AUSTRALIAN grain growers need an organisation that is in tune with their needs, without imposing extra costs, writes CHARLES ARMSTRONG

The NSW Farmers' Association and the Western Australian Farmers Federation have signed a memorandum of understanding relating to the future representation of grain growers in Australia.

We have undertaken this to secure a new body responsible for this aim - National Grains Australia.

NGA will be a collaborative body established and supported by state farm organisations in Australia. The association and WAFarmers intend to work together to provide Australian grain growers effective representation.

You can argue that the drive from Western Australia and NSW to create NGA is not surprising, since these states account for more than 60 per cent of both winter and summer crop production.

NSW grower Peter Mailler represents the interests of another model being proposed - Grain Producers Australia.

Under the GPA proposal, Australian grain growers will be asked to pay a levy of 0.035 per cent of farm-gate value of grain, in the body's initial year to fund the organisation's operations.

This will be on top of fees they already pay to be a member of their state farming organisation.

It is our belief that growers will not accept another levy to fund a grains peak body, as outlined in the GPA plan, certainly not to the tune of $1.3 million.

The other basic difference between these two proposals is that our model will be a representative structure, not a company.

One of the main reasons GCA had so many difficulties was because it was operating under a company structure, which significantly limited the state farming organisations' ability to report back to their members.

Mr Mailler suggested last week that our model aimed to recreate the old Grains Council of Australia structure, that of a company limited by guarantee.

The NSW Farmers' Association withdrew its membership from GCA due to the process, the policy-setting mechanism and company structure. Also, their refusal to pay membership subscription fees to the National Farmers' Federation created an untenable position.

In fact, our plans for NGA will see it as an unincorporated body where the liability of the members will be limited. We are also open to negotiating this structure, not locking in a system to the detriment of growers.

NGA will be an efficient body, as it will use existing state farming body services, resulting in a better service for growers.

It is our belief all the state farming organisations can financially afford to fund the NGA framework.

While it's true that the state farming organisations have a plethora of issues that they represent their members on, we are focused on ensuring our members are also represented by an effective national peak representative body.

The NSW Farmers' Association has the money available to support NGA because the money was allocated in the budget previously and the Association's board has still allowed that to be available.

Mr Mailler asks which state's grain policy will have precedence. I've given the answer previously - this is a representative body.

Policy votes will be allocated to each member state organisation on the basis of production data obtained from the Australian Crop Report by the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics for the most recent financial year.

In an unprecedented move, NGA will also have some links to the NFF. This is significant, as the NFF commodities board needs a body representing the grains industry and anybody purporting to represent growers must be committed to this aim.

Grain production is an integral part of our members' operations.

The Association wants our members, and indeed all grain growers in Australia, to have a relevant body that is in tune with grower needs and without the imposition of further levies.

National Grains Australia is that body.