by Alicia Burgman Portfolio Leader Agriculture and FMCG

Climate change is the biggest scapegoat out there at the moment. It seems almost everything that’s going wrong at the moment can be linked to and designated to be a result of climate change. One sector that has been waiting patiently for the penny to drop is the agriculture sector, in particular those growing food for domestic and international markets. Climate change also formed the basis of the Prime Minister’s speech at yesterday’s ABARE Outlook conference in Canberra. Country areas have long been the stronghold of The Nationals, but last year’s election highlighted the changing nature of rural voters with one third of the 45 seats in the country now held by the ALP (See P&Ps analysis in the Rudd Book for more).

While there will always be arguments about the environmental footprint of certain sectors, it’s difficult to dispute the fact that Australian farmers don’t have a long history working with the weather. From searing drought to flooding rains, they’ve seen it all and unlike most of us who can still get up and go to work regardless of the weather, the changing patterns are directly impacting the viability of an entire industry.

This is not to say changing weather patterns are a new phenomenon for farmers. Their livelihoods depend on their ability to accurately forecast weather patterns and plan accordingly. While this has been challenging recently, farmers are used to changing their plans depending on what the weather is doing. This sector is opportunistic in nature and has to be to ensure its survival.

Farmers’ understanding of these patterns should be drawn upon by decision makers to inform policy. There’s a wealth of information farmers can provide in terms of really pinpointing differences in the climate patterns in recent times. It was great to read recently that it’s these older farmers who are really convinced there’s something out of the ordinary going on here, which is a change from what you normally hear and see.

While there’s still a lot of air left in the climate change debate, it’s a debate we need to have. While the commercial impacts of changing production to become ‘climate friendly’ are real and likely to be large, this is an debate which requires vision. And if we don’t start looking for solutions to the problems we have created, the outlook for future generations is certainly bleak

“John, as you know I am a meat man… I’m looking forward to some Australian beef…”
- US President George W Bush

It’s here! The much anticipated APEC wagon has rolled, or more accurately sped at a pre-ordained constant 80kph traffic light-free motorcade into Sydney.

Returning to its birthplace, Australia, it’s a coming of age for the economic cooperation that was formed in 1989 with twelve members and a pure trade focus.

Much has been made about whether any major outcomes will result from APEC with detractors saying its nothing but a talkfest. But reality and the early signs are promising with Australia and the US signing major defence, visa, trade and IP treaties today and the mood optimistic APEC will deliver some major regional trade progress.

APEC and separate bilateral talks scheduled this week look likely to throw a lifeline to the sinking Doha Round.

The buzz today is of course the visit by President Bush and the discussions being held with his long time ally, friend and ‘man of steel’ John Howard. Both are under siege on their respective home fronts, so we can assume the two must be keen to find solace in their mutual concerns: Iraq, Afghanistan and climate change. Bush has all but thwarted any hopes Howard had on an APEC climate change direction by calling his own summit on the issue to be held later this year in Washington but it will still be a major agenda item for this Friday.

Last week John Howard was forced to concede that people hoping for tangible targets on emissions and binding agreements on climate change will be disappointed. But that doesn’t mean APEC is tokenistic. World leaders have scheduled bilateral meetings with anyone who’s anyone during the summit. Howard has a diary full of talks. Bush has scheduled bilateral talks with Chinese leader Hu Jintao, Indonesia’s Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and potentially important talks with Russia’s Vladimir Putin. Add this to talks with Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and the South Korans and it is clear that APEC is serving to bring sides together. There is hope too that the summit will help reengage leaders involved in the seemingly dismal Doha round of the WTO libralisation talks. This outcome alone would warrant the security price tag attached to hosting the talks.

For APEC detractors, global coverage of Australia has already been immense in the US, Canada, Asia and Russia.

By Alicia Burgmann

It seems it’s not only parents who have trouble getting kids to eat healthily. The NSW Government recently has had to bolster their original healthy-canteen policy after they found it wasn’t working in some schools across the state.

School canteens in NSW have adopted a ‘traffic light’ system of assigning nutritional value, as in green is a good food which you should eat more of (i.e. fresh fruit and vegetables) and red foods are those you should avoid. This approach is similar to the voluntary Traffic light labelling scheme adopted by the UK Government's Food Standards Agency early in 2005. Supermarkets and manufacturers in the UK are encouraged to indicate the level of fat, saturates, sugar and salt in food by using red, amber and green colour codes.

Advocates of the traffic light labelling system in the UK claim it has encouraged food manufacturers to improve the nutritional content of their products. However, critics say food manufacturers shouldn’t be responsible for labelling foods as bad. They should simply provide consumers with a range of products and information to help them make informed choices about what they eat.

In Australia, are we about providing consumers, including children, with choice when it comes to purchasing decisions?

It would seem to me that restricting the availability of certain food products to kids should take a back seat to educating them about healthy food choices. What we eat during our childhood can influence our future eating habits, weight and health for life. If children don’t understand the importance of a balanced healthy diet in maintaining a healthy lifestyle, how are they going to be equipped with the knowledge to make healthy food choices as they get older?