Considering Cane To Indonesia

By Kevin Borg, Chairman, CANEGROWERS Mackay

‍
There has been plenty said about Sugar Research Australia's decision to supply clean plant source to a fledgling Indonesian cane growing industry.
At first glance many people have seen the potential negatives in this decision, in that an Australian research organisation is assisting an emerging market competitor with Australian-developed varieties. Growers and millers pay compulsory levies to Sugar Research Australia (SRA), with co-funding coming from federal government, and grants through other government areas, including Queensland DAF.
The SRA decision to sell plant propagation material for the development of West Papuan sugarcane production is not something that CANEGROWERS was involved in. SRA is an independent organisation.
SRA has a long reputation for skilled development of varieties with traits adapted to disease resistance, harvest timing, and climatic conditions. SRA has been clear in public statements over the past year that there are reasons for the decision to share Australian-developed varieties and expertise, that are tied to its current strategic plan, and tied to increasing its revenue base, to "sustain and enhance its operations".
To my mind, while CANEGROWERS may not have been party to the decision, we can but look into the reasoning for their decision and see that there are some very strong, legitimate arguments that benefit our own industry as to why it should be done. And I'm sure the SRA board has not taken the decision lightly.
The project involved trials of 12 different varieties to determine what might be suited to West Papuan conditions. The trial has largely involved tissue culture, but Indonesian expansion of the trial made use of billets sourced from surplus clean seed stock from the Herbert Productivity Services.
When we put the risk of supporting the development of a competitor into perspective, we need to realise that, if it is not our own industry doing this, another will. Also, with Indonesia being so geographically close to our own industry it is in our interest to make sure that material and knowledge being used to develop their industry is pest and disease free. With a raft of pests and diseases in overseas industries and our successes thus far to keep them at bay, why would we put all that past work at high risk.
Moreover, in terms of variety disease resistance, Indonesian propagation will give an opportunity to see how the Australian-developed varieties perform in exposure to a disease or pest, which will better prepare the Australian industry for a potential disease outbreak
Has SRA given away our Intellectual Property? No: they have a solid contract with Indonesia with payment for the planting material supplied and a strong return on royalties for every tonne grown into the future. Arguably, this would give SRA further funding to advance our own industry.
Realistically, we will never be able to outstrip our competitor nations on production, particularly where labour is cheaply sourced. The Australian sugar industry needs to have the confidence to back itself, to know that we have the world's most sustainable production systems, the world's best R&D, strong credentials in safety and ethical workforce conditions. As the world looks for sustainable, ethically produced sugar and sugarcane to meet an ever-increasing variety of food and manufacturing applications, it is the Australian product that is recognised as a world leader. That is our niche, our strength.
One could question whether SRA has consulted sufficiently with its stakeholders and if it could have done better in that department. That will always be a question put forward in a controversial situation like this one and in hindsight SRA will probably assess they could have done better.

‍

Sugar Research Australia has a quality plant breeding program.  Photo source: SRA

‍