Mike Kelly (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

It is a shame that we have had to prolong the embarrassment of the member for Wide Bay on this issue of live animal exports after his statements on Radio National today. To reiterate, this issue has a long generation going back the many years of the Howard government's time in office—the full 12 years in fact. The relationship and arrangements that related to the MLA began with John Anderson's activities back in 1997. So this has a long history. But, once again, this is another case of the coalition being asleep at the wheel as they were on so many issues during those Rip Van Winkle years.

We should systematically respond in this matter of public importance by talking about what the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has done and what is at stake, what is involved and how technically difficult this issue is. We should highlight that the minister initiated action on this matter back in January, well before the Four Corners material was aired on 30 May. He wrote to the industry asking them to address the issue of better animal welfare and then followed through by working with the industry in follow-on contact. The essential part of this was that we were seeking transparency and trying to work through the lack of verification across the system. In my earlier comments I referred to some of the subsequent action that has been taken. I emphasise the action taken by the Australian Chief Veterinarian Officer on 31 May after the program was aired, but the letter that the minister wrote was way back in January.

The minister acted aggressively after a full airing of that program. He only saw the footage on the day it was made available prior to programming. He responded by asking for orders to be prepared to enforce the complete suspension of live animal exports. He directed DAFF to implement a moratorium on the installation of any new Mark 1 boxes and he also instructed the Australian Chief Veterinarian Officer to coordinate an independent scientific assessment of the ongoing appropriateness of both the Mark 1 and Mark 4 restraint boxes.

On 8 June, the minister suspended the export of live cattle to Indonesia and made it very clear that that would remain in effect until there was a verifiable and transparent supply chain giving us assurance up to and including the point of slaughter for every consignment that leaves Australia. This was followed on 13 June by the appointment of Bill Farmer to conduct the review that I referred to. The immediate investigation that the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry is being ordered to do followed the picking up of that footage and the evidence associated with it—looking into it and determining what it represented and what abattoirs it was portraying. The department is working on that aspect as well as a moratorium on the installation of any new Mark 1 restraint boxes with Commonwealth funding. The DAFF officials have already arrived in Indonesia. They will be joined this week by an independent representative of the Australian Veterinary Association, and I stress that it is an independent representative. They will be conducting a review of the processing facilities that receive Australian cattle in Indonesia.

As I have mentioned, the Indonesian government shares our concern that some animals are not being slaughtered in accordance with Indonesia's own animal welfare laws. Certainly both governments have acknowledged that this is not an issue that threatens the relationship but that it is an issue that we both need to get settled. The trade minister, Dr Mari Pangestu, has stressed in her public comments that Australia's action represented a temporary suspension and that Indonesia was keen to improve practices. Also, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has recognised the importance of the issue and he has asked his ministers, the ministers for agriculture and health, to examine and manage abattoirs in Indonesia in accordance with health, religious and animal welfare standards. So we are seeing a very genuine engagement from the Indonesian government, and I thank them on behalf of the government for their actions in this respect. I do want to highlight that they are being serious in this engagement. They understand the implications, for themselves as well as for our industry, associated with this issue.

It is important to stress that this order is in place for six months only as a maximum. We will ensure that the suspension only applies for as long as is absolutely necessary to guarantee supply chain assurance. I stress that it is very important that we have supply chain assurance, because while the abattoirs are a key link in the supply chain they are not the only part. What is important is to be able to ascertain that animals are being handled well throughout the processes and that the exporters have certainty about where the animals they export are being slaughtered. That will involve establishing technical measures in Indonesia to be able to provide the full range of support that is required through the National Livestock Identification System. Otherwise there will be no point in us proceeding with the tagging of these animals unless that system is in place at the other end to assist us in tracking those animals right through the chain.

The concern that has been expressed in relation to the animals that have been held up, as a result of this suspension, is a legitimate concern and I recognise that people would be concerned about what is happening with those animals. I can assure the House and the community that AQIS has inspected all cattle currently in AQIS facilities onshore and they are reported to be in good condition, so I think we can rest assured in that respect.

Of course, there is an issue here about what is happening for farmers, and that is of deep concern to all of us. I think we should genuinely recognise that there are many members on both sides of this chamber who are very much concerned about the situation of our farmers and it is very important to note—and to emphasise and stress again—that the minister is now taking direct action and exercising his powers to direct the MLA to use some of its very substantial reserves to manage the immediate domestic impact of the suspension of this trade. We all know how integral the MLA has been to this situation. The MLA, as its members have been very loud and long in stating, has been funded through the contributions by these farmers. Their expectations were that the MLA were providing certainty about the welfare treatment of these animals. We should note, when I refer to the Howard government's stewardship and time spent on this issue when they could have done something to put us in a better position in this respect, that they had experience of livestock issues along these lines and banned the export of live sheep to Egypt but that was over a much longer period than simply six months. It was a very long period indeed. Very extensive and detailed measures were put in place to make sure that there was an international-standard abattoir to receive our animals, and that was over a very long period of time.

