HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2015-11-17 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Natural Resources Management Levy

Mr BELL (Mount Gambier) (15:45): Today, I rise to talk about the natural resources management levy. It is yet another example of a government so out of touch with regional areas and so out of touch with food producers and primary producers, and I will explain why.

We have been informed through minister Hunter that the NRM boards are set to have full cost recovery of their operations. That means covering $3.5 million for this financial year, rising to $6.7 million next financial year and indexed in future years. On the face of it, I have no problem with full cost recovery if it is applied equally across all parts of South Australia, and that is what, unfortunately, is not being done. There are plenty of services which do not have cost recovery, yet the regional areas are now going to be stung with full cost recovery.

What does this mean for somebody down in the South-East? It normally will mean a household levy increasing from $42, which is what it is currently, up to $127. This is on top of an emergency services levy and yet another grab by this government for those resources and that money. Unfortunately, those who are going to cop it the most are our primary producers. I have seen some estimates of where up to $2,000 will be added onto the NRM levy for a primary producer.

This comes on top of a massive increase in the emergency services levy, and this government sits there and says, 'We don't understand what the problem is with regional areas.' Can I say that, in the South-East Local Government Association submission to the NRM levy, the South-East region contributed 21.6 per cent of the gross state product for agriculture, forestry and fishing, yet it is these industries and these people who are going to be doing it the toughest.

Many probably do not know, because they are stuck in a bubble up here in Adelaide, that the South-East has had two years of consecutive poor springs, which means that our fodder and grazing are not at the level they have been in previous years. We have had failed crops. This levy is going to strike at the heart of many of our farmers, and I have had a number of farmers come and see me.

As I said, I have no issue if you are going to apply cost recovery across South Australia, but to selectively go after regional areas with an NRM levy is pretty ordinary as far as I am concerned. This will culminate in issues with CFS groups, who will boycott attending fires on government land, which is not where we want to be ending up. We actually want to be working together.

I have a sneaking suspicion that this is all part of a plan to fund the South-East drainage issues. In March this year, minister Hunter enacted a citizens' jury on how the state government is going to pay for the drains and, interestingly, recommendation No. 5 states that the community panel recommends that the government source sufficient annual funding for the drains from better planned budgeting, etc., but also from the South-East Natural Resources Management Board.

In my opinion, this is a smokescreen to raise the levy, which the minister has indicated to me on many occasions is what he sees as the way of increasing that funding to manage the drains at a sufficient level. It is a disgraceful tax grab which is going to hurt regional areas. It is going to hurt our primary producers, and I call on the minister to rethink that strategy.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT