Question Time AU

General Debate

Nicholls Electorate: Agriculture

House of Representatives · Tuesday 26 May 2026

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

Sam Birrell raised concerns about the disconnect between Canberra policy and regional realities, citing increased costs for farmers due to water management and compliance burdens. He criticised the government for taking credit for projects initiated by the previous administration and highlighted the need for federal infrastructure support. The debate focused on the economic pressures facing agricultural businesses in northern Victoria, including rising input costs and regulatory demands. Birrell argued that current policies were unsustainable for small businesses and called for reduced government interference. No other members spoke, and the motion was part of a general grievance debate.

Outcome

The speech was delivered as part of a general grievance debate with no further discussion or vote recorded in the transcript.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Opened the debate

Birrell argued that federal policies under the Albanese government were increasingly detached from the realities of regional Australia, particularly in the Nicholls electorate. Birrell stated that the Murray-Darling Basin Plan reduced available irrigation water, forcing farmers to pay higher prices for temporary water and system maintenance. Birrell claimed that government compliance costs were rising as a proportion of business expenses, creating an unsustainable burden on small agricultural enterprises. Birrell also criticised changes to capital gains tax, arguing they penalised farmers selling assets built over a lifetime. Birrell contended that the current administration was taking credit for the fertiliser project in north-western Australia, which he asserted was established and funded by the previous coalition government.