Rural crisis of confidence a concern for Government
So the political year begins with the usual antipathy and party posturing that pivots on little of real consequence.
It is doubtful if most of us are lying awake at night, angst-ridden about how political parties manage their funding procedures. Even more unlikely that our political preferences will be influenced by protracted investigations into where the money came from and who is in charge of the bank account.
In the real world, health scares of epidemic proportion aside, it seems that economic forecasts are generally more upbeat than usual.
For primary producers, the medium-term prospects look to be positive and encouraging. Despite the obvious problems in our critical Chinese market, there is encouraging evidence of international price buoyancy, and good reason to believe that 2020 export receipts will be at much improved levels over the next season.
So why is the farming community so grumpy?
Record prices for exports and a continuing and expanding international demand for lamb, beef, forestry and fruit notwithstanding, the industry appears determined to be morose.
According to a wide range of reports, farmer confidence and morale are spiralling down at about the same rate that returns for produce at the farm gate are hitting record highs.
How this anomaly equates with reality and positive market forces is a tad baffling. However, it seems that the problem lies not with the market forces but more with the perception that homegrown legislative forces designed to bring the industry to its knees are about to descend on rural communities across the nation.
A survey of the latest rural reaction to moves by central government to improve fresh water standards and tighten up land use restrictions has been met with an avalanche of criticism and claims that the measures under discussion could cripple farm enterprises and end in Armageddon for all concerned.
Perhaps the apparent disconnect between urban and country perspectives and how this equation affects all our lives is at the heart of the problem.
There has to be more than speculation and rumour abroad to move Federated Farmers Otago president Simon Davies to suggest that the economic impact of mooted regulatory compliance ‘‘is going to be catastrophic’’. He says rural New Zealand is tired of ‘‘picking up the tab for the rest of the country’’. That sort of ‘‘the sky is falling’’ rhetoric adds nothing to the debate, and is as tired and pointless as it sounds.
Meanwhile Beef & Lamb New Zealand, through the conduit of consultancy firm BakerAg, is claiming that the costs associated with the proposed tightening of legislation around fresh water standards have been ‘‘grossly underestimated’’ by ministry boffins.
Among a swathe of dire predictions comes a contention that enforced fencing costs to keep stock out of waterways could bring some farmers to their financial knees.
Beef & Lamb chairman Andrew Morrison says that costs associated with the proposed new regulations go ‘‘way beyond what the sector needed to do to manage its risks’’.
It seems obvious that those revising agriculture policy and the farmers who are required to meet new standards should make an effort to get into some sort of synch. At this juncture, they appear to be talking past one another.
Our national economy pivots almost entirely on rural production. The kudos extended to the farming industry for its extraordinary enterprise has been hard won over generations by practical men and women demonstrating a profound history of innovation, imagination and economic adroitness in the face of fierce international competition.
But in a very human sense, farming can be a lonely pursuit, and it’s fair to suggest that even the most positive producer can find the contemplation of what might happen in an industry that has so many intangibles a tad overwhelming.
On the other hand, it could also be suggested that the banking system that for so long was committed to advising and financing rural enterprise is now a very different beast. As Golden Bay farming leader Wayne Langford points out, the relationship is not as ‘‘user-friendly’’ as it was in the past, and bankers are no longer the supportive economic partners they once were.
The men and women who have been at the centre of the production and marketing of agriculture exports have ensured the continuing success of our country’s economy. Without their generational dedication to the land and the productivity gleaned from their efforts, we would be living a very different life.
Nothing in the commercial catchment comes within a bull’s roar of the offshore earnings generated by agricultural production. Not tourism, or satellite launching pads or entrepreneurial commerce.
There is little point in trying to make political capital out of the present crisis of confidence.
Minister of Agriculture Damien O’Connor is a hands-on politician who does have an agenda to move the industry into a more environmentally holistic space. And the reality is that a wide range of producers are keen to do just that. O’Connor is open to debate, no matter how robust – just don’t expect him to walk away from confrontation. Surely that can’t be too difficult?
Why is the farming community so grumpy? . . . It seems that the problem lies not with the market forces but more with the perception that homegrown legislative forces designed to bring the industry to its knees are about to descend on rural communities across the nation.