News 
 National Rural News 
 Grains and Cropping 
 General 
 Port operators hit back 

Port operators hit back

29 Dec, 2011 03:00 AM
GRAINCORP has slammed calls by South Australian senator Sean Edwards to nationalise the allocation of grain export capacity.

David Ginns, corporate affairs manager at GrainCorp said introducing legislation compelling the four grain port operators to run a single allocation system was a retrograde step.

“Why do politicians in this country continue to call for nationalisation of agricultural assets, which would take away the rights of the owners to manage them the way they wanted?

“It’s not something you see in any other industry.

He also criticised the current arrangement, which means port operators are bound by access agreements overseen by the ACCC.

“There hasn’t even been an evaluation of the elevators to see whether access agreements are required.

“The process to assess whether infrastructure should be regulated has not been done.”

Senator Edwards criticised current port booking processes, saying that high exit fees distorted the market.

Mr Ginns, however, said non-refundable fees were introduced following the 2008-09 harvest, where his company had $2/t booking fees.

“This sparked massive speculation by exporters, who booked 12.5 million tonnes of capacity, yet only executed 4.5 million tonnes.

“Following that, we changed the system to a non-refundable fee and now the bookings roughly represent the tonnes executed, as there was an incentive not to speculate.”

Viterra, South Australia’s port operator, also said its access arrangements were working well.

Dean McQueen, Viterra’s grains executive manager said Viterra’s terminal access met all legal requirements and was fair and open to all exporters.

“In the 2010/11 marketing year, almost 8 million tonnes of grain was shipped from Viterra’s port terminals by 15 different exporters, and more than two thirds of all grain from South Australia is now being shipped by companies other than Viterra.

“This constitutes a new all-time record for annual grain exports shipped through South Australian ports and demonstrates the efficient operation of the export supply chain.

He said there was already enough regulation in the grain export business.

“Viterra’s port terminal operations are heavily regulated via a combination of State and Federal bodies, such as the Essential Services Commission of South Australia, Wheat Exports Australia and the ACCC.”

He said Viterra’s revised port access arrangements would include an auction system, which will begin mid-2012.

Mr Ginns said the government’s best approach to port arrangements was to let the market find its own level.

“This system needs to normalise along commercial lines, its not appropriate to impose more and more regulatory restrictions.

“You look at the grains industry as a whole, you can see it has benefitted since 2008 from the reduction in regulation.”

He went on to have a swipe at rival exporters, who he claimed were trying to gain commercial advantage from the regulatory process.

“The continued use of the regulatory process by companies that don’t have an investment here themselves really sticks in the craw.

“In what other country would you disadvantage the companies that are investing in infrastructure?”

CBH could not be reached for comment prior to publication.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

RELATED COVERAGE

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Polititcians couldn't run a chook raffle, then giving gratuitous advice to grain exporters is a bit rich. Why does he not object to the sell off of Australian assets to overseas companies.

The grain industry is deregulated and the best option for the Senator is mind his own business.

Posted by Realist, 29/12/2011 7:47:03 AM
The Liberals and David Ginns played a key role in bringing about deregulation.

Now the Liberals are finding that the merchants will not play the game and the real world is different to the theory that they the Liberals espouse so strongly.

The Liberals should admit that they were wrong in supporting the Rudd Government and re introduce a national pool when they return to power with the Nationals.

David Ginns and his middlemen colleagues will oppose with all of their strength but ignore them; they don't count for too many votes.

Most of then don't vote because they are foreign.

Posted by Jock Munro, 29/12/2011 11:26:43 AM
How much would it cost to reintroduce a national pool?
Posted by blahblah, 29/12/2011 4:06:28 PM
With the demise of the single desk I felt the best thing a farmer could do with all his productive capital is to invest it all into the grain trade and not produce a thing, I have been exonerated for this decision, as a result today while hard working farmers like Realist are taking all the production risk, taking all the marketing risk and staying awake at night wondering how to balance the budget with the lowest real grain prices in history, they can think of me.....deciding how I will spend their hard earned money on my next holiday
Posted by cunning stunt, 29/12/2011 10:07:35 PM
Ginns I think you protesteth too much. There are regulations for all sorts of industries to ensure a safe and level playing field you wanted to get rid of AWB so you could start you own monopoly without being shackled by the regulations that applied to AWB. To say the industry is beeter off since dereg is self serving twaddle, Graincorp ois better off, that is borne out by the amount of feed grown last year and the amount shipped, but Peter Woods is too thick to join the dots or is playing games given his leaning.
Posted by Bonnie, 30/12/2011 8:26:48 AM
Yes - let's return to a national pool and protect our beloved growers. After all - why should they be incentivised for growing quality grain?

Surely they are a protected species and deserve to have a floor price delivered to them on a silver platter. Forget the fact that just about every other major exporting nation is deregulated. Being competitive and offering quality grain is overrated right?

Posted by ashc, 30/12/2011 10:42:01 AM
What floor price would that be, ashc?
Posted by Chris, 30/12/2011 12:11:04 PM
ashc, do you think the US and Europe are totally unregulated, open, unsubsidised? The only place that is that way is Aust now as per usual our pollies are star struck with leaving our ag sector at the mercy of subsidised, dumped produce. The US at least has the sense to have a regulated quality control at export, such as it is, but better than our rubbish so we have met the US and gone below them as far as customer satisfaction is concerned.

By the way the national pool is not a floor price - where did you get that from? Time for farmers to wake up to the spin and bulldust.

Posted by Bonnie, 30/12/2011 1:18:43 PM
Chris, Australian prices should obviously not correlate with world prices and we should always get paid $100 more than other exporting nations.

Thats what happened under the single desk............maybe we should look for some trucking fees, it looks like Iran is going to be sanctioned soon.


Posted by blahblah, 30/12/2011 1:29:57 PM
What drugs are you on,blahblah?
Posted by Chris, 30/12/2011 1:57:12 PM
1 | 2 | 3  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
23 December, 2011
25 December, 2011
02 January, 2012
POLL
Q: What did you have as your main meal this Christmas?

Pork
(14.2%)

Ham
(23.6%)

Turkey
(23%)

Chicken
(7.4%)

Beef
(6.1%)

Lamb
(8.1%)

Seafood
(12.8%)

Vegetarian
(2.7%)

Other
(2%)

Total Votes: 148
Poll Date: 28 December, 2011

Most popular articles

Advertisement



The Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...