Opinion 
 Blogs 
 Inside wool  
 Wool's ugly politics 

Wool's ugly politics

Wool's ugly politics, seen at it's worst in recent months, will not change with new faces at Australian Wool Innovation; the problem is deeply rooted in the very structure of the body.

"Until the levy goes, the politics will not go."

Whether it is Brian van Rooyen's team or Chick Olsson’s at the head of the industry doesn't matter; they are all part of a failed system.

That's the blunt assessment of wool industry historian Charles Massy who you could excuse for having déjà vu as he was sending out the exact same message this time last year.

He will release the latest edition of 'The Australian Merino' in June next year, seen as the definitive history of the Australia wool industry, it's sure to have some interesting tales in it.

Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent at AWI since it was formed and what is there to show for it?

What on-farm breakthrough? What marketing genius? What innovation? What prices?

The organisation has been defined by politics, poor performance and a lack of accountability, according to now-former chairman Brian van Rooyen.

Mr Massy has long been scathing of the structure of the wool industry and its need to reform and become truly commercial.

A rapidly increasing portion of woolgrowers fed up with poor prices and spin rather than substance agree and have either left the industry or are about to.

But real change can only come from Federal Government, through a change of the Act that gives AWI statutory funding with matching levy funds from growers, many of which want to pay zero wool tax.

Nobody appears happy with the wool industry but as a dinosaur it continues to lumber on in the same direction.

Politics in Canberra started AWI and perhaps it is now time to remove it and give wool one last chance to prove itself in a fully commercial sense in a modern world.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

Comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
You have to wonder what people mean when they use the word politics. For many it seems to refer to any view inconsistent with theirs. The politics that wiped out wool was very poorly educated politics in government, starting with the Wool Marketing Act of 1987, followed by the hopelessly unviable scheme of management imposed by the government on the Wool Corporation in 1990, under which a very large part of the stockpile which bedevilled us for years was accumulated. Then came the greatest political error of all, as the Howard government used reckless price cutting to dump the last of the stockpile. When unity was most needed in 2003 to address the terrible problems which that price cutting had created the political separation of AWI and AWS left our organisation wholly dysfunctional. This politically enforced dysfunction can be blamed in a large part for AWI's panic action in launching the terribly ill considered lawsuit against PETA. As for PETA, the new management at AWI must understand that ultimately our promotion must outweigh PETA's promotion.
Posted by Ted O'Brien on 20/11/2008 3:09:07 PM
Brilliant Ted.
Posted by ROCKET SCIENCE on 21/11/2008 8:18:11 AM
I hate to say it, but chalk up a win for Peta. They have achieved everything they set out to do & more, & all they did was to get farmers fighting with one another. The multi-national green extremists, like HSI, Greenpeace, WWF, etc., are well versed in these tactics & we dumb Aussies took it hook, line & sinker. The wool industry won't be the last agricultural casualty if we are dumb enough to let immature divisions like this continue in our peak bodies.
Posted by Trev on 21/11/2008 9:02:54 AM
We completley agree with Charles Massey in that AWI is an absolute disgrace and we are sick of seeing 2% of our wool income during these tough times being wasted. This wastage is not only the obvious politics, courtcases, exorbitant launches, salaries etc but the endless glossy rubbish we receive in the mail most of which treats us like idiots. The majority of woolgrowers don't need all advice written in publications like 'Beyond the bale' nor do they need the majority of events that are sponsored by their levies. Bring on Woolpoll 2009 so we can vote this big lumbering bueracacy out of existance. Private enterprise will sell and market our wool because they have the incentive to.
Posted by Chris Stoney "Minto Pastoral " on 24/11/2008 9:02:59 AM
It always amazes me how someone as geographically isolated manages to develop such finely honed ideas on policy - particularly compared to those who apparently immerse themselves in such issues as our so-called agri-leaders do. It would be very interesting to see the decision-makers actually try and implement some of Ted's ideas - I suspect he would do a lot better at solving our issues than the current mob, who seem more interested in indulging their own interests and egos.
Posted by Duncs on 24/11/2008 11:29:55 AM
PETA did not take anything from us in the marketplace. They simply moved into ground that we had vacated by cutting production. Twice.
Posted by Ted O'Brien on 27/11/2008 6:04:35 AM

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.
Inside wool
Wool growers are sick of the politics at a time when industry most needs a connection with growers. But what is needed and how can it be done?

Q: Would you approve if the Federal Government put the budget into deficit in order to counter the effects of the global financial crisis?

Yes
(40.5%)

No
(54.8%)

Undecided
(4.7%)

Total Votes: 677
Poll Date: 17/11/2008

11/12/2008 | Farm lobby groups will decide next week whether the future of farm representation will stay as it is or be broadened to bring in the big end of town.
NQR Subscriptions
 
Rural Bookshop
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...