Posts

Senate Hearing Into Bank Closures in Regional Australia

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for attending today. My questions initially go to the Reserve Bank and, if there’s time, to the ACCC. To the Reserve Bank, cash is legal tender. Isn’t it part of a bank’s social licence and a
duty of a bank to provide access to legal tender?

Ms McPhee: The banks obviously do provide cash services. They’re services that they provide to their customers in their own business models. The Reserve Bank doesn’t have any mandate to legislate or to regulate
access to cash services, so that’s really a matter for the banks, as is providing those services to their customers. Banks will usually provide the services their customers are looking to access, and, as long as customers want to access cash services, banks should provide them.

Senator ROBERTS: I’m not experienced in your area, but I would’ve imagined that, as part of being a bank, it would’ve been a requirement to be able to provide legal tender, such as cash. Is that not correct?

Ms McPhee: There’s no obligation to provide legal tender services that I’m aware of for the banks, but I’m not an expert in that space. But, certainly, the position that we see is that many members of the Australian public still want to use cash as a means of payment, and they access that cash from their banks. Consumers still want to use cash, although a much smaller proportion of consumers wish to use cash. But there are still consumers who do use it and need to use it, so that is a product that the banks need to provide to their consumers because the consumers demand access to it.

Senator ROBERTS: Okay. I would’ve thought it was a responsibility, almost a condition, of having a banking licence, but let’s continue. In your submission, you state:

  • The cash share of payments by consumers in regional areas fell from 35 per cent in 2019 to 14 per cent in 2022 …

What is the measure you used for cash share, please? The Reserve Bank isn’t notified when someone buys a cup of coffee at a cafe with cash, for instance. How did you arrive at these figures?

Ms McPhee: I might hand that to my colleague.

Mr Fisher: I believe the numbers that you’re talking about most likely come from our Consumer Payments Survey, which is something that the Reserve Bank does every three years where it asks people to essentially fill in a diary of every payment that they make over the course of a week. So we have quite detailed information spread across different demographics and different locations of how people are making their payments. I don’t have those precise figures in front of me, but, when we’re talking about the cash share of payments, then most often we’re referring to the results of that Consumer Payments Survey.

Senator ROBERTS: Could we get those figures on notice, please?

Mr Fisher: Yes, of course. The numbers I do have in front of me are that the cash share of payments in 2022 was a little under 10 per cent for people living in regional and remote areas. Actually the 2022 survey showed that that wasn’t all that different from people living in the major cities, but that’s not to say that some people don’t use cash much more intensively, including in those regional and remote areas.

Senator ROBERTS: And it doesn’t show the severity of not being able to access cash. For some people it is crucial, because they do everything in cash.

Mr Fisher: That’s right, and one thing we do from the Consumer Payments Survey is that you can classify people into how intensively they use cash. What that shows is that something like one in 20 people during that
survey week use cash for all their in-person payments, and it does show that certain demographic groups tend to use cash a lot more intensively than others, even though those shares have been declining over time.

Senator ROBERTS: The evidence is clear, from previous hearings of this committee, that banks are trying to drive down the use of cash, destroy the use of cash. That’s quite clear. Cash could be circulating more than you state, without your knowledge. Does this figure provide air cover for the banks’ war on cash, without having a solid basis in fact, apart from a survey?

Mr Fisher: I can’t comment on the issue of whether it’s providing cover for the banks. What I can say is that the survey is designed to be very comprehensive. It’s the best measure of cash use that we have. It surveys a
significant number of people, and a lot of effort by the survey firm goes into making sure that it is representative of the Australian population so we have a reasonably good picture, a good snapshot, at a particular point in time, of how people are using cash across the economy.

Senator ROBERTS: I understand, just as a side point, that the Reserve Bank of Australia has done work on establishing a digital currency. That’s correct, right?

Ms McPhee: Like many central banks around the world, we are doing some experiments and some analysis of a digital currency, but we are still working through that, and there are no direct plans to establish a digital
currency.

Senator ROBERTS: Let’s go back to the cash figures. A merchant who can’t deposit cash in their bank because the bank has been closed, and who can’t deposit in an ATM because their ATM has been ripped out, is
not going to accept cash they can’t bank, can’t use to pay suppliers, insurance, advertising and rent. Isn’t it true that regional merchants are no longer accepting cash because they can’t use that cash in their businesses?

