Sugar Code keeps industry focused on future

The peak grower body will call on the Federal Government to remake the decade-old Code with practical improvements, saying it remains an important safeguard for fair, orderly negotiations across the industry.

CANEGROWERS CEO Dan Galligan said the industry already had enough pressure points without removing a framework that had helped reduce the risk of prolonged supply disputes.

“The sugar industry is dealing with low sugar prices, fuel and fertiliser supply pressures, recent milling and season-length challenges, pressure on harvesting groups, and the constant risk of weather and natural disasters,” Mr Galligan said.

“At the same time, there are real opportunities ahead, including growing interest in biofuels and renewable energy products where sugarcane has a real opportunity to play a central role.

“To deal with those challenges and make the most of those opportunities, the industry needs growers, millers and marketers pulling in the same direction. The Code helps by taking one major pressure point off the table.”  

The Sugar Code is currently subject to a statutory review ahead of its scheduled sunset date of 1 October 2027, with the review panel to consider whether it should be remade in its current form, remade with amendments, or allowed to expire.

Mr Galligan said the review was an important process, but not a crisis.

“This is a scheduled review of an industry Code that has now been in place for almost a decade,” he said.

“Our position is clear. The Code should be remade, with sensible amendments where they improve how it works in practice.”

Introduced in 2017 following major industry disputes over grower marketing rights, the Sugar Code sets ground rules for negotiations between growers and millers.

It requires parties to negotiate in good faith, protects growers’ ability to choose who markets their Grower Economic Interest sugar, and provides access to pre-contract arbitration if negotiations break down.

Mr Galligan said the Code did not remove commercial risk or guarantee outcomes, but it gave growers and millers a clear framework for resolving difficult issues.

“Arbitration is not something anyone enters into lightly. It can be costly and time-consuming, so it is in everyone’s interest to reach commercial agreement wherever possible,” he said.

“But the existence of that circuit breaker matters. It gives confidence to growers who only have one practical milling option, and it supports fair commercial negotiations across the supply chain.

“Where arbitration has been used, it has helped bring parties to agreement.”

Mr Galligan said CANEGROWERS was preparing a detailed submission to the review and consulting with district organisations and industry stakeholders.

“We know the Code has supported industry stability and confidence across the supply chain. That’s important, because this should not be seen as growers versus millers,” he said.

“This is about maintaining a fair and workable framework that supports the whole industry.”

CANEGROWERS is encouraging growers to make their own submissions before the public consultation period closes on 16 June.

“Growers’ experience matters,” Mr Galligan said.

“This review is an opportunity to explain why the Code remains important, how it has worked in practice, and where practical improvements could be made.

“Our message to growers is simple – have your say. Our message to government is equally simple – retain the Code, improve it where needed, and give the industry the certainty it needs to move forward.”