Asia's appetite to drive our farming: Food Plan

SUE NEALES 

THE government's first national food strategy makes clear what agricultural scientists have been saying for the past decade: it is impossible for Australia to double its food production by 2050 to meet growing world demand without the use of all available investment, innovation and scientific advances.

On a financial level, that means accepting that foreign investment in agriculture in the purchase of our farms and key food processing plants, as has occurred rapidly in sugar mills in the past 18 months, is here to stay, and probably at an enhanced level.

As pointed out by the National Food Plan green paper, released for public comment yesterday, there will be 3.2 billion affluent and middle-class people living in the Asian region by 2030, mostly in China, India and Indonesia.

It will be their food needs, not ours, driving the expected Australian agricultural boom.

As the plan starkly states: "Australian investment alone is not enough for our food industry to continue to grow, so foreign investment remains critical to the ongoing success of our agriculture and food sectors."

Just as Chinese investment has driven Australia's mining boom, so will it be the prime mover behind the new "dining boom".

Another stark reality lies ahead for all those who object to the use of crops bred using the latest biotechnology techniques, including genetic manipulation. The green paper makes it clear that without the adoption of all the latest agricultural innovations and technologies, it will not be possible to meet the challenge of growing twice as much food by 2050.

At a farm level, that undoubtedly means using all forms of enhanced biotechnology and crop and animal breeding techniques available, including growing genetically modified crops.

These new crop varieties have been bred by scientists and seed and chemical companies to meet specific agricultural, processing or nutritional demands. Usually they are higher-yielding varieties, producing more crops, seeds or, at the most basic level, kilojoules of food, on the same amount of land.

At other times, as is the case for the GM cotton varieties grown in Australia, the scientific manipulation results in a plant that is more resistant to common diseases or insects, reducing the need for frequent chemical sprays.

Sometimes the genetic modification is little more than a quicker way of selecting and breeding for natural variations and traits already in some plants.

The more contentious side of genetic modification is inter-species gene manipulation or genetic engineering. That is when genes from entirely different species of animals, plants or bacteria are spliced into the gene mix of common crops such as sorghum, wheat and corn for a specific purpose, such as bestowing a new colour along the lines of the blue rose, a longer shelf life, a new disease-fighting mechanism or a different type of protein or production system.

The green paper makes it clear that no farmer will be forced to grow crops he or she does not want to grow, and no consumer forced to eat food they do not want to.

Clearer labelling for nutritional value, place of origin and GM presence is also on the cards, according to Agriculture Minister Joe Ludwig.

"The Australian government supports farmers' right to choose which crops they plant; ultimately their decisions will be determined by factors such as market acceptance and the costs of production," the plan says.

"But food produced by new and alternative technologies (such as GM crops) can bring benefits such as improved human and animal health and nutrition, greater affordability, better tasting food, a more sustainable food supply, reduced chemical use and increased productivity."

Original Article Here