I've been a bit of a streaker on OLO lately Gilbert with competing priorites at the moment but will have a read very soon and get back to you.

The idea of an alliance sounds good but it will be a hard sell to the majors and to other groups in the short term. Many people see any form of protectionism as speaking with forked tongue. The whole issue has been grossly manipulated IMO.

One of the ironies is that often imports don't lead to cheaper prices for consumers in any case, it is the middlemen who rake in the profits while they wreak havoc behind and in front of them. Those items that do reach the consumer at a cheaper price come with a different cost and that is exploitation of a poor labour force.

No doubt there will have to be some tweaking and compromise but in the long term I think it will help Australia prosper and ensure the viability of our agricultural industry. It would be interesting to know the ratio of number of jobs lost to free trade compared to the number gained and which crops look like being lost totally to OS imports and the effects on biosecurity (not only here but where it affects the developing world).

More tomorrow if I get a moment. :)
Good night for now.

*One of the ironies is that often imports don't lead to cheaper prices for consumers in any case, it is the middlemen who rake in the profits while they wreak havoc behind and in front of them.*

One of the ironies of armchair critics, is that they commonly are
not aware of what is going on out there, in the marketplace.
I can assure you Pelican, that trading is very competitive. If
somebody is making too much money, somebody else will want a share
of that by undercutting them. Freer trade means more competition
not less. If you know of anyone making too much, just ring their
competitor and see how long it takes for them to cut in.

What amuses me is how you armchair critics view agriculture and
Gilbert with his notions of the peasants out there, growing
organic vegetables etc. How romantic, but the reality is
quite different.

Fact is that one of the biggest problems today is that the young
generation simply refuse to work physically, like the old generation
used to. Try and find people prepared to bend down all day in
a veggie patch. Its hard work and the young want cushy jobs,
not hard work jobs.

So its all about mechanisation these days and that is where our
niche is, for mechanisation makes labour costs largely irrelevant.

Yabby you cannot undercut your competitor if by doing so you will make a loss? How can you compete with cheap labour? Mechanisation has an initial investment cost and then it has to be maintained or updated as technology advances.

Locally grown is better all round for communities and knowing what is happening to your food in the chain of production. I don't understand why you are so vehemently are against the locally grown movement. Movement away from food produced for local consumption has been disastrous for many in the developing world albeit it serves a few in the priveleged classes.

There is nothing wrong with importing goods/food that cannot be produced locally where our climate is not suited or water is not sufficient.

I am not sure how much the issue of lack of governance comes into play (eg. bribes) and how this is healthy in the FT economy.

References to armchairs serves no purpose. I have never been burgled but have a right to offer opinion about the legal system and the law. People are quite capable of making up their own minds about many issues and you also assume that no-one else on OLO but you has ever imported goods. There are many goods that cannot be sourced here but that is another issue.

You speak about opponents of free trade in quite derogatroy ways at times which fails to acknowledge many economists and other academics realisation about the myths and dangers in some aspects of free trade.

But you can continue to put your head in the sand if that makes you feel better. :)

*How can you compete with cheap labour? Mechanisation has an initial investment cost and then it has to be maintained or updated as technology advances.*

Pelican, it seems to me that you are out of touch with modern
farming. We had some of the world's most efficient rice farmers
in Australia, until we cut off their water supply. How did they
do it? Large scale mechanisation. Yes, harvesters cost half a million
Dollars. Large tractors another 300k$. Seeders another 250K,
SP sprayers another 400k$. But they can cover huge acres. Your
paddy planting labour force, no matter how cheap, cannot compete.

Its the same for all our broadacre crops. Wheat, oats, barley,lupins, canola,
lentils etc. Peas, beans, potatoes, wine grapes, sugar,
sown and harvested mechanically. What you pay the driver has
little bearing on the final price. But land cost matters, fertiliser
costs matter, energy costs matter, herbicide costs matter.

We produce meat efficiently, because our farmers run relatively large
herds per man, on land that is basically cheap, compared to other
parts of the world. We don't have to take them indoors when it snows.

We have also benefitted because in the past, because Govts spent money on
scientific agricultural research, so our farmers stayed ahead of
the global pack. That is less the case now. CSIRO etc do other
things.

Price is only one component of one part of the market. When I
was exporting seafood, I was competing directly with the Chinese,
even in places like Hong Kong. Yet places like the Hong Kong
Jockey club still bought my product, because when people go to
top restaurants, they want the best, not the cheapest. The
Chinese have still to learn to produce quality, not everyone wants
cheap and nasty.

I am not against local food production. I am against those of you
who are trying to make it compulsory, through punitive tariffs or
legislation. I am for consumer choice.

To take it further Pelican. Regarding your favourite topic, garlic.

Since you raised this topic some time ago, I've been watching
the garlic market. What I found was a number of local farms who
do indeed produce garlic. They sell all that they can produce at
very good prices. Meantime Mexico is the place that more garlic
is bought from, as there is a lack of local production.

It even made me think. Could I produce garlic here? Sure I could.
A couple of roaded catchments would provide the water, the problem
is the rest, which is frankly backbreaking work, bent down all
day.

So why would I bother, if there are other options?

Most Australians do in fact have other options, that is the core
of it.

So my point really is this. You and Gilbert are seemingly both
pencil pushers. You do indeed express your opinions and you have
a right to do so. But IMHO you are also out of touch with the
reality out there. If you spent 8 hours a day bent down over
veggies patches, rather then your present cushy jobs, you might
realise why more Australians don't grow veggies locally, if they
have a choice.

For if the crunch came, neither of you would do that kind of hard
work for a living, day in, day out.

But of course it's easy to pontificate to others. That is your right.

There is indeed a local solution. Get some creative Aussie to
mechanise the whole chain of garlic production and you'll have all
the local garlic that you want. That is the sort of thing that
we are good at.

"I am not against local food production. I am against those of you
who are trying to make it compulsory, through punitive tariffs or
legislation. I am for consumer choice."

What do you call competing with a country that provides farm subsidies? It is the same as competing with a 'punitive tariff'.

I am not against all imports, but the playing field is hardly level and I believe there are greater community and environmental advantages for local production. Would you rather food security be in our hands or in the hands of an overseas competitor?

You talk about consumer choice as though we have it with free trade. We do not when the government under private sector pressure refuses to support consumer pressures for more honesty in labelling.

A couple of examples in relation to choice. I have seen, in more than one major supermarket a container load of vegetables marked as "imported and local produce". When I asked one of the supermarket employees how do I know which ones are the Australian avocadoes (they were all sticky labelled the same) he could not answer and just said "well some of the are from Australia and some from OS".

A friend out of interest, called the ACCC and was told that the labelling was fine because it described the contents as local and imported. Can you tell me where the choices if for those who want to support local farmers?

I hate to break it to you but with advancements in technology and research, farmers are more and more becoming pen pushers whereas I am no longer a pen pusher - my role was never about just wielding a pen, it was very much an operational service oriented role. You seem to think all public service roles relate to pens. I would not call police or fire personnel pen pushers, nor nurses for that matter and so much more. But what is your beef about pen pushers? Pen pushers are consumers just as much as non-pen pushers. You really must do something about this prejudice.