Mr Fisher: What I might speak to there is the analysis that we do, some of which I believe might have been in our previous submission. Our overall assessment is that access to cash, in terms of the distance that people have to travel for withdrawal and deposit services, hasn’t changed a great deal in recent years. The nature of those services may have changed, though. If a bank branch has closed, people may have to either travel a little bit further to access full branch-style services or switch to an alternative source of cash access. I think it is reasonable to say that the elements of what you can call the cash cycle are interrelated. Cash use, cash access and cash acceptance are all, I guess, pieces of the total cash-use puzzle.

Senator ROBERTS: That’s a very important point you’ve made. If the banks want to drive people off cash so they can get fees and greater income from handling digital transactions then they can use what you just said.
Mr Fisher: I can’t really speak to the motivations of the banks, but I think it’s reasonable to suggest that there are different elements of the cash-use cycle that are related. We’ve published some analysis on the different
elements of the cash-use cycle in one of our bulletin articles, which I’d be happy to provide to the committee if that’s of interest.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. Let’s get back to the alternative sources of cash to banks in some towns. Isn’t it true that post offices have a role to play in providing cash? But they are not banks. They do not have after-hours ATMs, when most people take out money.

Mr Fisher: In the analysis that I referred to a moment ago talking about the distance to cash access points, one of the reasons that the distance most people have to travel on average—we say ‘on average’, but it’s different the further remote you go—hasn’t changed a great deal in recent years is the strong geographic coverage of alternatives like Bank@Post outlets. I think it is a relevant question as to whether those offer full branch services. I definitely think that’s a relevant question. Those alternative means of accessing cash that I mentioned a moment ago might not be perfect substitutes for full banking services, for example.

Senator ROBERTS: So there is a need for potentially a post office or a people’s bank to have a greater role than they do right now to provide full banking services.

Program-250324Download
/by

From Sublime Hemp to Ridiculous Crickets

,

Emerging industries was the topic in this Senate Estimates attended by AgriFutures, an organisation set up by the Australian government to help fund research and development in our rural industries.

I’m pleased to see that AgriFutures is active in hemp research and investing in grants for trials, including one in the Northern Territory. I visited a successful hemp farm in northern Queensland earlier this year and was curious to know if AgriFutures had looked into trials in this part of Australia too.

Although AgriFutures claims its operations are free from political bias, they are tied into the United Nations sustainability goals. Levies paid to AgriFutures are also being spent on carbon farming for carbon trading, which is a contrived market.

Bug farming is another area that AgriFutures is promoting. It involves growing bugs in intensive urban facilities, which is not supporting the farmers in the regions. AgriFutures’ bias towards these policies is doing people out of their jobs. Taking regional jobs and shoving them close to the cities is political no matter how you characterise it.

One of the purposes of the UN Sustainable Development Goals is to allow the globalists to get control of agriculture and food, centralising people into urban landscapes. AgriFutures’ excitement about turning crickets into dog food is just another step towards that future.

/2 Comments/by

The Future is Digital Says Westpac CEO

Your future is digital and Westpac’s is even higher profits. Once again, the commercial in confidence excuse was trotted out around disclosure of the cost of the Australia Post community representation contracts that are allowing the banks to close many of their regional branches. In 2018 the amount was public information so what’s changed? Westpac has taken the question on notice.

Almost a quarter of Australians cannot do digital banking. Either they lack access or the necessary skills to go online for their banking. I asked Westpac why the bank is turning its back on these Australians. The way Westpac’s CEO Peter King views this is that 96% of their own customers are engaging with them digitally so all is well.

Has Westpac looked at the fact they’re pushing people online who don’t actually have the capability to stay safe and secure on that platform? Instead of directly answering my question, Peter King said the three biggest scam losses are through investment scams, romance scams and business email compromises. Banks are doing everything they can, he said, to prevent this by blocking suspicious payments and educating customers.

