Recognising NFF realities
Feature Article in Queensland Country Life
Published: 12 July 2007
by
David Crombie
President
National Farmers’ Federation
WHILE the contribution modern farming makes to Australia – economically, environmentally and socially – is stronger and more ‘switched on’ today than ever before, farm representation bodies have not kept pace.
In fact, we’ve failed to seize upon numerous opportunities because they were deemed too much of a departure from ‘the norm’ or just too hard.
I’m not prepared to simply allow the status quo to continue. I took on this position because I believe that the National Farmers’ Federation (NFF) can make a difference for farmers.
My sole focus, therefore, is the NFF, where it’s going and what it can do for farmers as a representation and advocacy body.I do not have any political, nor industry, ambitions beyond this objective.
The simple truth is that the raw number of farm businesses across Australia is shrinking. Like most sectors within the economy, farming has seen increased consolidation over the past 20 years to the point that there are 25% fewer farmers, their terms of trade are under pressure and they have been battling drought.
The membership base of state farming organisations and commodity groups is, therefore, under increasing pressure. Like all voluntary membership organisations they struggle for funding but, worse, despite playing a very important local role, they struggle to demonstrate value for money at the ‘grass roots’.
Agricultural production has changed, the structure of regional communities has changed, so we must also be prepared to change.
While the demographics have shifted, the amount of land dedicated to agricultural production across Australia remains largely unchanged. In other words, there are fewer farmers but they run bigger farms. Interestingly, and importantly, 99% remain family owned and operated.
Throw into the mix the fact that our representative base must shift its focus to reflect not just farmers, but encompass the raft of new, and growing, agribusiness and peri-urban farming enterprises that exist today. They not only have rights and a stake in farming issues, they have an important contribution to make.
Further, for too long the NFF has been hamstrung from engaging in dynamic sponsorship agreements with the corporate sector because of a fear that such relationships would impinge upon the rigour of NFF’s policy development.
Not for a second would we countenance ‘watering down’ our policy directions or the fervour with which we pursue them to appease corporate partners. Countless peak industry groups engage in such sponsorship arrangements and do not surrender their policy making integrity. The NFF would be no different.
Indeed, more formal partnerships between the NFF and, for example, the various Research Development Corporations would have many advantages, including minimising duplication of services, streamlining research funding, and alleviating the NFF’s reliance on external research activity.
Not least of all, this would also enhance the intellectual rigour underpinning our advocacy activities. The NFF has already delivered excellent policy results by establishing technical committees, made up of specialists, whether they be NFF members or not, to drive policy engagement in the areas of water and trade.
All of these options represent new opportunities, which we are actively exploring. All options are on the table as part of the NFF review.
None of the NFF’s member groups doubt the vital role the federal body plays in representing, and advocating on behalf of, Australian farmers at the national level.
All NFF members unanimously endorse the vital need for a single national peak farm organisation as a given. Moreover, they have reiterated their strong and ongoing support for the NFF’s new Strategic Plan (2006-09), our Operational Plan and our Communications Strategy and they recognise the leading role the NFF is playing on the national front.
The NFF has an extremely strong brand – not just historically, but tangibly today. This is important for Australian farmers. In 2006, Client Solutions, an independent Canberra-based public affairs and lobbying consultancy, found the NFF rated by parliamentarians as one of the most effective lobby groups in the country.
In fact, it is more effective and more relevant today than at most times in its history. But, clearly, given modern realities, we need to expand our horizons – and our thinking – to remain relevant and viable.
What our member organisations struggle with, frankly, is paying the bills. That’s why the NFF led the call for a major restructure of the NFF’s membership system... it’s out-dated and it can work better. So let’s develop a structure that more relevant to the future needs of rural Australia.
Importantly, at the same time, the review process we have established is an opportunity for all farm organisations – state and commodity – to seriously look at their own businesses and address the value proposition they provide to their members.
The NFF is proud to be the established and highly-respected peak body through which Australian farmers can speak with one voice. All of us in farm representation and advocacy have a responsibility to work together to make that voice even stronger, more relevant and sustainable into the future.
[ENDS]
NFF Feature Articles – Recognising NFF realities- 1 -