News 
 National Rural News 
 Property 
 General 
 Land clearing ban put pressure on land values 

Land clearing ban put pressure on land values

10 Aug, 2009 04:44 PM
Australia's two biggest banks are voicing concern over the value of properties affected by the Queensland government moratorium on clearing of secondary growth.

According to The Australian Financial Review, the moratorium, which began on April 8, has been extended to October while new legislation is drafted, with the result that some farmers have lost land for production.

Commonwealth Bank of Australia's state manager for agribusiness, Richard Brimblecombe, said properties' productive capacity would diminish over time as a result.

"The security value of property held by banks will be diminished by this," he said. "We also think the reduction in productive capacity will mean a reduction in the ability to service loans. It's a double whammy for the primary producers, and that is a concern for all stakeholders."

NAB Agribusiness regional manager for North Queensland and the Northern Territory (which also has clearing moratoriums) Geoff Howard said: "Where there is more regrowth it means there is less feed, less feed means less carrying capacity and properties are valued on carrying capacity."

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size


comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
State Government statutes that overide common law can be expected to really impact farm prices in the near future. This includes native veg, lack of access to water and heritage agreements to mention a few.

I recall a grazier in the NT raising this issue years ago. Looks like he was right. The birds are coming home to roost.

Posted by Archibald, 10/08/2009 7:58:38 PM
It was always going to happen. Farmers and their bank managers survive by dealing with reality. Others can live in leafy suburbs dealing in perceptions.
Posted by Ron Bahnisch, 11/08/2009 3:48:54 AM
At last the banks are saying something about this crazey idea that will have the opposite impact to the one wanted and landholders will pay a huge price.

The banks should now have something to say about the reduction in value of land affected by mining and gas and become a real voice for the maintainance of the value of their moraged assets

Posted by Wally Peart, 11/08/2009 5:50:42 AM
The land clearing ban causes "a reduction in the ability to service loans". Let's hope that this isn't bankspeak for "margin calls on rural debts".


Posted by Keyline Designs, 11/08/2009 7:05:25 AM
Well, gee wiz, the banks are finally discovering the bleeding obvious. Yes, guys, regulations that "deprive the owner of the thing of it", or those that restrict "the use to which land may lawfully be put", constitute a "taking" of property without just compensation.

And as the mortgage lender of those properties, you guys have a professional duty to your shareholders to maintain the integrity of the security on your loans. It is "banking 101" stuff, fellas.

Posted by Ian Mott, 11/08/2009 7:36:16 AM
I was often jolted by the predictions of the conspiracy theorists some years ago, when I saw the things they predicted govts would do to make the landowners serfs in their own country so that they could be taken over by big multinational companies and we would have to work for them for peanuts.

Now I see...maybe the conspiracy theorists weren't so wacky after all!

Posted by Trugger, 11/08/2009 7:39:48 AM
But isn’t this what state governments are supposed to do, their main reason for existence. They spend all day not only devaluing their own assets but everyone else’s as well, with little or no regard as to the consequences of their actions and, they are very good at it.

Placing an ‘instrument’ across people’s property and then sending a couple of public servants out (always in pairs and in brown shirts) to force compliance is the new age in law making and they dare to call it ‘responsible government’.

Posted by Dr Bob, 11/08/2009 8:43:05 AM
Ian Mott, the question is: have the states gone far enough for the banks to take on the state statutes in the courts, now that their equity in some of these properties in now under threat?

That is, the banks now find themselves in the same boat as the landowner who has carried the cost of these statutes without just terms compensation, for a decade or more now.

Posted by John Michelmore, 11/08/2009 10:02:56 AM
Best ask the banks that, John. If they are true to their own standards then they should have taken action long ago. If I were to give away just 1% of the land on which a mortgage is held then I have a contractual obligation to inform the bank, the breach of which is sufficient to allow the bank to cancel the contract. Yet, there are farmers who have had 50% of their property confiscated by Vegnazis.
Posted by Ian Mott, 11/08/2009 11:29:53 AM
Now that financial insitiutions have recognised there is a problem, what will they do? Add a further margin to account for "governmental and regulatory risks"?
Posted by PD Sheridan, 18/08/2009 7:48:14 AM
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
10 August, 2009
07 August, 2009
POLL
Q: Do you believe the RSPCA's claim that live exports can be ended without significantly hurting the economy?

Yes
(16.4%)

No
(80.2%)

Undecided
(3.3%)

Total Votes: 602
Poll Date: 09 August, 2009

Most popular articles

Advertisement

Irwin Hunter 160x160


Farm Weekly







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...