Westpac is enthusiastic in its push towards digital. In Townsville for example, where Westpac has shut its doors, the bank conducted education sessions to help customers adapt to the digital transition. Clearly there are factors that limit digital banking in regional Australia. Westpac’s answer isn’t to reverse the closures, it’s to improve its banking app to do everything. The bank intends to shoehorn people into the digital economy whether they like it or not. Peter King believes this shift is much broader than just banking because all government and essential services will become digital too.

Will there still be cash? Peter King thinks that cash will still exist in the economy but its use will decline. Cash made up 70% of all transactions in 2007. That figure is now 13% and trending down. Where telecommunications or power are cut off, Westpac would get cash into an affected area by flying it in. Telecommunications is obviously critical.

Finally, I asked if Westpac’s data might not be accurate. It isn’t capturing all cash transactions. Once cash is circulating there is no way to track it, so perhaps they’re not seeing the real picture of cash use in the economy. I was told the Reserve Bank undertakes surveys into how cash is used and in Westpac’s view there is less call for cash making it less important in the scheme of things. Online banking and Bank@Post will replace bank branches, particularly in regional areas where Westpac and the other big banks are pulling away from in person services.

Profits over personal touch is what’s in store for customers in the digital economic future. In a move we’re seeing across the corporate and political sectors, the Big Four are making the data fit the narrative so they can achieve their goals. Where’s the care factor?

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: Just sticking briefly with Australia Post, how much do you pay Australia Post for a community representation fee, not the transaction fee?

Mr King: It’s subject to some commerciality requirements. I’ve said it will be over $200 million over 10 years, including the fee. We might see whether we can provide that separately in confidence.

Senator ROBERTS: It wasn’t commercial-in-confidence in 2018. Is something being hidden?

Mr King: No. We’ll work with Australia Post on how much detail we can give you.

Senator ROBERTS: So, you’ll take that on notice?

Mr King: Yes.

Senator ROBERTS: Your submission relies on digital technology as a fallback to the removal of physical branches, yet 23.6 per cent, almost a quarter of the population, either lack access to or the ability to handle digital banking. Why are you turning your back on almost a quarter of the population? Do they not have enough money to warrant your attention?

Mr King: What we see in our customer base is 96 per cent of customers are engaging with us digitally, in terms of transactions.

Senator ROBERTS: That’s your customer base. I asked about the population of Australia. Almost a quarter don’t.

Mr King: In terms of our service offering, if you take the cash, we have our own branch network, and the Australia Post, and an ATM arrangement. So, there are plenty of opportunities for customers who still want to use cash to get cash through the country.

Senator ROBERTS: The ACCC reports that Australians lost $3 billion in online scams in 2022. Has Westpac done any work on what share of that has come from Westpac and the banking sector in general, forcing this 23.6 per cent of the population online when they lack the skills to avoid being scammed? Is Westpac simply setting up these people to lose their money in an online scam?

Mr King: In short, no. There are three big drivers of scam losses, and the biggest one by a long way is investment scams. As to investment scams, we have less financial planners in the country, more people doing
research, including on social media platforms, and that’s devastating. Romance scams are still pretty high in terms of people being prepared to pay for romance scams, and then there’s business email compromises. A lot of those are issues around how customers are being tricked out of their money, effectively. The way the banks are reacting is to do everything we can to help customers make better decisions. So, prompt them about those types of things, put friction in the system to stop the payments. But we do need to help our customers pick these scams up as well.

Senator ROBERTS: In towns where you close your branch and provide education to customers on how to use online banking safely, do you open a digital education centre?

Mr Miller: In a regional town where we’re closing a branch we have a fairly lengthy period where we’re consulting with our customers. We run education sessions from the branch before it closes. When the branch has
closed, we’ve enabled our call centres to be able to take calls from customers anywhere in Australia where they can continue that digital education with customers online. We would have had 340,000 of those conversations with customers since March this year.

Senator ROBERTS: Some of them are a physical, face-to-face in town where the bank is about to close?

Mr Miller: Absolutely. That’s our priority during the transition period.

Senator ROBERTS: What factors would limit digital banking in regional Australia?

Mr King: For us, I think we’re looking to have everything you can do in the bank in the app. We’re not there yet, as Ross said, but we will be. Another is, as you just said, helping people transition to the digital economy. But I think it’s broader than banking. If I look at government services, banking services and most services in the country, they’re all going to go digital, so we have to help people get on. Then telecommunications is critical as well.

