At a high-level, NFF does not support the proposals outlined in the Discussion Paper. Reforms must be guided by the principles of efficiency, fairness, and supporting regional economic resilience. In our view, the proposals outlined lack balance, introduce additional complexity, fail to recognise and integrate with existing legislative frameworks governing Business-As-Usual (BAU) agricultural activity, and fall short in improving efficiencies in current agreement-making processes.
You may also like
NFF Submissions: 2026 Murray-Darling Basin Plan Review Discussion Paper and The Menindee Lakes Review
At this stage of implementation, the central issue for the Review is no longer whether additional volumes of water can be recovered through voluntary water purchase, but whether further recovery is justified given the...
Chrissy KerinProductivity Commission Review into National Water Reform 2026
Significant challenges continue to undermine town water security, particularly in regional and remote areas of the Murray-Darling Basin. In these regions, regulatory and funding constraints have repeatedly impeded...
National Statement on First Nations in Agriculture, Fisheries, and Forestry
While the draft National Statement acknowledges challenges relating to “complexities of communal land tenure, land rights, and limited access to collateral”, the draft National Statement does not attempt to engage...
