Ross Gittins argues the claim by manufacturers that Australia has become a net importer of food is ridiculous.
What’s the world coming to? The latest is that Australia has become a net importer of food. Last financial year our imports of food and groceries exceeded exports by $1.8 billion, a dramatic turnaround from our $4.5 billion surplus five years earlier. This alarming news comes from a report by the accounting firm KPMG for the Australian Food and Grocery Council.
The council’s chief executive, Kate Carnell, said the industry ”is still a major exporter but imports are rising fast, eroding the trade surplus historically enjoyed by the industry”.
”I don’t think Australians really understand what we’re facing at the moment,” she said. ”We really are facing a scenario where Australia really won’t manufacture much at all in this space. The majority of products will come from overseas.
”The . . . costs of power, costs of staff, costs of transport, costs of government regulation, costs of the drought in the food space [have] really put pressure on costs for Australian manufacturers.
”To protect Australia’s food supply and overcome this challenge, there must be a ‘whole-of-government’ national strategy to ensure food and grocery manufacturing’s long-term growth, increase export earnings and boost competitiveness. Proposed water allocation cuts for food production in the Murray-Darling Basin will also threaten the future viability of numerous food manufacturers in the basin . . . and making it harder for locally produced goods to compete with imports.”
There’s just one problem. This is all nonsense. Australia? A net importer of food? Yeah, sure. If you fell for it, your bulldust detector has seriously failed you in the media space.
And in these days of he-said-she-said journalism, you need your detector working as never before. Increasingly, the media are used by interest groups – whether governments, oppositions, businesses or lobby groups – to push their own barrows. And increasingly the media suspend disbelief and happily pass on the most dubious claims, provided they’re sufficiently novel, alarming or combative.
Often the vested interests are waving some ”modelling” or ”independent report” they’ve bought from some seemingly reputable source. Only if you find the report and read its fine print do you discover the reputable source covering its backside with disclaimers.
Consider this from KPMG’s report for the food and grocery council …
Read the full article HERE
Ross Gittins, SMH