Senator ROBERTS: Are you saying there will be no cash, none of this stuff?

Mr King: No.

Senator ROBERTS: You said ‘all digital’?

Mr King: I believe there will still be cash in the economy but the usage will go down. I think I used a stat before that, in 2007, 70 per cent of consumer transactions were cash based. It’s now 13 per cent and it will go
further down; that is the trend. Cash will be less important in the scheme of things than it has been historically.

Senator ROBERTS: What are customers supposed to do if the bank or the NBN or the telco fails for a whole day? I noticed in Mount Isa, the day before I arrived recently there was no internet and no EFTPOS so people had to use cash. Business was open purely because of cash.

Mr King: That is an important part, but also the merchant terminals can go into a mode which is called offline for a period of time, but you need your card. You need to put your physical card in. It’s hard to use a digital wallet in that situation. There are fallback facilities when telecommunications are down. It’s a bit harder when the power is down, obviously. In that case, like we do in any event, a flood or fire, we would get cash into the area and a way to distribute it. We did that in Lismore through the floods by flying it in.

Senator ROBERTS: If a constituent of mine goes to a farmers market and pays cash, how is that captured in the data for cash use and electronic payment?

Mr King: It will depend on how that merchant reports. Certainly, when we’re tracking cash usage we’re looking at money going in and out of the banks. It will depend on how that person banks, whether they go near a
bank at all. They might just spend it. The Reserve Bank has the data on how much cash is on issue, and then it touches the bank at certain points but we don’t see 100 per cent of it because some of it’s in the economy and going around without us seeing it.

Senator ROBERTS: That’s exactly the point, isn’t it? The data does not capture all of the cash transactions?

Mr King: If it doesn’t go through us we won’t see it; that’s right.

Senator ROBERTS: Correct. Could the volume of cash transactions occurring outside of the banking sector be quite different to the data you present as being the reduction in cash transactions?

Mr King: Possibly, but the Reserve Bank also does periodic surveys where they survey consumers on how they’re using cash. That doesn’t rely on the reported data. You also get surveys. Our experience in what we’re
seeing is there is less cash being used for transactions, and much more cards and particularly debit cards are being used for transactions.

Senator ROBERTS: I’m being sent complaints about queueing in the branches that remain after closures in the area. Your point of presence is now inadequate. If a customer wants to use face-to-face and their branch is
closed, then they go to the next nearest branch which is queued out the door so they give up and go home and use phone or internet or banking, would you consider your bank as being helpful?

Mr King: As I started with, customer service has to improve. If there are examples from your constituents, send them through and we’ll have a look.

/2 Comments/by

Banks Behaving Badly and Ripping Off Australians

Customers of Australia’s ‘Big Four’ banks are not getting a fair go.

The Commonwealth Bank announced a $10.2 billion annual profit made on the backs of the hard work of their customers and staff, who deserve better.

The Senate inquiry into bank closures in regional Australia has heard evidence of banks acting in concert, if not collusion, to close branches, forcing customers online and preventing the use of cash. Even with online banking unavailable in areas where bank branches close and despite their actions not serving their customers’ needs they’ve gone ahead with closures. Worse, the banks have misled the committee not only about their plans to close branches in the future, but even about the reasons why.

I will be addressing the reprehensible behaviour of the Big Four banks in the next sitting.

Transcript

As a servant to the many different people in our one Queensland community, it’s my duty to ensure that our constituents get a fair go. Customers of the big four Australian banks are not getting a fair go.

The Commonwealth Bank announced a $10.2 billion annual profit made on the backs of the hard work of their customers and staff, who deserve better. While the banking superprofits tax will return some of that excess profit to taxpayers, my question is: how are the big four banks able to exploit their oligopoly power to deliver obscene profits? 

One Nation, of course, supports the right of companies to invest money and receive a fair return on investment—a fair return. One Nation believes that free market competition is the answer to providing all Australians with wealth and prosperity. Australia does not have free market competition in many industries, including in banking. We have an oligopoly conspiring together to rip off as much money as they can from captive clients. That was evident in 2017, when I chaired the Senate Select Committee on Lending to Primary Production Customers. The committee heard evidence of inhuman banking behaviour that screwed their own customers, taking homes, livelihoods, equity and even cattle, to which the banks were not legally entitled. No compensation has ever been made, because good luck suing a bank. Banks are above the law. 

