The government’s response to the primary sector’s He Waka Eke Noa proposal fails to meet the partnership’s fairness test, according to the group’s programme director.
Kelly Forster said of particular concern is the government’s rejection of He Waka Eke Noa’s (HWEN) proposed involvement in setting the emissions price, its priorities in how the price is set and the tightening in the classes of vegetation recognised in sequestering carbon.
“We don’t think it has met the sector’s fairness test,” Forster said.
“What the sector put forward we felt was a good balance. This shifts the balance away from what the sector thinks is fair.”
Forster said it was always understood that government ministers would have the final say on emissions pricing, but the sector wants to have input as part of an advisory or oversight board.
The concern is that entities such as the Climate Change Commission (CCC) will take a purely economic and emissions approach to achieve their targets, a concern reinforced by a comment in the government’s response to HWEN.
Forster said the government’s list of factors to be considered in setting an emissions price prioritises meeting reduction targets ahead of any socio-economic impact.
“That is very concerning. It is not acceptable,” she said.
There was also concern at the accuracy of modelling used by the government and the CCC to support claims that methane emissions can be reduced by 10% through on-farm efficiency alone.
“It neglects that not all farmers can dial up their farm system to reach that point.”
Equally unacceptable are forecasts that sheep and beef farm revenue could fall 20% and dairy 5% as a result of the policy.
While there will be a cost to reducing emissions, Forster said, there need to be checks and balances.
The narrowing of what vegetation is classified as sequestering is another concern.
The government said administration and compliance make it impractical to credit multiple types of vegetation for sequestering carbon, but Forster said the sector offered to work with the government and scientists to find a solution.
This has been rejected in the government’s initial response to the HWEN proposals.
Forster said the sector has tried to constructively work with the government, and it successfully kept agriculture out of the Emissions Trading Scheme and averted the imposition of a tax at processor level.
Both had been distinct possibilities.
The HWEN partnership also welcomed the government decision to retain its proposed split-gas approach and to calculate greenhouse gas emissions at farm level.
“Getting those wins may not look big to those looking from outside, but they were big,” said Forster.
The partnership has been united during negotiations in its support for each sector.
“If something suits dairy, and sheep and beef are not on board, then it is rejected.”
Forster is optimistic farmers will have new tools to help them reduce emissions, her confidence borne of discussions she has had with scientists and experts.
The government has indicated it is willing to listen as it decides the final shape of the policy, and Forster urged farmers to work with and contribute ideas and views to their sector groups.
Farmers and growers also need to realise this challenge is not going to disappear, she said.
“You can’t simply say no. We have to find a way that is manageable.”
The six-week timeframe for submissions on the government’s response will be tight, but she is confident the primary sector partnership will have a strong case.
