01/12

      Stephan, most overseas sovereign funds operate through groups like the Wentworth Group, who then purchase through local agents. If (as in most cases) the sale is being forced by the banks the farmer has no option, let alone idea, of who he is selling to.

      A neighbouring farmer cannot compete with sovereign funds. These are not foreign individuals buying our land, it is foreign governments. As Lucy rightly pointed out, no-one has any idea of just how much land is being bought, but I can assure you it is mostly the best irrigation country available.

      Short term monetory gain is not going to bode well for Australia’s agricultural future, after the past soul destroying decade the youth are leaving farming in droves. I don’t know of one young farmer around here returning to the land in a 40 klm radius, whereas just a decade ago we were a vibrant, mixed age community.

      Years of neglect, free trade utopian idealism and plain bastardry (high interest rates, red tape, market manipulation) has led to this state of affairs, to our own detriment and other countries profit. Instead of selling produce to these countries we are now handing the farm itself over to them on a plate.

      As an example, our wheat exports are now controlled by a foreign company, Cargill. This year wheat prices were equal with 1980’s prices. Increasing productivity can only go so far. Oh, and as our boy has joined the army and his great uncles and grandfather fought in New Guinea and WW1 trenches for this gtreat country, we’ll wave our damn flags with pride.

    • Hanrahan says:

      12:54pm | 11/01/12

      Well done weary farmer for stating the sitaution so well .With real estate agents and polys happy to put their particular but VERY narrow glancing views, its no wonder Lucy’s listeners are confused . 
      Its quite simple mate .This is our home and we shouldn’t just sit around while our people are exploited in the name of economics. Family members unite here http://fairgomate.blogspot.com

    • Bolirvia says:

      02:34pm | 11/01/12

      It seems most comments betray a desire to hold onto opinions without testing them. Factoids abound. I think it would be more useful to think about how to improve the statistics collected by the ABS before coming to any firm views. Yes, the 2010 ABS survey showed little change in foreign ownership since the 1980s. But of the three measures used, only one is at all useful. The pct of farms owned is problematic. The structure of farming has changed significantly since the 1980s. There has been an increased proportion of production generated by the largest farms. I presume overseas investors are likely to be more interested in those larger farms which will provide a better return on capital. Likewise, area of farm land is problematic as it is distorted by the longstanding foreign interest in range land properties. A hectare of range land is a lot different to a hectare of almonds. I would like to see an estimate of the share of value of production using the ABS’s Estimated Value of Agricultural Operations. For now, I will place some credence on the water ownership value, although that has its problems with different levels of water entitlement security. A ML of NSW High Security Entitlement is a lot different to a Victorian Low Security ML. I am not sure how or even if the ABS takes this into account. But putting that aside, it seems 10 per cent of water is owned by foreign interests. I am not sure how worried I am about that. perhaps my main concern would be that foreign interests could end up collecting the windfall gains that will ensue when the Commonwealth next enters environmental water market.

      Reply

    • A Weary Farmer says:

      09:07am | 12/01/12

      There are three issues here that need to be addressed.
      1. Stop pulling out the old rascist plug to stop any further discussion or inquiry. European investors have historically made profit by standard Australian practise, that is, selling produce locally or exporting on our tradtional markets, keeping our export chains intact. Which brings me to point 2.

      2. The use of land acquired by countries like Qatar and China needs to be investigated. Is it profitable for Australia and our export chains to have produce bypass these and be shipped directly to the countries involved? How will this affect future commodity prices?

      3. Why are our farms being sold out? Farmers have been sending out warning calls for years, too often this is dismissed by an urban-centric community as just “farmers whinging again”. With a generation of young farmers and ag scientists missing from the industry has a trickle turned into an avalanche and can it be stopped?

      I don’t see a need to panic but I do see a need to know just what is happening out there, on what scale and why. Pretty basic commonsense really.

      Reply

    • Morten says:

      12:18pm | 10/02/12

      December 13, 2010 @ 2:00 pmWhy don't you write a rvieew of the book for us? It doesn't need to be a long one. The paragraph you've already written is great as is. Maybe add another paragraph summarising the book's structure.

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:27PM

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:11PM

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:00PM

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 08:57PM

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

by Claire Connelly

41

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

I’d like to be able to say that sharing the world’s largest radio telescope with South Africa…

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

by Laurie Oakes

60

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

When North Queensland Liberal MP George Christensen got the idea of launching a new political organisation…

Please enter your password

by Lucy Kippist

39

Please enter your password

Help! I’ve succumbed to a crippling modern illness that can strike at any moment. Symptoms include:…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed