Patrick Secker (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

From the outset I want this chamber to know that I believe Australia is the best place to eat beef in the world. I also believe that Australia is the safest place to eat beef in the world. Our standards ensure that there are no risks to the quality of the meat and the Labor government should be doing their utmost to retain this quality.

The reputation of Australian beef must be protected at all costs. Standards should be equivalent to current Australian standards, meaning that any country which has had a BSE outbreak must have an equivalent to the Australian National Livestock Identification Scheme, the NLIS. That should be in place before they can import beef into Australia. The minister is responsible for making this happen, and I will come to this later.

There has been some concern about the lack of consultation surrounding the government’s decision to abolish the ban on beef imports from countries which have had a BSE outbreak. I accept the minister’s comments today that he has consulted, but certainly the coalition will be moving a private member’s bill to ensure that not only is a full and independent risk analysis undertaken by the minister’s department but any beef coming into Australia is produced under the same high standards as Australian beef, and that this is enacted under this legislation.

It is important to know the difference between the risk assessment that the minister has used and the full independent risk analysis that we believe should be instituted. A full independent risk analysis is driven and measured by Australia. The risk assessment is an international assessment driven by the countries wanting to export to us, with the hope that they fully comply.

I will quote from the letter that the trade minister referred to in his speech, and we thank the minister for supplying us with this information. But I say to the minister that it is not possible when you are using points 4, 5 and 6 to actually comply with points 1 and 2. I note that the minister did not quote from points 4, 5 and 6. About point 4: we have electronic ear tags in Australia. I am a beef producer, and the tags are a nuisance, but we have been using them for years as part of being in that system. We actually know from birth to death where that animal has been. With tags you say, ‘We will accept same, or alternative methods are accepted—yes to plastic ear tags.’ Animals lose plastic ear tags, they have them ripped out of their ears and they fade so they are unreadable. I know this because I am a farmer and I have been using sheep tags all my life. All my animals get tagged within 24 hours of birth, and I can tell you we take the greatest care but they get lost, they get ripped out and they fade and become unreadable. So you cannot have the same compliance with tracing animal to origin or birth, or tracing the animals forward when these things occur. It always happens.

You say that alternative methods are accepted for the national vendor declaration. I do not know that some countries take the same care with their declarations that we do in Australia.

See this speech in context