I was in Iraq at the time that the Howard government was attempting to offload sheep with scabby mouth that were floating around for quite some time. I did manage to convince the administrator of the CPA to actually take these sheep but unfortunately the port facilities were not up to taking them. Certainly this presented another difficult problem for us in the live meat trade. So the Howard government was no stranger to this but obviously did not go through the root and branch exercise that we are now engaged in, to make sure that we as a country and our farmers are never put in this situation again. We need to put this industry on a sure footing, or at least a sure hoof. So the industry body should support the efforts of the government and get involved in supporting our farmers. If they will not do it voluntarily they will be made to do it, because it is right and proper that they do so.

In relation to Mr Farmer's independent review, as I mentioned earlier, it will investigate all live animal trade and it will review and examine the whole live animal export supply chain for all markets that receive Australian livestock. He was appointed, as the minister indicated, on 13 June and he will be asked to provide an interim report to the government by 29 July and a final report by 31 August, so there will be in no delay, no dallying, in relation to going through this process.

It is important that we need to be able to track systems all the way through to approved abattoirs and make sure that it is backed up by an accountability and veri­fication regime. So I think we can very clearly see that the government has been rigorous, has been systematic and has been determined and methodical in relation to making sure we are never put in this situation again. It is representative and indicative of the measures that this government has been taking to reinforce our farmers in this country, measures that have been long neglected by the coalition, and by the time this government is done it will be well demonstrated that this government was the best friend farmers in this country ever had. There have been many examples of what we are doing. It was this government that implemented the drought reform analysis. Everybody understood the old exceptional circumstances regime was a blunt instrument that was not serving our farmers properly so it was this government that instituted the review into the drought policy. We have committed another $44.1 million towards that process in this year's budget. It is a process that has been well accepted by the farmers, who understand we need to get it to a better place, we need to get into risk management rather than consequence management and we need to enable our farmers to deal with the peaks and troughs of the challenges they face from drought from climate change. That is where we are going with our drought reform policy. It is something this government instituted. We also have the Rural Financial Counselling Service program being extended, and I know that has been well received by men and women in the bush. We have committed $464 million for a smarter approach to the management of biosecurity right across the system. I know from my own family and from farmers in my region that biosecurity and invasive species are critical issues for them, issues that were neglected by the previous government. And we are introducing the first-ever national food plan, which will finally make sure we get the balance right of preserving our arable land and meeting the food security challenges of the future, making sure at the same time that we enable our farmers to be more productive and efficient in that process.

It has been a great day for farmers today in the passing of the Carbon Farming Initiative bills through this House. I must stress that this is a set of legislation, a set of tools, that the coalition opposed. How could they possibly be in favour of farmers and oppose the Carbon Farming Initiative, an initiative that will no doubt be regarded in the future as one of the key turning points in enabling our farmers to obtain productivity at the same time as diversifying their income while contributing to the climate change effort. It was opposed by the coalition. Why on earth would they do that? It defies belief. And it shows clearly that they are always prepared to place politics above the interests of the people we are supposed to be serving in this House. It is a great shame and discredit to them. The fact that it is an important piece of legislation for our farmers was well and truly illustrated by the fact that the Independents in this House backed that legislation, including the very wise and knowledgeable words that we heard from the member for New England, who is a farmer, who understands the benefits of this legislation. There is also the $8.8 million that we have put forward over four years to assist the implementation of reforms for the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority.

Most importantly of all, as I mentioned, our farmers are concerned about invasive species, and it was the Howard government that was going to trash the weeds CRC. It was going to be wiped off the map with nothing to replace it. I am extremely proud that I was able to advocate on behalf of my farmers, who were facing a serious challenge of fireweed in the Bega Valley, that we replace the loss of the weeds CRC with a new National Weeds and Productivity Research Program for which we have assigned $15.3 million. This is very much appreciated by our farmers. Unless you get out there and understand the threat of serrated tussock, of African love grass, of fireweed, you cannot understand that these are great threats to the productivity of our farmers. We needed research happening there. We need to get into management and eradication programs. All of that was completely neglected by the previous government. They were going to can the weeds CRC and abandon our farmers to their fate in trying to deal with invasive species. Well, we have not. We have picked that ball up and we have run with it and we are helping them in that process by backing up that research money with extra money through caring for our country and environmental stewardship programs to be applied to eradication. I have seen many examples of the success of that in my own electorate.

I say to the coalition: do not come to the dispatch box dripping hypocrisy, cheap politics and intellectual bankruptcy. I call on the Leader of the Opposition to, for once, be helpful to farmers and not sacrifice their best interests on the altar of his unbridled ambition.

See this speech in context