Agribusinesses broadside at wheat export regime
The Productivity Commission's draft report on wheat exports is due in a matter of weeks but deep-rooted dissatisfaction appears to have developed within the supply chain since the market was deregulated.
One point of agreement, however, is the low support for the regulator, Wheat Exports Australia, from the major industry players it oversees.
AWB was one body that criticised the disparity in regulatory burden between bulk wheat exporters and containerised wheat exporters.
The agribusiness questioned the value of Wheat Export Australia's role in judging counterparty risk.
AWB said the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service was a more appropriate authority for guaranteeing export quality control and Grain Trade Australia for guaranteeing domestic quality.
GrainCorp described reporting conditions as "pointless" and effectively called for it to be abolished.
AWB also took grain export facility owners to task over the risk preferential treatment – a charge those businesses deny.
The attack came a matter of months after the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) was forced to hound bulk-handling companies, which owned the facilities, over their open-access arrangements.
AWB backed the ACCC's continued oversight of export terminal and up-country storage access and claimed the requirement for port terminal access undertakings affected investment in port facilities, citing the Melbourne Port Terminal as an example.
However, GrainCorp said that there was no evidence of anti-competitive practices by it and Sumitomo's investment in MPT proved competition was possible and had occurred.
"Given the relatively low throughput usage of these terminals, and the high fixed annual costs, GrainCorp is not in a position to ‘exclude’ the elevation requirements of competing exporters and has never done so," it said - a point echoed by the Cooperative Bulk Handling submission.
