Biosecurity not competition a meaty issue in beef talks
Even if the federal government lowers barriers blocking imports of US beef, it would be no match for higher quality and cheaper to produce Australian cattle.
Australia is considering granting more American beef producers access to the local market as a potential bargaining chip to strike a deal on tariffs, as the two nations' leaders prepare to potentially meet face-to-face for the first time.
For biosecurity reasons, Australia imposes a soft ban on US beef.
Cattle that can be proven to have been raised and slaughtered in the US are allowed into the Australian market, but large amounts of beef sent to American abattoirs come from Mexico or Canada, which are barred from importation.
Challenges in tracing the origin of cattle means in practice beef imports are not allowed, until the US can show the same traceability systems Australia has in place.
Australian beef producers urged the government not to loosen biosecurity protections.
"Australia's biosecurity status is integral to the success and sustainability of our agricultural industries," National Farmers Federation president David Jochinke said.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese assured farmers the government would make no compromises on biosecurity.
But as long as biosecurity was protected, Mr Albanese said he would be open to discussions about easing restrictions.
David Humphreys, vice chair of industry body Western Beef Association, was open to the idea as well.
As long as Australia's biosecurity standards were protected, it would be a beneficial outcome for all Australian farmers if it could be used as leverage to lower US tariffs, he said.
Assuming US beef imports posed no disease risk, the impacts for Australian farmers from extra competition would be limited.
"Australia has very competitive and relatively cheap beef production in comparison," Mr Humphreys told AAP.
"Any beef that's coming in from the US is probably going to be targeting quite select segments of beef consumption, probably the cheaper cuts, produced beef products.
"So it's not really competing with the premium Australian beef products that our beef farms produce."
The low exchange rate of the Australian dollar as well as the high cost of transporting US beef also reduced the likelihood of it outcompeting homegrown products, he said.
Local consumers are accustomed to leaner, higher-quality Australian beef and unlikely to be won over by fatty, hormone-injected American competitors.
"I think there's not a lot of risk to Australian producers of beef, with this possibility of some limited US beef being imported into Australia," Mr Humphreys said.
Australia's Department of Agriculture is reviewing its ban on Mexican and Canadian beef slaughtered in the US.
Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said any decision to allow greater access for US beef would be based on science and evidence.
Even if the federal government lowers barriers blocking imports of US beef, it would be no match for higher quality and cheaper to produce Australian cattle.
Australia is considering granting more American beef producers access to the local market as a potential bargaining chip to strike a deal on tariffs, as the two nations' leaders prepare to potentially meet face-to-face for the first time.
For biosecurity reasons, Australia imposes a soft ban on US beef.
Cattle that can be proven to have been raised and slaughtered in the US are allowed into the Australian market, but large amounts of beef sent to American abattoirs come from Mexico or Canada, which are barred from importation.
Challenges in tracing the origin of cattle means in practice beef imports are not allowed, until the US can show the same traceability systems Australia has in place.
Australian beef producers urged the government not to loosen biosecurity protections.
"Australia's biosecurity status is integral to the success and sustainability of our agricultural industries," National Farmers Federation president David Jochinke said.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese assured farmers the government would make no compromises on biosecurity.
But as long as biosecurity was protected, Mr Albanese said he would be open to discussions about easing restrictions.
David Humphreys, vice chair of industry body Western Beef Association, was open to the idea as well.
As long as Australia's biosecurity standards were protected, it would be a beneficial outcome for all Australian farmers if it could be used as leverage to lower US tariffs, he said.
Assuming US beef imports posed no disease risk, the impacts for Australian farmers from extra competition would be limited.
"Australia has very competitive and relatively cheap beef production in comparison," Mr Humphreys told AAP.
"Any beef that's coming in from the US is probably going to be targeting quite select segments of beef consumption, probably the cheaper cuts, produced beef products.
"So it's not really competing with the premium Australian beef products that our beef farms produce."
The low exchange rate of the Australian dollar as well as the high cost of transporting US beef also reduced the likelihood of it outcompeting homegrown products, he said.
Local consumers are accustomed to leaner, higher-quality Australian beef and unlikely to be won over by fatty, hormone-injected American competitors.
"I think there's not a lot of risk to Australian producers of beef, with this possibility of some limited US beef being imported into Australia," Mr Humphreys said.
Australia's Department of Agriculture is reviewing its ban on Mexican and Canadian beef slaughtered in the US.
Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said any decision to allow greater access for US beef would be based on science and evidence.
Even if the federal government lowers barriers blocking imports of US beef, it would be no match for higher quality and cheaper to produce Australian cattle.
Australia is considering granting more American beef producers access to the local market as a potential bargaining chip to strike a deal on tariffs, as the two nations' leaders prepare to potentially meet face-to-face for the first time.
For biosecurity reasons, Australia imposes a soft ban on US beef.
