A new Australian Government drought plan

Australian Government Drought Plan

20th September 2024
Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3

Question 1: Is the Australian Government’s approach to drought across the drought cycle clear in the

draft plan?................................................................................................................................... 3

Question 2: Is the draft plan clear as to why the Australian Government’s drought policy and response

is di erent from that for natural disasters? ................................................................................... 3

Question 3: Does Pillar 1 – Evidence-based decision-making provide greater clarity about when, why,

how, and what the government will consider when determining its response to drought? ............... 4

Question 4: Does Pillar 2 – Strategic drought support provide greater clarity about how the Australian

Government will respond across the drought cycle, including what support it will not provide? ....... 4

Question 5: Have you identified any gaps in how we have responded to any of the review

recommendations in the draft plan? ............................................................................................. 5

Question 6: Do you have any comments on the work underway for us to consider as we progress it?

................................................................................................................................................... 5

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 5
Introduction

TasFarmers, as the peak representative body for Tasmanian farmers, welcomes the opportunity to provide input into the Australian Government’s Drought Plan. Tasmania’s agricultural sector faces unique challenges due to its seasonal variability, lack of irrigation infrastructure in several regions, and the complexities of transporting livestock and produce across Bass Strait, King Island, and Flinders
Island. As such, TasFarmers strongly advocates for a focus on preparedness rather than a reactive response to drought, ensuring that farmers can better withstand the impacts of dry seasons.

This submission will provide answers to the six questions posed in the consultation paper, with a focus on the needs of Tasmania’s agricultural community.

Question 1: Is the Australian Government’s approach to drought across the drought cycle clear in the draft plan?

The Australian Government’s approach to drought preparedness, response, and recovery is broadly understood. However, the specific challenges facing Tasmania due to its variable climate and infrastructure limitations require a stronger focus on preparedness, particularly for regions where irrigation is scarce.

Tasmanian farmers, especially those on dryland farms, are particularly vulnerable to the variability of seasonal rainfall. Ensuring these farmers have access to preparedness measures such as improved water storage infrastructure and drought-resilient crops is critical. The draft plan could be clearer in articulating the importance of long-term planning and investments in infrastructure, particularly in states like Tasmania where response measures alone will not su ice.

Question 2: Is the draft plan clear as to why the Australian Government’s drought policy and response is di erent from that for natural disasters?

The distinction between drought and natural disasters is well-established within the draft plan.
However, Tasmania’s experience highlights that while droughts are slower in onset, they still place significant strain on critical infrastructure, particularly in livestock processing and transport. For instance, the need for additional livestock processing capacity during dry periods, and the logistical challenges of shipping animals across Bass Strait, King Island, and Flinders Island, are unique considerations that are often overlooked when comparing drought to fast-onset natural disasters.

It is important for drought policy to incorporate provisions for managing the long-term impacts on infrastructure, such as livestock processing facilities and transportation routes, ensuring they remain functional and e icient during extended dry periods.
Question 3: Does Pillar 1 – Evidence-based decision-making provide greater clarity about when, why, how, and what the government will consider when determining its response to drought?

Pillar 1 emphasises evidence-based decision-making, which is critical for ensuring that policy responses are timely and well-targeted. However, the evidence-based approach should also account for the regional variations in how drought a ects farming communities. In Tasmania, where irrigation infrastructure does not cover all areas, decisions around preparedness should prioritise water storage projects, climate-resilient crops, and sustainable land management practices.

The Australian Government should prioritise the collection of localised data from sources such as the
TAS Farm Innovation Hub (the Hub), Natural Resource Management (NRM) Tasmania, and the
Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture (TIA). These organisations provide valuable insights on how to e ectively prepare for and respond to drought conditions at a state level, ensuring that Tasmania's unique challenges are considered in national decision-making.

Additionally, the drought plan should recognise the Hub's recent collaboration with farming organisations like TasFarmers, which enhances their outreach and impact. This integrated approach would benefit all states and jurisdictions by strengthening the connection between research, development bodies, and local farming communities.

Question 4: Does Pillar 2 – Strategic drought support provide greater clarity about how the
Australian Government will respond across the drought cycle, including what support it will not provide?

Pillar 2 outlines the strategic support available across the drought cycle, but further clarity is needed on how specific regions like Tasmania can access support tailored to their needs. For example, dry seasons in Tasmania create a unique set of challenges for livestock producers, particularly regarding processing capacity and transport logistics.

During dry periods, processing delays and shipping livestock across Bass Strait and to and from the islands are significant bottlenecks. Ensuring that these critical infrastructure needs are considered in the government's drought response is essential. Support should also include subsidies or incentives to address these logistical challenges, ensuring the sector remains resilient during prolonged dry conditions.
Question 5: Have you identified any gaps in how we have responded to any of the review recommendations in the draft plan?

A notable gap is the transportation issues during drought. Tasmania’s reliance on transporting livestock across Bass Strait creates vulnerabilities during dry seasons when destocking becomes necessary.

Furthermore, the draft plan could more explicitly address the need for regional water management solutions in areas that lack irrigation infrastructure. Investing in infrastructure that improves water capture, storage, and distribution would strengthen Tasmania’s resilience to future droughts.

Question 6: Do you have any comments on the work underway for us to consider as we progress it?

TasFarmers recommends integrating ongoing research and projects from the TAS Farm Innovation Hub,
NRM, and TIA into the final plan. These organisations are continually working on drought resilience strategies specific to Tasmania, and their insights would be invaluable in shaping both local and national drought preparedness measures.

For instance, these organisations are researching drought-tolerant crops and water-e icient farming techniques, which could be critical for shaping policy around preparedness in Tasmania. Incorporating this work into the broader strategy would ensure that Tasmania’s agricultural sector is well-positioned to face future challenges.

Conclusion

Tasmania’s unique climatic conditions, limited irrigation infrastructure, and reliance on livestock processing and transport infrastructure require a drought policy that prioritises preparedness over reactive response. By strengthening infrastructure, focusing on proactive water management, and addressing logistical challenges such as livestock transport, Tasmania’s farmers can better manage the risks posed by drought.

TasFarmers appreciates the opportunity to contribute to the consultation and looks forward to ongoing engagement with the Australian Government to ensure that Tasmania’s agricultural sector is resilient in the face of future droughts.