![Australian Livestock and Property Agents Association general manager Andy Madigan. Australian Livestock and Property Agents Association general manager Andy Madigan.](/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/38U3JBx5nNussShT8aZyYjc/867f1000-9724-4a86-9484-f4cc9bd5f53a.jpg/r0_307_6000_3694_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg)
FORCING buyers at cattle sales to reveal whose orders they have prior to auction impinged on commercial in-confidence rights and would contribute nothing whatsoever to increasing competition for stock, livestock agents say.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to all our agricultural news
across the nation
or signup to continue reading
Commission buyers and agents have come out strongly against the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s push for a mandatory buyers register to be made publicly available ahead of all cattle sales.
The recommendation was one of 14 made in the ACCC’s interim report following a six-month market study of the beef industry, most aimed at improving transparency in the supply chain and addressing what the independent watchdog found was uncompetitive conduct in the cattle market, particularly saleyards.
The recommendations have been slammed by livestock agents across the country, who say they are vague, contradict each other, encroach on the rights of various stakeholders in the supply chain to do business and demonstrate a lack of understanding of the issues. Australian Livestock and Property Agents Association general manager Andy Madigan said registering intentions did not mean a buyer would follow through.
“Whether or not they actually buy what they turned up hoping to get depends on how the market is travelling, what’s on offer and who they are competing against,” he said.
“Having their name and their clients’ names up there adds nothing to transparency but it is asking for commercially sensitive information to be revealed which can have some very big negative implications to their business.”
Mr Madigan said once a pen was knocked down, it was typical practice for the buyer to provide the name of the client they were going to.
“No one is trying to hide anything - it’s just that providing that information beforehand is revealing their hand to their competition,” he said.
Ultimately, it was supply and demand that determined cattle prices - not what knowledge people have of what their competition is doing, he said.
Livestock agents were very disappointed with the “lack of proof” to come out of the ACCC market study, he said.
“There are lots of allegations being thrown around but no one has been able to offer real evidence,” he said.
“Like the processors, we are saying let us know what it is and where it is happening and we’ll fix it.”
It appeared much of the so-called evidence provided to the ACCC came from a small vocal minority and the wider producer community had no complaints, he said.
“People who are successful know how to read a grid,” he said.
“Ignorance isn’t making the system wrong.”
Agents felt the ACCC had not garnered a good understand of the role of agents in the supply chain, citing recommendations involving ALPA in the expanded data collection of paddock sale prices.
Mr Madigan said that particular recommendation also contradicted the ACCC’s following decision not to recommend the implementation of mandatory reporting of all non-saleyard cattle sales.
As for legislation requiring standardised national licensing of livestock agents and professional buyers, Mr Madigan said: “Good luck with that.”
Extensive efforts to achieve that had already been made, via the National Occupational Licensing Authority, to no avail.
“The states that don’t have it now certainly aren’t going to do it - they don’t find a need for it because they don’t get any complaints and they see it as just more red tape,” he said.
“So recommend away, ACCC.”