The Senate inquiry into bank closures in regional Australia has heard evidence of banks acting in concert, if not collusion, to close branches, force customers online and prevent the use of cash, despite online banking not being available in areas where bank branches closes and not suiting customers’ needs. Worse, banks have misled the committee regarding their future branch closure plans and misled the committee on the reasons for closures. The big four banks’ behaviour is reprehensible. In the next sitting, I’ll advance the debate regarding a proposal to stop banks further hollowing out the bush and forcing their customers into digital prison.

Watch this space. 

/10 Comments/by

Farmers and Regional Towns are struggling

, , ,

With water availability, labour prices and government all against the farmer, it is too hard for smaller farms to survive and even the large farms are struggling.

If our farms fallover, regional towns will quickly follow and then the rest of the country will be in big trouble. Governments at every level need to help our regions be building cheap, reliable electricity and secure supplies of water.

Decades of government dropping the ball on these issues has left us in a scary position. I talk about this in my new segment, Our Nation Today, with farmer Trevor Cross and Mike Ryan.

Let me know what you think.

Transcript

[Malcolm Roberts] Regional Queensland literally feeds and clothes us, Yet so many short-sighted government policy decisions will hit these regions first and hit the regions hardest. Travelling around Queensland, I’m constantly reminded that the one-size-fits-all policies just don’t meet the needs of rural and regional centres. We’re talking about the fundamentals that urban areas take for granted. Affordable, secure, and reliable water, energy, and food. Reasonable insurance premiums and freight rates, roads, and rail fit for purpose. Access to health and education that gives people the confidence to settle in the regions. There’s nothing more fundamental than food.

A prosperous agricultural sector is essential for supplying Australia’s food needs and the needs of the rest of the world. In the financial year 2021, the gross value of agricultural production is estimated at $66 billion, a staggering figure. And it’s easy to forget that being a farmer is a tough gig because even in good years it’s 24/7 and the balancing acts of risks within a farmer’s control, and those beyond never stops. There’s been a lot of talk about an agriculture-led recovery after the COVID restrictions that smashed our economy and the need for confidence to pick up the pieces and to keep going. Many in our farming community have sustained shattering losses with ready to pick food being ploughed back in and a major reduction in the planting of next year’s crop, simply due to worker shortages.

I see a role for government in creating the right environment for businesses to flourish. Part of that is to help mitigate unnecessary risks, such as having strategically placed dams and a well-connected water infrastructure grid which should have happened years ago. So instead of the Queensland government spending $10 million to cart water for Stanthorpe when the town ran out, it would have been better spent on a longer term solution such as more town weirs to hold more water. We know that our water reserves and existing dams are not keeping up with population growth. Government should aim to minimise its unnecessary intrusions and yet any farmer will tell you that excessive regulations such as the reef regulations and vegetation management laws create an impossible business environment for farmers.

Layer upon layer upon layer of stupid and destructive rules and regulation leaves the farmer with ever-decreasing profits. And yet we expect farmers to just saddle up and continue to make it work. Today Mike Ryan talks with Trevor Cross, a successful Queensland horticultural grower based in Bundaberg. I first met Trevor in 2017 at his farm and was impressed with his passion for farming, his business savvy and the hard work that he and his team do everyday to put many veggies such as tomatoes, capsicums and zucchinis into our supermarkets.

[Mike Ryan] Trevor, thanks for joining us.

[Trevor Cross] Thanks Mike, good to meet you.

[Mike Ryan] Now, tell us about your farming business, the size of your holdings, where you’re located, what you grow and what you export.

[Trevor Cross] We’re in Bundaberg in Queensland, we farm about two and a half thousand acres of small crops. So we grow tomatoes, gourmet roma’s and cherry tomato. And then zucchinis, capsicums, chilies, melon, pumpkin, a few cucumber, snow peas, and sugar snaps, and just a few beans, so we spread that over about a nine-month period in the Bundaberg region. So most of our stuff actually goes Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne a little bit to Adelaide. And this year in New Zealand, it’ll open its exports again, it’s been out for 12 months with this virus. So it’s supposed to open up again this year, so hopefully that’ll be good for the industry.

