Mar 28, 2024
An appalling draft animal welfare bill has been tabled in Vic that looks like it’s been written by activists, and NSW is set to follow suit. They say it’s to replace POCTA (Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act) which has served the state well over many years. In addition to many other “Nasties” this proposed bill:
- will give the Minister the power to “delete” a whole industry with the stroke of a regulation, with no oversight by parliament.
- will give the Minister unlimited power to impose “guidelines” that are not in accordance with nationally agreed guidelines
- will give the Minister unlimited power to impose “monitoring” without consent and at any time, on any industry, if there is a prosecution.
- will appoint “Authorised Officers” who can enter your property at any time “on suspicion”
- Authorised Officers will have the power to search, seize, enter your residence, and euthanase – but there is no requirement on them to euthanase humanely!
The Coalition RECKON IT’S A DONE DEAL but ACGC and VCGC have submitted on your behalf anyway. TO SEE THE ACGC SUBMISSION CLICK HERE. To see the VCGC submission CLICK HERE
The ACMF (Australian Chicken Meat Federation, for which ACGC is a member) also made a submission on behalf of the whole industry, including the processors. to see the ACMF submission, CLICK HERE.
Remember, it’s your membership of your farming group that is the only thing standing between you and automatic adoption of any law that any activist wants to put up – congratulate yourself on your foresight!
Mar 28, 2024
As part of their review of supermarkets, ACCC has produced an interim report for their national review. They promised to look deeply at entire supply chains – but the Interim Report does not do that, and in spite of the
Interim report suggesting a closer look at the chicken meat supply chain, we have been told that this will NOT extend to farmer level. ACGC has responded with deep analysis of the supply chain from farm level to processor – highlighting the need for a Code of Conduct.
ACCC has now contacted us wanting further discussion on the issues raised. We are pushing for a formal statement from the ACCC that they believe that a mandatory Code of Conduct is needed.
TO READ THE ACCC INTERIM REPORT – CLICK HERE. The “insights” from suppliers and consumers are particularly interesting!
TO READ THE ACGC RESPONSE TO THE INTERIM REPORT – CLICK HERE. Some of the graphs in this document are revealing!
UPDATE FROM MARCH 2024.
The ACCC has launched a nationwide review of supermarkets, including all of their supply chains. That includes the poultry meat supply chain, and another chance to push our claim for a Mandatory Code of Conduct for the poultry meat sector.
the ACCC Issues paper can be found HERE. ACGC has responded to the Issues paper and our submission on your behalf can be found by CLICKING HERE. Many thanks to the entire Tasmanian growout and all the ACGC Directors who read the whole draft submission and added truly excellent comments! The submission covers both industry issues and supply chain issues, and recognises that the processors can have just as rough a time with supermarket demands as they demands they are putting on growers. However, that is no excuse for the appalling behaviours we have seen in recent times. It’s worth remembering that processors have NO interest in whether your business survives or not, they just want cheap prices and they figure there are always people out there that will buy and operate meat poultry farms.
The ACCC has a whole year to report, and is likely to have public hearings. If so, ACGC will try to attend on your behalf. In the meantime, if you are talking to your local elected member of parliament, (whichever party) remind them of how much the meat poultry sector needs a Mandatory Code of Conduct.
Mar 27, 2024
The NFF, under commission from the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, have completed the Final Report examining regulatory options for the Chicken Meat industry.
It recommends a mandatory Code of Conduct, and the supermarkets have agreed. SEE THE FINAL REPORT HERE. Even if the whole document is just a “meal too large”, start at page 140 and see exactly what the processors are saying about you! 
The processors appear to have declared war on all growers. In addition to the above, they have been running around Canberra telling anyone who would listen that no Code is needed because there is no risk in growing chickens. It’s been reported that they have now engaged a PR firm (just like big tobacco did once!) to push their case with Parliamentarians. Reports out of growers meetings are that they are engaging in a new level of thuggery, threat and intimidation.
Growers have wanted government help for more than 20 years. The goal (a Code of Conduct) is in sight, but we have to get over the processors’ hill to get there. If you do not get this Code, your income will continue to be eroded, processors will start stratifying growers by shed type or region and driving them to bankruptcy in groups. They DO NOT care if your business survives, they only care about their shareholders. IT’S NOW OR NEVER!
So what’s the next step/s?
