A vote on a draft constitution for the new grass-fed cattle peak industry body, Cattle Australia, will be held on October 4, but not all state farmer organisations are behind the restructure.
In September 2021, the Cattle Council of Australia and Cattle Producers Australia appointed a steering committee to guide a restructure to form a new entity — Cattle Australia.
In September this year the draft constitution for the new body was released.
CCA president Lloyd Hick said it had been prepared with input from a broad cross-section of grass-fed cattle producers and industry representative groups.
“Producers can now see how the new organisation will run that will be both democratic and transparent,” Mr Hick said.
“This means producers will now have the collective power to ensure their industry body always functions in the best possible way.
“The state farming organisations will no longer be at the core of the organisation, and I thank them for making this sacrifice for the good of our industry.”
NSW Farmers president Xavier Martin said it opposed the proposed new cattle body.
He said there were still too many unanswered questions to support the proposal.
“As a founding member of the Cattle Council of Australia, NSW Farmers has long ensured the grass-fed cattle industry is effectively represented at a national level,” Mr Martin said.
“At the end of the day we want what’s best for farmers — and we are unconvinced that this proposed body will deliver any real benefit to grass-fed beef producers.
“The proposed model at present is undemocratic, with no clear funding arrangements or business case.”
Mr Martin said there were a number of challenges ahead for Australia’s grass-fed beef producers — from biosecurity to animal activists — and that meant there was a clear need for an industry restructure, but said the existing proposal was not a step forward.
“The Cattle Council ... needs to create the right model and get back to the negotiating table to work through these legitimate concerns,” he said.
“A clear business case and budget must be provided, otherwise members are voting on assumption rather than fact, and that’s why it will be a ‘no’ from us.”