Submision regarding Ammonium Nitrate costs

I have no issues with the security aspect and considering the nature of the materials possible potential the security measures are of no problem.
The COAG situation has however introduced substantial costs which cannot be passed on to anyone.
I have spoken to many govt people at Federal Level and have been given some really odd responses to the Ammonium Nitrate regulations and compliance costs.

From Norm Blackman Senior Adviser to Hon Peter Mc Gauran MP
Why is there no grants to pay for the security – no funding was made available
I have been searching for 3 years for funding to pay for the security measures no required no grants.
The cost of SECURITY is the COST of DOING BUSINESS
So how do I pass on the cost answer just pass it on to your customers.
We sell our produce by Auction – answer Oh Farmers are price takers .
This is from the SENIOR ADVISER TO THE MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE.

From the elecorate office of DAVID HAWKER.
The cost of the 40 foot high cube container is expected to be $ 4000.
I already have $20000 of infrastructure to make Urea Ammonium Nitrate solution and apply it.
DH office oh you should consider this and investment.
This cost is not and investment as it has no part in my process to make UAN.
DH office You can pass the costs on to your customers.
We auction our Product
DH office oh well when you sell the produce just add the cost to the bill to your customers
Don’t know her name older blond women .
How did Vickery Bros get the $200000 grant under the Dairy Grant Scheme to build sheds for fertiliser .
They are not dairy farmers how where they eligble – the got the funding because they were going to help the farmers, considering this group is a very large fertiliser reseller and carrier spreading contractor they were eligble for funding.

I was in Horsham at the meeting on chemicals with Rob Floyd, the other farmers there stated the same thing we do not have a problem with the security just so long as it doesn’t cost us any money.
We have a never ending supply of new compliant costs that just keep on coming from so many different govt depts it seems no one has given it any thought as to how we are suppose to keep paying for things which do not bring in any increase in income.
An example is current sales of lambs yielded $10000 less than expected and based on tax return data prices received are back to the price obtained in 2001.
The prices we buy in things are not wound back to 2001 prices because we are getting less for our product.
The current grain prices are not anything like the normal market value placed on the grain in the world market.
Farm produce is sold on world price and inputs are based on domestic prices which are in general for ag inputs much less on the world market place since we seem to keep being told of the “globalisation” which only applies to some things not all.

The prices generally received for Agricultural produce would not keep up with the prices that are placed on the inputs required for farms.
A farm is not a sustainable operation as it is like any other factory everything sold needs unputs to replace and replenish the soils or capital.
My own opinion is that farm product in Australia is subsidised only the people who produce it are the ones who subsidises it.
My own experience is no holidays no days off practically no money for the work involved and some weeks have long hours and one week I can account for for the statistics was 80 hours of work time.
I am not the only one working like this.

I hope you will get some value from this submission as to the extra costs that just keep adding to our operating expense.

Tom Napier