Drought Assistance

Mr McBRIDE (MacKillop) (15:29): I rise today to reiterate the need for further and more targeted drought support. South Australia is grappling with one of the most severe droughts on record. In many regions, 2024 was one of the driest years ever and no doubt, Mr Speaker, you are not immune from this, being the member for the Fleurieu and Kangaroo Island, and I know that it goes way over there as well. This prolonged dry spell has devastated many farming communities, leaving significant livestock losses, exorbitant feed and water costs, and widespread financial distress.

I just want to give you a little instance when things were really tough in the 1990s in a little area during the collapse of the wool boom in the late 1990s, about five or six years after the shooting of sheep and a six million bale wool stockpile that had to be gotten rid of. A little place called Avenue was one of the poorest postcodes in Australia for revenue and income, and that is exacerbated by what is going on right now in South Australia. No doubt, when those statistics come out, I think you will find that there is regional poverty, and I mean regional poverty in the way of income, lifestyle, expenses and choices that regional people used to make but no longer can because of this dry period.

The state's $73 million drought relief package, while a positive step, has faced criticism in its limited reach. A significant portion of the assistance is tied to the commonwealth Farm Household Allowance, which has a stringent eligibility criteria. Currently, only 820 South Australian farmers received the Farm Household Allowance (FHA) despite the state housing nearly 9,000 farms. This asset threshold for the Farm Household Allowance has not kept pace with the rising land and equipment values, rendering many farmers ineligible despite facing genuine hardship.

To pick up on what has already been said, I back the words of the member for Chaffey: the emergency services levy could actually be removed through this process, and not only that, it could be removed or paid for by the government or it could be waived for 2025-26. The government could get rid of the 4 per cent increase, which is just another little dagger in the side that makes it harder.

There is also the impact on small regional businesses. We talk about farmers, but small businesses in these towns depend on the farmers, and they are also suffering. Two years ago, a little lawnmower shop in Naracoorte, Limestone Coast mowers and bikes, would usually sell 40 lawnmowers in October but only sold one or two. It was a complete collapse of business. Not only did he have stock on the showroom floor to sell and be prepared for that spring but he had to go into the Field Days event in March to quit stock that he could not move for over six months—and that went well beyond just lawnmowers.

Regional small businesses are really suffering and I think the government needs to consider what it can do for not only the farmers but the businesses that depend on this period and the lack of income that is right around regional South Australia. I am hoping that the South Australian government is looking at what other states are doing. Other states are implementing other measures. For example, Victoria has subsidies for water cartage, and Queensland is talking about interest rate subsidies and loans.

There have been advancements since past droughts, you would have to say, now that we are in this dry period. I can remember at least three: Ash Wednesday in 1983, the Millennium Drought from 2006, and now we talk about 2023-24 going on to 2025. We are doing it better than we have ever done it before. We know how to confine feed. We know how to feed the most important stock. We know how to get rid of the stock that we do not need. We have water infrastructure that will actually meet these dry times more than we used to. That does not mean it is failproof or foolproof, but we are in a better position than we were nearly 20 years ago and in a better position than we were 40 years ago.

There is technology out there to help us do all this with limited staff and with no income, making losses. There is also technology out there that is helping that transition when we are making nothing. Some recommendations for immediate action are to decouple the state from the Farm Household Allowance (FHA) and revise the criteria so more households can participate in this rather than it being such a limited amount.

I talked about the removal of the emergency services levy. It is just one of those obvious things that government could play a part in and say, 'Right, we are not going to tax the farmers that little bit more or impose the fee rise through 2024-25,' because there is no money out there. You are trying to get blood out of stone when there is no blood.

We need support for regional businesses. They are part of the small towns that are going to also suffer from the lack of money for farmers. We need to offer direct financial assistance. That could be fodder, water, freight subsidies, and trying to get grain from one side of the country to the other. Mental health is number one. We saw the Prime Minister come over and give $2 million extra for mental health. I have seen the state government roll out nearly $10 million—I think it is $8 million—towards mental health. It is very helpful because it is tough out there.

One of the things that has been recommended to me, and I have written a letter to the Premier about it, comes from a local farmer up between Keith and Bordertown. We should have a sporting round, a sporting weekend, where the government helps with the gate takings to encourage rural people to turn up, mix, socialise, talk and support their local sporting communities, whatever type of sport it may be—hockey, soccer, whatever the winter sport is—because those sorts of sporting events bring people together. It is tough out there and the more we can do, the better. I hope the government can get on board and work with the federal government to find solutions.