A farmer who led opposition to land-clearing bans has rubbished the National Farmers' Federation proposal that graziers be redressed for their contribution to Australia's emissions reduction targets.
As the coalition government considers setting a target to make the economy carbon neutral by 2050, the farm lobby has called on the federal Nationals to promote redress for landholders affected by policies aimed at meeting Kyoto climate protocols.
Queensland grazier Adma Sargood said no level of compensation would be adequate for the impact land-clearing laws had on her family.
"You could never compensate me for what I've lost for these vegetation laws," she told Queensland Country Hour.
Mrs Sargood and her late husband Scott were staunchly opposed to the laws and claimed it made running cattle on their properties in south-west Queensland increasingly difficult.
She said farmers wanted to be able to manage their land without being hamstrung by government policy.
"We're not in this to go broke, or wreck the country … It's our life … we need to be able to manage our farms, our land, and our trees," Mrs Sargood said.
Land clearing and Kyoto
During the 1990s and early 2000s, the Queensland and New South Wales governments introduced bans on land clearing.
Richard Heath, the executive director of the Australian Farm Institute, said the land-clearing bans helped Australia meet its international climate obligations.
"By putting land-clearing bans in place, those emissions that would have occurred by land-clearing were able to be credited against our emissions target reduction.
"It was a really easy way to avoid a whole heap of emissions [that] were assumed were going to happen.
"It went a very significant way to helping Australia meet its Kyoto targets."
Mr Heath said it was important that farmers were part of "the solution to climate change" and that acknowledging the impact of earlier policies could help to rebuild trust between farmers and governments as new climate change mitigation policies are introduced.
"It is also important to acknowledge the way that land-clearing bans and land use change has been the main factor that Australia has performed against its Kyoto targets," Mr Heath said.
Mr Heath said by meeting the Kyoto protocols through land use change, it meant the focus on emissions reduction, energy transition, and fuel efficiencies were neglected.
"We've fallen behind the rest of the world now, just because there was that easy win through land use change that was able to be put in place," he said.
Regions don't want to be done over again
The NFF has not put a figure on the cost of issuing redress, but the appeal follows Resources Minister Keith Pitt's call last week that the Commonwealth create a $250 billion loan facility for future mining projects.
The big-spending suggestions come as the Nationals partyroom could be forced to negotiate with its coalition partner on a net zero emissions by 2050 target.
When asked on Monday if his party would endorse the target, Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce said he did not want a repeat of the impact that the Kyoto protocols had on regional Australians.
"That's how they did the Kyoto process."
Mr Joyce said the Nationals wanted to ensure any climate policy it supported would not be to the detriment of regional Australians.
One of the 'most beneficial' climate policies
When asked whether he supported the NFF's proposal, Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese said land-clearing bans were one of the major reasons Australia had been able to meet its emissions targets.
"One, the former Labor government's renewable energy target, a target they opposed.
"The other issue was that of land-clearing changes by state Labor governments that were resisted by Liberal and National parties at every opportunity.
"They've been the two big benefits that Australia has had."
The president of community group Gladstone Conservation Council, Jan Anders, said he found it extraordinary that the NFF was seeking reward for land management.
