ONE month into a nationwide series of face-to-face producer consultation meetings for the Cattle Transaction Levy review that will ultimately take in around 40 rural locations, Beef Central caught up with Cattle Australia CEO Will Evans at the Brisbane Ekka to find out how the process is unfolding and what messages are emerging from producers.

You can watch our full interview in the accompanying YouTube video, but here are several messages that emerged in the conversation.

Could the $5 cattle levy be headed for major reform?

Major reform of the cattle transaction levy system is “definitely on the table”, Mr Evans said when asked whether the review process is likely to result in a minor tweaks or potentially significant changes.

Will Evans talking to Beef Central for the Week in Beef podcast at the Ekka.

The current review is the first major examination of the levy and the structures surrounding it in around 20 years.

“I think major reform is definitely on the table, and I think the more we do these consultations the more we get a feel for how producers are participating or not participating in these structures, we realise that it’s needed,” he said.

One of the strongest messages emerging from producers was that levy payers needed more regular opportunities to understand where their money was being invested, what those investments were achieving and how they could influence the process.

“Probably the most emergent and really clear message is we can’t do this once every 20 years,” he said.

“It needs to be something that producers interact with a lot more often.”

He also added that this process can not be another “set and forget” exercise.

“I think so many of the things that we do at an industry level where we do consultations and these engagements, we kind of do the consultation, we finish it and then it disappears and no one gets a really clear understanding of what’s happened.

“So the importance of continuity is critical.”

Is a flat $5/head levy still the fairest model?

One potentially significant reform being considered is whether the existing flat-rate transaction levy should remain in place or ultimately be replaced with a rate that moves up and down with cattle values.

Mr Evans said three or four potential models were being considered, such as an ad valorem levy, under which the amount paid would be linked to the value of the animal, or an index-based system linked to a measure such as the Eastern Young Cattle Indicator.

He said no system was perfect including the current flat-rate system.

“The transaction levy has inherent inequities in it,” he said.

“So you’ve got a guy who sells a weaner, he gets a five dollar charge, a guy sells a bull, he gets a five dollar charge.

“So we know that this challenge is with it.

“It’s an imperfect model currently but it’s effective and it works.”

He said the question of how the levy is collected was a complex one and would require more investigation and consultation to ground truth different models and to work with levy collection agents and DAFF, indicated that process is unlikely to be finished by September.

“It’s not just about ‘is this a better model nationally?’

“It’s also about ‘is this equitable for producers across different production systems?’

“But you need to make sure it fits everybody. So there’s some work that needs to be done there to know what it looks like on the ground.”

Could levy funds directly support national producer representation in future?

Another major question being canvassed through the review is whether cattle transaction levy revenue could be used to directly support national producer representation.

Cattle Australia CEO Will Evans addressing a Cattle Transaction Levy review producer consultation meeting in Tamworth, NSW, this morning. Picture: Cattle Australia

Asked if Government rules allow national representative bodies to receive funding from mandatory levies, Mr Evans said “the guidance that we received is it is possible”.

He said the cattle industry structures developed through reforms over previous decades were designed around the principle that producers should sit at the heart of the system and that it should be driven by producers.

“This is something that is there to benefit producers, and producers are the biggest contributors to it.

“The relationships and roles of some of the players in this space are really well defined and really well supported.

“But that pathway to support producers to participate in this probably is the only role that really isn’t supported currently.

“And if we accept that producers are at the core of this, they’re meant to be at the core of this, they’re meant to drive this but they did but they don’t have the financial support to be able to do so then that’s the deficiency we need to look at.”

He also said that it was important that people who had the ability and inclination to participate in representative structures are also supported and trained.

“So what we’re looking at and what we’re consulting on is that we think there’s a there’s a structural issue here. We think producers need to have a say on ‘is this a model that should be driven by them? And if it is that model, how do we make it so that we can support them to do that?’

“There are really clear prohibitions around what you can and can’t do with the levy and most of those I think are appropriate and things that we’re not looking to change.

“What we’re looking to change is how do we get producers supported to be able to participate in these structures more effectively.”

Mr Evans said representation issue had attracted significant interest throughout the consultation process through written and face-to-face feedback.

Feedback from producers indicated they would be willing to participate more heavily in national industry structures but often lacked the time, knowledge or support required.

“There is this desire of producers to say look, ‘I would do more here, I would be happy to participate more, but I don’t have the time or I don’t have the knowledge or I don’t have the support to be able to do that. I can’t walk away from my property for three or four days to go to meetings in Sydney four or five times a year. I just physically can’t do that,” he said.

“So that’s sort of the challenge that was presented to us and what our thinking is now is alright, well how do we address that challenge.”

Can Cattle Australia independently oversee the levy funding question?

Given there is a possibility that the review being driven by Cattle Australia could result in a producer vote to recommend it receives direct funding from future cattle levies, an obvious governance question about governance emerges: is there adequate independence in this process?

Mr Evans said it was important to recognise that Cattle Australia is a producer representative organisation made up of producers, and support it receives goes directly into representing producers.

“It’s really important to understand, Cattle Australia isn’t separate from the industry, it is the body that forms the industry’s views, it’s the body that articulates the views of the industry to government.

“Everybody at a board and a regional consultative committee level are cattle producers who are directly elected by cattle producers.”

He said as the national representative body Cattle Australia is the body tasked with undertaking reviews.

“Yes in this circumstance there’s a question about how we fund this, but we’ve been really clear in saying this is something that was brought to this process, it is something that we’ve been asked to address in this process, and we’re really seeking people’s views.

“And if there is a concern around conflict or there is a concern around people saying this isn’t appropriate, we want to hear that as well.

“We’re not looking to do consultation that agrees with us. We’re looking to consultation that allows us to capture the views of the industry.”

‘If you’re a levy payer, you’re part of it’

Asked if he had any messages he wanted to levy payers to hear before the consultation process closes at the end of this month, he encouraged them to take the opportunity to share their views, even if they felt they did not understand the levy system well enough to contribute to the review.

He acknowledged it was a complex system and process but urged levy payers not to be deterred from having their say.

“The core message from me is if you don’t feel comfortable engaging in this, or you don’t feel like you have enough knowledge about it, or you don’t feel like your perspective would be valued, then you’re wrong.

“It doesn’t matter how well you understand this system. It doesn’t matter.

“You know what your experience is with it. If you’re a levy payer, you’re part of it.

“So come along, be engaged, if you can’t come to a meeting, come to an online meeting, if you can’t come to an online meeting, fill out the survey.

“If you can’t fill out the survey because you can’t get the computer to work, we will mail you a version of it.

“Tell us how to engage with you, and we’ll try to find a way to include that.”

Ultimately, he said, Cattle Australia was “not looking for people to tell us they agree with us”.

“We’re looking for people to tell us what their experience is and we want to hear it.”