Michael,
Chinese don't believe in fair trade full stop, they aim to dominate at every level, everywhere they've gone for thousands of years it's been the same story.
Ask the Tongans,Papuans, Singaporeans, Vietnamese, Solomon Islanders, Madagascans and all what happens when Chinese immigrant "businesmen" become entrenched in a local economy...short answer, the economy dies, commerce becomes a Chinese monopoly.
It's a little known fact that a good number of the "Vietnamese" refugees of the '70's were actually ethnic Chinese "traders" who were run out on a rail once their corrupted protectors in the south had been overthrown.

Yabby I stand corrected.

But it doesn't change my stance that the FIRB policy must be changed to reduce or make harder for the influx of money into Australian agriculture in all its forms to occur.
How hard can it be to develop fiscal policies that aid our own agriculture and make it less vulnerable to foreign ownership?

*But it doesn't change my stance that the FIRB policy must be changed to reduce or make harder for the influx of money into Australian agriculture in all its forms to occur.*

So Renew, you are against the fact that British money developed
the NT cattle industry and American money developed agriculture
in Esperance. Why would we be better off, if they had not done so?

If Australians want to own all agricultural land, why don't they
simply buy it? There is plenty of super fund money to do so and
given that farmers have 59$ billion of debts, many want to get out
and have no buyer. Why should agricultural land be treated differently
to other business investments?

Yabby, I am not diminishing the values of the past. It simply time to change. We need to be far more defensive in our policies. Go back and look at Michael Lardelli's words. This will become critical for Australia.

*Go back and look at Michael Lardelli's words.*

Renew, I read it earlier but took little notice, for IMHO
Lardelli's arcticle is full of holes.

Whilst I agree with the notion of not having a huge Australian
population and that this is best for Australia's future,
his data on food production is flawed for good reasons
and as ever, the devil is in the details.

Lardelli firstly compares Dollar values, which is hardly a
fair comparison. Yes, we export boatloads of commodities
and we import lots of gourmet foods. In tonnage terms we
still land up exporting far more then we import, its just
that our consumers seem to like Jambon from Spain or Lindt
chocolates from Switzerland. There is no good reason why
they should not, for we are hardly about to starve.

Secondy Australia could produce quite alot more food then
it does, if it were profitable to do so. Profits drive
food production, not potential maximum volume. The numbers need
to add up for any food producer and given our high costs
and low agricultural prices,it commonly makes sense not
to grow something at all, rather then lose money.

Foreign investment in the past has improved things for
agriculture, for when foreigners have skin in the game,
it is their interest to help develop an industry and
that helps to develop overseas markets for Australian
farmers. I can't see why that should be a bad thing.

After all, the land stays here.

The real issue we will face moving forward is the fact that most farms will become unviable due to costs of farmimg.

Lets face it, if the current trend continues a farmer will be paying an assistant up to $60 per hour to drive a tractor. The going rate now is $35 an hour, and thats if they can find someone reliable, thanks largely to the mining industry.

The trouble is, we cant survive without mining, so thats unlikely to change.

Now assumming energy costs continue to head north, then the only people who will be able to afford to farm will be the likes of china, as they dont have the IR constraints we have. Yet!

Now ask yourself an honnest question.

If you owned that inherited farm and, you were offered 10 or even 20 years potential income to sell, would you?