WOOLGROWERS' have delivered a scathing assessment of the Wool Selling System Review (WSSR), accusing Australian Wool Innovation (AWI) of presenting a 'sanitised' and 'diluted' report to media.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to all our agricultural news
across the nation
or signup to continue reading
AWI banned media from attending last week's WSSR industry workshop in Melbourne, choosing to hold a press conference with details of the discussion following the event.
Stock & Land has since been inundated with calls from woolgrowers who have withdrawn their support for the panel's proposal to modernise the wool market via an online Wool Exchange Portal (WEP).Growers believe the mixed reports between what was in media reports and what was discussed in the meeting reflects the WEP "has grown legs" and developed beyond what is being exposed.
Woolgrowers have bandied together to reject support for the WEP, fearing the technology would impact the current two per cent compulsory wool levy.
Wool Producers Australia director Joe Keynes, Keyneton, SA, said the growers were apprehensive about the WEP due to concerns about financing the system. "As woolgrowers, we don't need to be the one investing our money in this," Mr Keynes said.
"I didn't hear growers saying absolutely not, I heard a lot of cynicism so it will take leadership from a group of organisations to make it happen and there is certainly no appetite for growers' money to fund this further."
The WSSR main recommendation was the WEP - a metasearch engine which would be linked to current online selling systems such as AuctionsPlus and WoolTrade as well as automated access to existing open-cry auctions.
"The panel's brief was to look at the selling system and identify efficiencies and saving opportunities for wool growers - they've had a good hard look at the different ways to sell wool, the auction system is only one way, and they haven't come back with anything that shows us we are inefficient with our selling system," Mr Keyes said.
"We can always say it has been a waste of money and that we have invested our money in coming up with no result, but in actual fact, we have to have a look at the systems occasionally to have confidence our wool is being sold in a reasonably efficient manner and we are extracting the best returns we possibly can."
Rankins Springs grazier Jock Munro, "The Brae", was vocal during the workshop and said the "panel of academics had missed the mark" on stabilising and improving the wool market.
In his submission to the WSSR, Mr Munro wrote of his strong support for the successful New Zealand Merino business model - a growers co-operative based in Christchurch.
"We have an uneven amount of wool being placed on the market with swings of up to 25,000 bales a day," he said.
"The review should have focused on ways of stabilising the industry and raising the price for growers - if it is a pure portal on selling alternatives for growers, it is a non-event.
"There is plenty of information out there now so the concept won't change the basic fundamentals of an extremely volatile market place that is not very profitable - the proof of that is in the pudding, it is an industry shrinking."
Chairman of Quality Softwools Australia Peter Small, Wilderness, Coleraine, has been wool grower for 55 years and believed the WEP needed to be market driven to ensure it was commercially viable.
"If the industry can make it work, it will work, but the market will drive it - it certainly shouldn't come out of our wool tax money," Mr Small said.
"If there is a need, there are plenty of people within the industry that will set up a website to show that information - you don't need a million dollar inquiry to work that out."
He said the industry poor grower reaction to the WSSR recommendations would draw attention to the September WoolPoll, which determines the rate of levy paid to AWI for industry research, development and marketing.
"I think the WSSR is simply finger pointing to deflect attention away from the bureaucrats who run the system," Mr Small said.
"There is widespread concern about all the growers' money spent on promotion despite the demand and price not going up.
"What this review is doing is galvanising growers who are sitting on the fence about the wool tax and I think AWI will find it hard to maintain the wool tax now - this was another operation in wasting money."
AWI did not respond to Mr Small's comments but issued a statement that said the WSSR was requested by woolgrowers who wanted to "explore the opportunities for advancement".
"The Panel is highly credentialed to examine and communicate the issues and further submissions are welcome before a final report later this year," the statement read.
"AWI stands by its record of marketing and wool prices since efforts began in 2010 are the ultimate measure."
