AGRICULTURE is said to be dominating early discussions in the negotiations on emissions trading scheme which the Government and Opposition are said to be locked into for at least a month.
Speculation is rife that agriculture could be the first concession made in the Government's carbon pollution reduction scheme, with a strong argument to exclude agriculture said to be gathering momentum in the halls of parliament.
In an interview with the ABC this week, Senator Wong said there was still not sufficient technical information regarding agriculture to make a decision on its inclusion in a scheme, but she was prepared to consider the Opposition's proposal to exclude it now rather than make a decision in 2013.
"I do understand this is an issue the Opposition are very concerned about and we'll certainly be prepared to consider what they have put to us," Senator Wong said following her first meeting with the Opposition this week.
The Opposition's main negotiator, Queensland Liberal MP Ian Macfarlane, would not give anything away about the negotiations or agriculture's standing within them, pledging confidentiality to Penny Wong while the package was being negotiated.
But he said the position on agriculture in the Coalition party room was very clear, confirming there would be no ETS agreement if there is no deal on agriculture.
In an interview with Rural Press this week, Mr Macfarlane pointed to his RM Williams boots and photos from his farming days to prove there was no other sector closer to his heart.
"I can say to farmers that I will stand up for them," Mr Macfarlane said.
"Agriculture is obviously a key issue.
"I would say quite openly that if (at the end of the negotiations) agriculture is not included in the package the party room won't carry the amendments.
"And if you ask me will I weaken on agriculture, the answer's no.
"I've still got the RMs, still got the akubra, still got the photo on the wall and I still think like a farmer."
As someone involved with privatising the wheat board, Mr Macfarlane said these negotiations would be toughest thing he's done in his career
"The legislation and negotiations are immensely complex. Some of the economics modelling is mind blowing.
"But the thing that makes it difficult is it is so absolutely crucial – I've never done anything as crucial as this and if I'm able to get this right it will be a huge outcome.
"My biggest fear is the current legislation will become the final legislation and that would be a monumental disaster for Australia. If I'm able to avoid that disaster that's a good outcome."
Mr Macfarlane said he's always stressed his belief that there would be parts of this package that would be crucial to rural areas and rural industries.
"Offsets are an area where there could be huge money in it for farmers.
"Any ETS is going to cost rural industries money because they're going to pay it on their fuel and their electricity.
"But to counter-balance that, if you can give them an offset then they could come out net better off.
"Farmers aren't fools - many have said they want to have a crack at this."
Mr Macfarlane went further, and said looking at it from a farmers' perspective he'd be saying 'this bloody ETS is a nuisance, it's like the GST, but I think I can see how I can make a quid out of it'.
Unlike his Nationals colleagues, Mr Macfarlane is more pragmatic on the politics of it all, believing the political reality will dictate an ETS being legislated - the challenge for him is to make it better.
He said to be fair to the Nationals, it is true that given a choice most farmers would rather not have an ETS.
"The majority of farmers don’t want an ETS; most of them are sceptics. The ones that aren't, probably still say it's more work we don't need.
"But do most farmers think they're going to get an ETS? Yes, they do.
"So if we've got one, we've got to work on the shape of it and work on getting agriculture out."
Email a friend
Favourites
Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
StumbleUpon
MySpace
Reddit
Newsvine
LinkedIn
Kwoff
Twitter