Grain growers are concerned about draft recommendations to change the structure of the industry's peak research and development body.

A draft report to the independent review of the Grains Research and Development Corporation's structure, initiated by the corporation itself, suggests moving gradually from a statutory body towards an industry-owned model, to improve efficiency. Listen Duration: 3 minutes 49 seconds 3 m 49 s Listen Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to seek, up and down arrows for volume. Grains research body review raises concerns amongst growers ( Lucy Barbour ) Download 1.7 MB

Grain Growers Limited's general manager of grower interests, Michael Southan, says there's no evidence to suggest any change is necessary.

"I think there are still a lot of growers asking, 'why has this review taken place?'," he said.

"Growers are certainly are happy to look at what can be improved, but at the same time, they feel a sense of security around a statutory corporation model which they think gives them more protection around levies and how their levies can be used.

"Our view from Grain Growers is that there's not enough evidence there for a complete structural change, but certainly some change may improve some efficiencies in GRDC's working."

The draft report suggests that a hybrid model, somewhere between a statutory and industry-owned corporation, would be a viable option for the GRDC in the short-term future.

Mr Southan says there isn't enough to detail to justify that proposal either.

"There maybe be efficiencies that can be gained simply by looking at some changes, or seeking some exemptions from their current reporting structure as a statutory corporation, which would give them those efficiencies and not require the full time and cost to go through a complete structural change."

The review was announced by the GRDC and its representative organisation, Grain Producers Australia, in February this year.

But the original push for a structural review came from previous GRDC chairman, Keith Perrett, who supports a move to an IOC-model.

The current GRDC chairman, Richard Clark, is yet to be convinced that the current operating system, which has been in place for more than 20 years, needs to change.

"We think we're operating soundly in the current structure that we've got," he said.

"If change was a recommendation, then we'd want to understand the costs and the benefits of doing that change.

"But there's no point doing change for the sake of it.

"If there's a compelling argument, then GRDC would be 100 per cent behind it, but we haven't seen that argument put forward to us yet. So we'll await the outcome of this review with interest."

Making GRDC more commercial

Growers aren't entirely against the 'hybrid' model suggested in the draft report.

Chairman of the NSW Farmers' Association grains committee, Dan Cooper, says while detail on such a model is lacking, it could lead to a more commercial-looking GRDC and less red tape.

"One of the main issues or the main concerns is that the last 12 months has seen GRDC brought closer to government, whereas we'd like to see it probably become at arm's length from government," he said.

"And if we can't do that under the current structure, then maybe the hybrid model would be a way to get a bit of distance from government."

But Mr Cooper doesn't see any reason to move wholly to an IOC model.

Grain Growers Limited's Michael Southan says such a move could see grower levy funds spent more on marketing rather than research, development and extension.

"If you look at Horticulture Australia and Meat and Livestock Australia, there have certainly been some issues there," he said.

"MLA has a very strong marketing push and GRDC has traditionally kept clear or stayed away from marketing work.

"But also it's really about what does industry want from its levies, and in this case growers are certainly very keen to get any productivity gains from good investment from their levy money.

"And at the moment it appears that the current structure is generally delivering that."

Growers want more time

Mr Southan says some growers feel they haven't received adequate time to respond to the review, the draft for which was published in late June.

But chair of the review's steering committee, Terry Enright, who's also a Grain Producers Australia director, has defended any suggestion that the consultation period hasn't been adequate

He says the steering committee, which included representatives from state farming organisations, visited every state and held meetings with growers.

"We set up a website where people could respond in writing. There was an opportunity to put in submissions and we weren't pedantic about the three-week limit," he said.

"People are still putting in submissions now, but even once the final report's in, people can still make submissions on what they feel should happen from here."

The GRDC structure review report is expected to be finalised this week.