Farmers would face a perfect policy tsunami in the agricultural policies of a Labour-Greens government, Federated Farmers vice-president Dr William Rolleston said.
This tsunami included adding agricultural emissions to the ETS, resource rentals for water, land and water plans put out by regional councils around the country and a capital gains tax.
It was not unreasonable to think a Labour-Greens government would be formed in 2014, he told farmers and scientists at a forum at Lincoln on the emissions trading scheme organised by the New Zealand Institute on Agricultural and Horticultural Science.
”We cannot sustain a tsunami of policies that drowns agriculture in a sea of red ink,” he said.
He gave examples of costs a Labour-Greens government would impose on farming including $40,000 a year if agriculture was forced into the ETS.
MAF modelling showed that had agriculture been in the ETS sheep farmers would have made surpluses in only two of the last four years and those surpluses would have been $4000 and $468.
Water resource rentals would add to costs, turning small profits into big losses.
All of New Zealand farms would be foreign-owned and all would be dairying because it would be the only way for land owners to achieve an economic return, he said.
Dr Rolleston also spoke of the extreme nutrient limits being set in land and water plans which would drive production levels down to those of hobby farms.
It could also trigger a banking crisis as the reality of digesting these policies all at once could sink the economy. Farmers would walk off their land and the banks would face a $48 billion write down of the debt owed to them in the rural sector.
“Foreign buyers funded by foreign banks would be the winners,” Dr Rolleston said.
Opposition to genetic modification meant the agricultural sector was being denied the tools to address its environmental responsibilities in the short timeframe demanded by environmentalists.
“It’s vital that the Greens and Labour wake up to the risks this policy tsunami imposes to the entire economy.”
This is strong speaking from the vice-president of an organisation which is non-partisan but it is not an exaggeration.
The Timaru Herald reports on farmers’ fears of needing consent to farm under Environment Canterbury’s land and water plan.
Farmers in other regions have similar concerns and if they are worried now they will be even more so under a Labour-Greens government.
I listened to an Opposition MP speak at a seminar recently.
It was under Chatham House rules so I cannot give any details. But I will say it left all of us listening with exactly the same view Dr Rolleston has on the devastating impact a Labour-Greens government would have not just on farming but the wider economy and society too.
Great post Ele. For a while now I’ve been picking 2014 as a watershed year for NZ, because Robertson is correct, and Labour/Greens are irresponsible enough to this ( look at Cunnliffe’s latest post Red Alert.) I’m using this speech in a blog on working on for a few weeks set around the ‘Great Stagnation Thesis’ as it might apply to farming in NZ.
Mark – I should have added it will be worse with the other wee aprties tacked on because it is likely to be a Labour/Greens/NZFirst/Maori/Mana Party government.
What, worse than National / Act / United future / Maori party / Nz first / conservatives. how so?
How so? By dragging labour and the Green party even further to the left.
, Dragging the labour party back to the centre,might not be a bad thing.
Nationals far right ideologies have done nothing to improve NZs’ prospects
Agreed, so we get this dreadful policy mix and anti-overseas investment xenophobia: it really is possible to be led to some scary conclusions as to results.
So farms wont make a profit,if required to pay the true cost of inputs?
Welcome to the real world.
ETS as it stands has nothing to do with inputs, it’s just a tax which no other country is imposing on farmers.
Whether you agree with the ETS or not, dosen’t change the fact,that tax payers are subsidising the polluters.
I’d prefer a carbon tax , but no doubt you would whinge about that too,lets face it farmers just dont want to pay their way.
Farmers expecting welfare for irrigation and pollution mitigation confirms an ugly entitlement complex.
sadly the proud independant ,self-sufficient farmer of yesteryear have been replaced by the current bunch of greedy wannabees
demanding that their unsustainable lifestyles are propped up by the taxpayer.
Farmers pay the ETS component on fuel, power and whatever else it’s on as everyone else does.
We’re also paying for research into carbon reducing practices but results that make a difference will take time.
Until there’s something we can do imposing the ETS on agriculture would add costs for absolutely no benefit.
Everybody pays ets component on fuel,power, that dosent explain why I am subsidising you,until you can improve your emmissions.
Water / pollution?
Scotty how would you suggest we do the accounting for accrual of soil carbon. It’s easily measured and with our direct drilling we should be getting the benefit of those actions BUT we can’t. Does that make sense to you?
What about methane released from rice paddies? How should that be treated?
It’s all a bit confusing about what is in and what is out!
I think the ETS might have been designed by industrialised countries for industrialised countries.
I can’t claim on my 243 ha of QE 2 forest that is still regenerating but if I had space planted poplars I could.
Go figure!!