Cattle that can be proven to have been raised and slaughtered in the US are allowed into the Australian market, but large amounts of beef sent to American abattoirs come from Mexico or Canada, which are barred from importation.
Challenges in tracing the origin of cattle means in practice beef imports are not allowed, until the US can show the same traceability systems Australia has in place.
Australian beef producers urged the government not to loosen biosecurity protections.
"Australia's biosecurity status is integral to the success and sustainability of our agricultural industries," National Farmers Federation president David Jochinke said.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese assured farmers the government would make no compromises on biosecurity.
But as long as biosecurity was protected, Mr Albanese said he would be open to discussions about easing restrictions.
David Humphreys, vice chair of industry body Western Beef Association, was open to the idea as well.
As long as Australia's biosecurity standards were protected, it would be a beneficial outcome for all Australian farmers if it could be used as leverage to lower US tariffs, he said.
Assuming US beef imports posed no disease risk, the impacts for Australian farmers from extra competition would be limited.
"Australia has very competitive and relatively cheap beef production in comparison," Mr Humphreys told AAP.
"Any beef that's coming in from the US is probably going to be targeting quite select segments of beef consumption, probably the cheaper cuts, produced beef products.
"So it's not really competing with the premium Australian beef products that our beef farms produce."
The low exchange rate of the Australian dollar as well as the high cost of transporting US beef also reduced the likelihood of it outcompeting homegrown products, he said.
Local consumers are accustomed to leaner, higher-quality Australian beef and unlikely to be won over by fatty, hormone-injected American competitors.
"I think there's not a lot of risk to Australian producers of beef, with this possibility of some limited US beef being imported into Australia," Mr Humphreys said.
Australia's Department of Agriculture is reviewing its ban on Mexican and Canadian beef slaughtered in the US.
Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said any decision to allow greater access for US beef would be based on science and evidence.
Even if the federal government lowers barriers blocking imports of US beef, it would be no match for higher quality and cheaper to produce Australian cattle.
Australia is considering granting more American beef producers access to the local market as a potential bargaining chip to strike a deal on tariffs, as the two nations' leaders prepare to potentially meet face-to-face for the first time.
For biosecurity reasons, Australia imposes a soft ban on US beef.
Cattle that can be proven to have been raised and slaughtered in the US are allowed into the Australian market, but large amounts of beef sent to American abattoirs come from Mexico or Canada, which are barred from importation.
Challenges in tracing the origin of cattle means in practice beef imports are not allowed, until the US can show the same traceability systems Australia has in place.
Australian beef producers urged the government not to loosen biosecurity protections.
"Australia's biosecurity status is integral to the success and sustainability of our agricultural industries," National Farmers Federation president David Jochinke said.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese assured farmers the government would make no compromises on biosecurity.
But as long as biosecurity was protected, Mr Albanese said he would be open to discussions about easing restrictions.
David Humphreys, vice chair of industry body Western Beef Association, was open to the idea as well.
As long as Australia's biosecurity standards were protected, it would be a beneficial outcome for all Australian farmers if it could be used as leverage to lower US tariffs, he said.
Assuming US beef imports posed no disease risk, the impacts for Australian farmers from extra competition would be limited.
"Australia has very competitive and relatively cheap beef production in comparison," Mr Humphreys told AAP.
"Any beef that's coming in from the US is probably going to be targeting quite select segments of beef consumption, probably the cheaper cuts, produced beef products.
"So it's not really competing with the premium Australian beef products that our beef farms produce."
The low exchange rate of the Australian dollar as well as the high cost of transporting US beef also reduced the likelihood of it outcompeting homegrown products, he said.
Local consumers are accustomed to leaner, higher-quality Australian beef and unlikely to be won over by fatty, hormone-injected American competitors.
"I think there's not a lot of risk to Australian producers of beef, with this possibility of some limited US beef being imported into Australia," Mr Humphreys said.
Australia's Department of Agriculture is reviewing its ban on Mexican and Canadian beef slaughtered in the US.
Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said any decision to allow greater access for US beef would be based on science and evidence.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Albanese need not shy away from his Catholic roots
Australian historian Manning Clark described the Australian attitude to spirituality as 'a shy hope in the heart'. We are uncomfortable with overt displays of religiosity or, indeed, strident atheism. For most Australians, to be asked by a stranger (as happens in the US) if they know Jesus as saviour would be cringe-making. This is the cultural context in which Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who visited the newly installed Pope Leo XIV last month, claimed a strong Catholic heritage, then almost immediately repudiated that by telling journalists his faith played no role in his politics. It seems that Albo's faith is not so much shy as painfully introverted. It scarcely figures in his discourse compared with, say, his struggles growing up with a single mother in a council house. This is not to doubt his personal faith, but to suggest that he is constrained in the public arena. His papal visit and later counter-balancing remarks were carefully calibrated to please – or, at least, appease – both sides of the divide. Catholics are a quarter of the population, and agnostics probably more than half. Many people believe that for a politician to express faith is to betray the separation of church and state. Former PM Tony Abbott particularly suffered this because of his strong public Catholic identity, with one commentator calling him 'Pell's puppet' (a reference to the late Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney at the time). Loading This is a terrible misunderstanding. Politicians who are believers cannot help but bring their faith to their work because it shapes their values and convictions. They should and they must. This doesn't mean seeking to advance the cause of religion, but that denying their core convictions would be hypocritical and inauthentic. Further, importantly, this is true not only of Christian politicians. Atheists, agnostics and people of other faiths are equally shaped by their values and convictions, and they owe it to their conscience and constituents to honour these. Those who don't risk becoming venal or corrupt. Philosopher Willard Quine provided a helpful analogy with his web of belief, in which the outer strands are contingent but the innermost and strongest are foundational, first principles that may never even be examined. This applies to all of us.
Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Albanese need not shy away from his Catholic roots
Australian historian Manning Clark described the Australian attitude to spirituality as 'a shy hope in the heart'. We are uncomfortable with overt displays of religiosity or, indeed, strident atheism. For most Australians, to be asked by a stranger (as happens in the US) if they know Jesus as saviour would be cringe-making. This is the cultural context in which Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who visited the newly installed Pope Leo XIV last month, claimed a strong Catholic heritage, then almost immediately repudiated that by telling journalists his faith played no role in his politics. It seems that Albo's faith is not so much shy as painfully introverted. It scarcely figures in his discourse compared with, say, his struggles growing up with a single mother in a council house. This is not to doubt his personal faith, but to suggest that he is constrained in the public arena. His papal visit and later counter-balancing remarks were carefully calibrated to please – or, at least, appease – both sides of the divide. Catholics are a quarter of the population, and agnostics probably more than half. Many people believe that for a politician to express faith is to betray the separation of church and state. Former PM Tony Abbott particularly suffered this because of his strong public Catholic identity, with one commentator calling him 'Pell's puppet' (a reference to the late Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney at the time). Loading This is a terrible misunderstanding. Politicians who are believers cannot help but bring their faith to their work because it shapes their values and convictions. They should and they must. This doesn't mean seeking to advance the cause of religion, but that denying their core convictions would be hypocritical and inauthentic. Further, importantly, this is true not only of Christian politicians. Atheists, agnostics and people of other faiths are equally shaped by their values and convictions, and they owe it to their conscience and constituents to honour these. Those who don't risk becoming venal or corrupt. Philosopher Willard Quine provided a helpful analogy with his web of belief, in which the outer strands are contingent but the innermost and strongest are foundational, first principles that may never even be examined. This applies to all of us.
Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Power bills got you sweating? Stay warm without spending a fortune
Real Money, a free weekly newsletter giving expert tips on how to save, invest and make the most of your money, is sent every Sunday. You're reading an excerpt − sign up to get the whole newsletter in your inbox. As I write this on a frosty Melbourne morning, the mercury has dipped below 3 degrees, prompting the ritualistic donning of black puffer jackets and a sharp spike in the number of people working from home. I've heard it's also quite cold in Sydney but, frankly, whatever goes on north of the Murray River is none of my business. Scientists have also discovered that cold weather is often associated with thoughts such as 'oh my god I'm never going to be warm again' and 'can I do everything I need to get do today from bed?' It can also see many of us crank our heating up to ridiculous levels, which is great for short-term relief but bad from a power bill perspective. This is especially problematic for those of us with large or poorly insulated houses (so, basically, all of us, as 80 per cent of Australian houses have a two star or less energy rating). What's the problem? To make matters worse, energy prices are on the up. Power prices are set to rise by up to 9.7 per cent in NSW and 5 per cent in Victoria from July 1, after the market regulator announced its latest round of annual price setting. These rises are just an estimate too, as calculations by Canstar show that over the past six years, 67 per cent of the actual prices ended up higher than the proposed price. All in all, it's shaping up as a bad year to be cold. What you can do about it So if the chill is creeping a little too much for your liking (and it's only June!), here are some moves you can make: Shop around: You can put on as many jumpers as you like, or stack on three more blankets, but nothing will save you as much money as jumping ship to a new energy retailer. Comparison expert at iSelect, Sophie Ryan, says everyone should get on the front foot now and check how your current energy offer stacks up – including what your service and supply fees are. 'While power prices may be higher across the board and will increase further for many homes from July 1, there are still differences between retailers and plans, and even a small price difference could make a big difference to a quarterly energy bill,' she says. It's a common misconception (and something that I ramble on about all the time) that loyalty pays, but it doesn't. Your energy provider owes you nothing, and vice versa, so if another one is offering a better deal (even if it's just a one-off for new customers), go get it. The government even has a free, independent energy price comparing tool which you can access here.