[Mike Ryan] I can really empathise with what you do. I mean, my dad will probably kill me for this being from the land. I recall he actually decided to go into rockies and do rock melons and large acreage. Anyway, the bottom fell out of the market. And I recall he got a cheque from the bank for, I think it would have been something like sixpence in those days. And I’m thinking, why would you ever want to do this? And then he decided to go into avocados and citrus and stuff. And that’s just as terrifying. It’s a really hard business, isn’t it?

[Trevor Cross] Yeah. The biggest problem with farming it’s actually almost like an addiction. You go out and start growing something, it’s very, very hard to stop it. It’s not so much about money, I don’t think, when you’re a farmer. It’s about just seeing a crop planted, seeing the crop grow and getting it picked. But the biggest problem is there needs to be some rewards on the way through.

[Mike Ryan] What’s the greatest challenge, say, to business such as yours on the land?

[Trevor Cross] In our industry it’s, because it’s a high-labor industry, it’s probably, at the moment, getting enough people to actually harvest crops. Because when we’re in peak-season we have about 350 people here, so… And there is going to be a shortage. I’m not quite sure how far we’ll be down, whether it’s going to be 10- or 20-percent down. So that’s probably one of the hardest parts. Water supply’s another major component to our operation, and just general costing. The costs keep going up and up and up and the end prices doesn’t really reflect what it’s costing to do business, anymore.

[Mike Ryan] So you have two and a half thousand acres, which is a very large, large piece of land. Do you think the days of the smaller farmer, for example, 20 or 30 acres are gone, and that you need to have, just to accommodate your cost and make sure you get a decent return, that you’ve got to have a large business instead of those, not micro, but the smaller businesses used to be.

[Trevor Cross] It’s volume now, whereas before it was just a family, a family could actually survive on a hundred acres and live fairly comfortable, now a hundred acres unless you’re doing really niche market product, you would never, ever survive. So everything’s been turned into bigger farms. We’d be one of the largest, freehold personal farms in town now, there’s probably a couple other families about our size that are just doing it, and the rest is a lot of consolidated money from investment companies, and they’re now are doing nut trees, mainly.

[Mike Ryan] What’s greatest impact on your business when it comes to costs? Which ones are the ones that stand out? Is it labour?

[Trevor Cross] Yeah, Labour used to run about 33- to 35-percent we’d work on for labour, and the way it’s going, last year I think hit early forties, about 42-, 44-percent, and this year, unless there’s a big market change I think it’ll go 50%.

[Mike Ryan] Wow. That’s incredible, isn’t it? How do you survive?

[Trevor Cross] Well, I just hope that there’s actually money paid at the other end. At the point of sale, at the first point of sale at the marketplace, most stuff is fairly cheap. At the last point of sale, it could be three… between two and four times what it’s paid for. So, that’s what the average customer doesn’t think, They think if it’s dearer in the shop, the farmer’s making the money.

[Mike Ryan] I was talking to Senator Malcolm Roberts, and he was saying, just talking about how the consumer in the major metropolitan areas, they all think that the produce that they see almost is manufactured in the supermarket, but, you know, prior to that, you’ve got so many factors. I mean, from the farmer to the chain. Farmer, to the, what do you call it?

The grower. Not grower, the buyer who buys up for the land and then they on-sell it to someone else. And then it’s sold to the supermarket. You think from the farmer to the actual supermarket, ’cause my dad used to always say, he would love to be able to take out a shotgun with some pellets and get rid of those middlemen. Is it still the same headache and pain in the backside?

[Trevor Cross] The biggest problem is with the whole system, if you actually get out of the place what’s supposed to set the right price how do we know what the right price is? And I think the days when people were actually stealing at the first point of sale, I don’t think it’s there anymore because everyone’s fighting for a dollar. So they’re getting screwed down more and more. All the grower actually needs is probably about 20- 30-cents a kilo more and they become very sustainable. And that’s not a lot.

