Dairy group leader says nuanced farmer needs call for specialised advocacy

Farmers are similar, in that they have their particular commodity sectors, each with their own inherent production systems, array of associated inputs, markets, pests, diseases and supply chain risks.

If you get a dairy farmer, a cropper, a wool producer and a grazier, from each of the six states, and put them together in a room, after the initial socialising they're usually in their respective commodity groups by the second round of drinks.

It is not just a natural social community behaviour. You see it reflected across society and across industries, not just agriculture.

Whether it be professional advocacy associations, trades, research and development organisations or, dare I say it, unions.

Within agriculture, our production sectors are reflected across our different commodity supply chains, buyers, traders, transporters, processors, marketers, through to peak industry bodies or different research and development corporations.

These sectors underpin the $81 billion generated across sectors in farmgate value in 2023-24, including $6 billion at dairy farmgates across the country.

That's billions - these are significant figures!

They're figures we would not realise if we did not have commodity-level representation, driving the hundreds of millions of dollars in investment for each sector.

We'd not be able to realise this revenue if we didn't have a strong cohort of dairy processors vying for our product.

We also need strong farmer and industry representation, as each commodity has a nuanced set of challenges.

The people on commodity representative boards have a variety of experiences and perspectives but are united by their common interest in their specific profession or commodity. That's how they gain and maintain the backing of farmers.

If farmers lose confidence and feel these boards and bodies are not representing them, they can be ousted, sparking a change in focus.

Meanwhile, a concerning wave of power is washing over our businesses. It comes from government and within the dairy supply chain.

Governments are piling on the red tape for farmers, while major players in the supply chain consolidate and grow their operations.

Government regulation has traditionally been science-based. But we now see the real influence of often fringe groups, representing a minority of the Australian population influencing policy particular in governments that lack a balance of power.

These groups or entities are politically intelligent and will play one party off against another.

It is the individual commodities who have their expertise and knowledge, which is second-to-none, that can push back with conviction on the "facts" and emotional gymnastics preached by these new groups.

In other sectors of the supply chain, the big players are being influenced by third parties demanding social licence.

Perception of social licence, or a lack of it, is usurping the due process of our democratically elected governments.

When these issues reach the media, industry is treated as being guilty until proven innocent, so it's imperative we focus on this.

Farmers still have the high ground.

Let's remember, an overwhelming majority of Australian consumers buy dairy products each week.

Consumers understand that it takes all sorts of different farmers to produce different parts of their diets - just as they know it takes all sorts of different professionals to provide personal advice and care through to tradies to fix their house and car.

Yet all these professions, vocations and trades all have their own specialist professional associations.

These differences make us collectively stronger.

Individual representation allows for a more specialised, nuanced, effective and focused approach to addressing the needs and advancing the interests of each agricultural commodity group right around this large continent.

Putting all our representative groups into a blender and making a soup won't deliver a dollar more to Australian farmgate incomes, yet it will put those very commodity sectors at far greater risk.

The argument goes that trying to dismantle all these specialist professional commodity bodies and roll them into one would save administrative costs.

But it would also place at risk $81 billion in production.

Let's allow the farmers to determine how they want to be represented!