Barry Haase (Kalgoorlie, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

In the time remaining for debating this matter of public importance, I wish to make some salient points. No. 1 is that Australia is the safest place in the world to be a consumer of high-quality, high-protein, high-iron beef. That is what is important and what needs to be maintained. What we do not need is any change in government policy that puts that wonderful reputation at risk. The last thing we want—and this is not frightening the horses or scaremongering, as the minister would suggest—is a policy from the Australian government that puts that reputation at risk. If the government has a problem and the industry has a problem with an outbreak causing the removal of meat from all the shelves in all the states across Australia then let the Minister for Trade via the department come up with a solution that does not put Australian beef at risk. Do not throw the baby out with the bathwater, Minister. We do not need to do that.

In Australia we have a protocol that allows us to trace the whereabouts, history and movements of a farm animal from birth to death. No equal system exists anywhere else in the world. Why then should we accept beef from countries that have had outbreaks of BSE if they cannot and will not replicate our trace system from birth to death? It is a question that producers right across this nation are asking, Minister. That question needs to be answered honestly and with great assurance so that our industry know that the impositions being placed on them as producers to put product into our market are equal to the impositions placed on overseas producers if they are now being invited to put their product into our market. This is about consumers and industry producers relying on receiving equity from this minister.

We are being asked to accept that assessment equals analysis. In matters of importing goods from overseas, an assessment is a simple process, the parameters of which are laid down by parts of the UN, and producing countries have to certify under that assessment regime. It is a process undertaken by the hopeful exporting country. It is not a process undertaken by Australia, Australian producers or the industry at large. What the minister is suggesting is that mere assessment under the UN protocols is sufficient because Australian authorities will tick the box that the risk assessment has been carried out and that will give everyone peace of mind.

Debate interrupted.

See this speech in context