Submissions to the consultation process on the Federal Government’s 10 per cent biosecurity tax demonstrate a rare form of collective strength and solidarity of views across Australian agriculture stakeholders. Farm representatives have consistently objected to this flawed policy proposal — be it grains, livestock, horticulture, seafood or forestry — that’s trying to impose an additional 10pc charge on agricultural levy-paying producers, by July 1 next year. Most contributors have called it a tax that severely contradicts and undermines trust and confidence in the existing ag-levy system. A system where most producers already make significant, direct financial contributions —as do Grain Producers Australia’s members. Producers who already do the heavy lifting on biosecurity will be further penalised due to the inequities of a flawed taxation proposal that’s merely a glorified cost-shifting mechanism. Federal Agriculture Minister Murray Watt and senior officials from his department answered questions at Senate estimates hearings in Canberra recently, and admitted to the consistency of industry’s opposition towards this new 10 per cent levy/tax. This questioning showed 92 responses have been received so far, and 61 meetings held, during the consultation process. Of these 92 submissions, 19 are from individual producers, 58 from industry representative bodies; seven from biosecurity interest groups, and eight from the general public. GPA’s evaluation of the 30 published submissions on the Department’s website shows farmer representatives share common views and collective concerns about the proposal’s flaws, including; Given this proposed 10 per cent levy/tax will be debated and voted on in Federal Parliament, with new legislation required, Minister Watt now has the opportunity to read the room and kill off the tax proposal, before it gets too far out of hand. This will show he’s listening to the clear majority of farmers, whilst delivering on the election promise his government made, and the Prime Minister, to bring back a spirit of cooperation into Federal Parliament, politics and government, as one of their key legacies. In doing so, he’ll also avoid instigating a political brawl over farm policy that’s not been witnessed in Canberra since the Backpacker Tax debacle saw a horse-trading feeding frenzy from opportunistic Senate cross-benchers. This policy reversal would also fulfill a commitment the Minister gave in his speech at the Hort Connections conference, only a few short weeks after this appointment following the 2022 Federal Election, to work closely and in partnership with the farm sector. “I think we’ve all seen over recent years there’s been so much conflict, there’s been so many fights, and I think everyone’s had a gutful frankly and I think people just want to work together a little bit more, whether it be in ag or many other sectors, and that’s certainly the approach that I’m going to be taking in working with your sector,” he said at the time. Reading between the lines of these submissions reveals stakeholders are also extremely anxious about a tax disguised as a biosecurity levy being imposed on agricultural producers. What else can the Federal Government potentially do? The impost could be increased in the future. If Minister Watt truly values the integrity of stakeholder consultations, he’d also do well to acknowledge nobody asked to pay any more in levies, when submitting their views to the Senate Biosecurity inquiry. This was held shortly after the election and his appointment. Nor was it a recommendation of that inquiry. If $150 million can’t be raised over the next three years from other areas of the federal budget to improve biosecurity protections, Murray Watt’s credibility — and the Federal Government’s trustworthiness — is the real price that will ultimately be paid. Barry Large is the chair of Grain Producers Australia and a farmer at Miling in WA.