It’s only 2 to 3 dollars a box on average, and everyone’s paying bills, because the Ag industry, and this is not just what we do, It’s every Ag industry, there’s a lot of people get employed before it even gets to the farm. And then after it leaves the farm there’s a lot of people employed from transport, through to your retailers, your wholesalers, and then the processors… there’s many, many people relying on the farming industry.

[Mike Ryan]What are your thoughts of the future of farming, say, in Australia?

[Trevor Cross] Well, I know if we keep going down this track we can’t last much longer. Even our business now we’ve actually got 400 acres of nut trees, and we’ll probably continue to change over just because of the labour price and for our small profits we’re making out of employing all the people, we may as well not have them. We may as well just go to where it’s all mechanical.

So, I don’t know if my boys will actually take over and do what I do, ’cause it’s a seven-day-a-week job. You’ve got to be in amongst the people and see what’s happening. I actually think, even in this area around Bundaberg, there won’t be too much of this industry left within probably four or five years. I think the majors will be all gone.

[Mike Ryan] That’s just terrible, too, because once you have less growers like yourself then you’ve got this monopoly and the monopolies are not what we want. I mean, look at the US and you’ve got these multi-billion-dollar corporations that control the price of produce, although you go to a supermarket and they do the same thing there too, they screw down the grower, although the grower being a lot bigger than what they’ve dealt with, they’ve got their sort of, at least it’s coming up to almost 50-50 between the grower and the actual supermarket chain.

It’s a really, really tough life. What do you think is the most important thing in keeping our farming sector successful and growing? What do we actually need to do besides revise wages, for example, on the land. You can’t keep paying out 50%. You’re going to make no money.

[Trevor Cross] Yeah. Everyone’s entitled to money, Mike. The wage earner is entitled to money, and they all want to lead a good life, but we’ve just got to get a share of that sale price at the end. Basically, I think all growers need just a little bit more money, and it’s not a lot, a couple dollars a box, as I say, it’s not a lot of money. And then everyone’s happy because I don’t think any man who’s been on the land for all his life deserves to actually have the bank come and sell him up, because of the poor market prices. I think everyone can work together.

If capsicums or zucchinis or whatever, ’cause we’re only seasonal, we do about eight months a year in Bundaberg, and then the South is just finishing up now, they would have had the most horrible year in their life. And people have been on the land all their life and next minute they gotta sell their farms because of poor prices. It’s only a couple of dollars a box, they wouldn’t have needed much more and they’d be still viable.

[Mike Ryan] So what do you do, though? If you weren’t on the land, what would you do?

[Trevor Cross] I don’t really know what I would actually do cause I’m not much into fishing, I don’t like doing anything else. And so that’s what I call it, a hobby.

[Mike Ryan] An expensive hobby though, isn’t it?

[Trevor Cross] Yeah but most… a lot of farmers grow because they’re addicted to growing. That’s what they’ve been bred to do. They grow. And they show up nearly every day. So it’s a challenge because you’re challenged against the weather, challenged against people and you become a plumber an accountant, you know, almost doctor, sometimes. So there’s nothing you can’t actually do. A good farmer can do just about anything there is to do.

[Mike Ryan] If somebody was wanting to find out more about what you do, do you actually have a website we could go to and have a look, just to get an idea and appreciation what it’s all about.

[Trevor Cross] No, I would say I keep pretty well under cover but we could actually have a bit of a look at doing something if there’s people interested and actually do something.

[Mike Ryan] Yeah. We must do that. I’m sure you’ll handle the technology as well as my dad.

[Trevor Cross] I have to get someone to help me, yeah.

[Mike Ryan] Trevor, great chatting with you. All the best. Thanks for giving us your time today, and also say thank you to your wife in the background, she’s done a wonderful job.

[Trevor Cross] No worries. Thanks, Michael.

[Malcolm Roberts] The harsh reality is that we, as a nation, will either flourish or decline with our regional centres and with Australian farmers. Our farmers must make a profit to make their livelihoods sustainable. And that, after all, is where we get our food. Our rural and regional communities have unique challenges and need a different set of solutions to ensure fair and equitable access to basic services and to grow viable communities. Thank you for joining me Senator Malcolm Roberts on Our Nation Today.

/by