Industry-wide price transparency must happen, Mudgegonga beef producers say

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission beef and cattle inquiry was published in March 2017 with a number of recommendations to the industry, including increasing price transparency.

The ACCC later published an updated report in 2018 about a "lack of progress" towards the recommendations.

The updated report claimed the ACCC's view for most of the inaction related to "entrenched" industry positions and roles, a "desire to keep the market opaque", and a lack of bargaining power for producers.

"Where there is appetite for change... The industry has not been able to effectively push this forward," the updated report said.

Beef producers and cousins Loretta and Julian Carroll, Mudgegonga, Victoria, said there was still a lack of progress and were calling on industry bodies and the Federal Government to prioritise price transparency.

The ACCC last released a statement in 2019 which said the industry had taken "some steps" towards improving transparency, but more work was needed.

Cattle Australia (CA) regional consultative committee member Ms Carroll said she joined the organisation because she believed there needed to be greater transparency in the industry.

"[The inquiry] also opened up a lot of other issues, people recognised that it needed more transparency," she said.

"The problem is a lot of the processors wait for the EYCI to come out every week before they set their price."

Ms Carroll said they were calling on more beef producers to join Cattle Australia.

"When you've got good years you don't think about it very much, but overall it is very important when you have the good years and bad years," she said.

"I believe about 90pc of the market goes direct to processors, so the EYCI is only reflecting 10pc of cattle."

CA chief executive Chris Parker said improved transparency in the domestic beef market would allow grass-fed cattle producers to capture better value from their product.

He said this was included in the body's recent submission to a current supermarket price inquiry.

"In doing so, however, caution must be exercised to ensure domestic price signalling doesn't impact international client expectations, given the Australian beef industry exports 75pc of its product," he said.

"We believe the current lack of clear, concise and consolidated market indicators for beef producers is a shortfall that needs to be rectified.

"Not only to help the industry capture more value, but also give the consumer more confidence at the supermarket."

He said the MLA had successfully implemented programs and greater market reporting, and looked forward to continuing to work with the MLA and other peak industry bodies to ensure a transparent domestic supply chain and marketing environment.

Stellar Livestock stud principal Mr Carroll, Mudgegonga, said the gap between beef and cattle prices was where processors were making "huge profits".

Mr Carroll marked 360 calves in 2023, and generally sells his cattle directly to feedlots.

"We do see times where there's a big gap between the cost of livestock and how much money [processors] are making," he said.

"Most people outside of the industry are surprised to learn that the price of beef and the price of cattle are completely uncorrelated.

"When the price of beef is sky high because there's global demand for red meat, that doesn't really trickle down to the producers."

A Meat Livestock Australia (MLA) spokesperson said it was always looking to improve market reporting services for the industry, citing the Online Young Cattle and Online Lamb indicators released in 2023.

"We continue to look for innovative ways to report on market conditions for producers, acknowledging that there has been significant industry change in recent years," the spokesperson said.

They said MLA reported over the hooks (OTH) prices for sheep and cattle, but since April 2023, they have been unable to source cattle OTH prices from the industry.

The spokesperson said the prices were reported weekly until the end of 2022, and the difficulty in sourcing prices meant a change to monthly reporting intervals.

"MLA also reports skins and co-products pricing, based on voluntary contributors.

"Through the National Livestock Reporting Service (NLRS), MLA reports on over 50 physical saleyard markets, producing 16 price indicators that are reported on a daily, weekly and fortnightly basis."

The spokesperson said many recommendations were outside of the MLA's control, and market reporting continued to be dependent on information provided by other industry participants.

"For example, the [ACCC] report recommends reporting of prices for live export cattle," the spokesperson said.

"MLA initiated such reporting in 2022 through the Live Export Price Indicator, but discontinued this indicator based on industry feedback."

An ACCC spokesperson said it had made recommendations on needing enhanced price transparency in agricultural supply chains.

The spokesperson's cited inquiries and market studies included the cattle and beef market study in 2017, dairy inquiry in 2018, wine grape market study in 2019 and perishable agricultural goods inquiry in 2020.

"[It was] to improve competition and market efficiency," the spokesperson said.

"This can be particularly important in concentrated markets."

One of the ACCC's recommendations in the updated report included the Red Meat Advisory Council (RMAC) should have "prime responsibility" for overseeing the implementation of recommendations and for monitoring compliance.

RMAC chief executive Alastair James said RMAC's views on the ACCC recommendations were "largely the same" as in 2018.

"It is not the role of industry bodies to implement competition policy reform nor is it appropriate for RMAC to oversee implementation of such or monitor compliance," he said.

Mr James said in line with RMAC's role, it continued to support stakeholder engagement to provide increased information and awareness in the supply chain, and policy leadership to improve competition policy settings for businesses.