- We have to get government to agree. That is best done by EVERY SINGLE GROWER SEEING YOUR LOCAL MEMBER. Don’t know your electorate? SEE HERE. Don’t know the name of your local MP even if you do know your electorate? Put your electorate name into the box ON THIS PAGE. Then just phone the electorate office and tell them you are an elector and ask for an appointment. When you go into the appointment, a small donation to their electoral campaign is VERY well received (around $100+) and give them the briefing note that you can download BRIEFING NOTE HERE. You can go to see your MP in groups, and if everybody goes then nobody will be singled out for “special attention”.
- Then we have to get the government to agree on the words to be in the Code. If we do our job well, the Code in the Report will be adopted. Otherwise it will be a knock-down-draq-’em-out-line-by-line battle for the words in the Code. Your membership is the ONLY thing standing between you and a Code, because we can’t fund the fight otherwise.
- Join the Fighting Fund! ACGC will take all donations and put it into a special account used only for this purpose. You will receive personal updates on where the spend is going.
- Support your elected farming representatives! They are the only thing standing between you and “NO CODE”. They are putting in huge amounts of work on your behalf. Even the occasional kind word or email goes a long way…
- Then we have to get it into Regulation. If we have done our job right, that should be a smooth ride, but since nothing about this process has been smooth, expect trouble!
MORE TO COME….
Mar 27, 2024
FOOD AND GROCERY CODE REVIEW RECOMMENDS MANDATORY CODE FOR SUPERMARKETS 
After a long process, the Food and Grocery Code Review was completed in June 2024.. CLICK HERE TO SEE DR EMERSONS REPORT
The government response to the Emerson Report was published on the same day – agreeing to a mandatory Code of Conduct for supermarkets when dealing with suppliers. CLICK HERE TO SEE THE GOVERMENT RESPONSE
So then Dr Emerson sent away and drafted up a mandatory Code of Conduct. IT IS A DRAFT SET OF REGULATIONS – CLICK HERE TO SEE. Among other things, it includes an excellent definition of “retribution” which could be incorporated with a few changes into a proposed MEAT POULTRY CODE. ACGC has responded to this ARGUING THAT THE CODE NEEDS TO EXTEND TO FARMERS (click here to see), and the NFF Horticuture Council reckons the thing is much too weak.
CLICK HERE TO SEE THE ACGC RESPONSE TO THE PROPOSED CODE
So why should we bother, when this is all about supermarkets and processors?
- Because this report goes to Treasury, and we need to educate them about meat poultry supply chains. It is Treasury that would enact a meat poultry Code of Conduct.
- Because we will want to pick up our own mandatory Code and we have to make sure the two Codes fit together
- Because the more noise we make in ALL forums about a mandatory Code for meat poultry, the more government will listen
- Because we are getting closer to a meat poultry mandatory Code and need to keep the pressure up.
Take a look at the proposed definition of “retribution” and contact the office with your comments about whether including this in a meat poultry Code woudl be worthehile:
8 Meaning of retribution
(1) Retribution, by a large grocery business against a supplier, includes (without
limitation) any of the following actions:
(a) delisting a grocery product of the supplier;
(b) requiring the supplier to make excessive contributions towards promotional
or marketing costs for the supplier’s grocery product;
(c) rejecting fresh produce from the supplier;
(d) changing the location of the supplier’s grocery product in store or online to
the detriment of the supplier;
(e) delaying restocking the supplier’s grocery product in store or online;
(f) varying, terminating, or electing not to renew an agreement with the
supplier for the supply of an own label product;
(g) reducing the volume of stock ordered from the supplier;
(h) varying, terminating, or electing not to renew a grocery supply agreement
with the supplier.
(2) However, an action is not retribution if:
(a) the action is taken for genuine commercial reasons; and
(b) the action is not taken because the supplier exercised, or indicated that it
will or may exercise, a right under this Code against the large grocery
business; and
(c) the action is not taken because the supplier was, or may have been, able to
exercise a right under this Code against the large grocery business.
(3) For the avoidance of doubt, taking an action as punishment for a matter
mentioned in paragraph (2)(b) or (c) is not a genuine commercial reason.
(4) A large grocery business that wishes to rely on subsection (2) in relation to an
action bears an evidential burden in relation to that matter.
JAN 2024 UPDATE – GOVERNMENT’S FOOD AND GROCERY CODE REVIEW
In the Jan newsletter we mentioned we had a seat for live consultation with former Labor frontbencher and PhD economist Dr Craig Emerson at the Food and Grocery Code review. ACGC developed a submission on behalf of growers – remembering that it’s not only the growers that are being “got at” by supermarkets; but because they are proxies for the supermarkets, processors are being “got at” as well.
SEE THE SUBMISSION HERE
Recent Comments