Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I commend the member for Riverina—a wonderful contribution as always, but an important contribution to this debate. I also need to pay tribute to the member for O'Connor. His electorate and his community are going to be directly impacted by these changes, by this government decision. I had the honour to serve with him on the agriculture committee, and we looked at this legislation in a very rushed two-week process; I'll speak to that in a minute. In my time serving here with the member for O'Connor, and serving with him on the committee, what is clear is his connection to his community, his passion for his community and his willingness to fight and to continue to fight for his community because he knows how devastating this will be to them. He knows because he is a sheep farmer; he is a farmer of the community. We heard so much testimony during the hearing about the impact this will have. So it is important that I put on record my admiration, respect and praise for the member for O'Connor, for the work he's done fighting for his community. We hope it will make a difference—if not now, then in the future. We know that there are many farmers and many community members in the west that continue to campaign to protect the agriculture community not only in WA but also across the country. We heard during the committee hearing from the Northern Territory Cattlemen's Association about their concerns about this bill, the precedents it sets, and about their memories of decisions of those opposite when they were last in government—of shutting down their trade and the ongoing legal situation afoot with that.

Let's take this back to basics and first principles, and understand what is happening here with this bill, the Export Control Amendment (Ending Live Sheep Exports by Sea) Bill 2024. The federal government, the ALP, are shutting down an industry. They are shutting down an industry, and that can send businesses out of business. If their decision shuts a business down they are not giving one dollar of compensation to that business, to that family or to that farmer. In the inquiry I asked the department of agriculture, 'Is any of the money that is allocated for the transition package going to compensation for businesses that are shut down by a government decision, that have to close because of a government decision?' Their answer was no. What precedent does that set for every agricultural business in Australia? What precedent does it set for every business in Australia? That this government is prepared to shut you down, close your business and give you no compensation. That's why the live cattle export industry are worried and why many other businesses and many others in agriculture are worried. We heard testimony after testimony that I will get to about the impact it will have on farmers and on families.

The part that we heard was most frustrating for the industry was that it has been documented that there were challenges—there is the Awassi case. Now there is also a situation where significant money was paid to the gentleman who filmed that incident, who was the whistleblower to get this started. There is a stat dec that I'll look to table that I was not able to table—the Labor majority would not let me table that stat dec—that showed the money that had been paid to the whistleblower. There was another statutory declaration that I was not able to table, that I was denied the right to table, that alleged the whistleblower did what he did—created the situation with the footage—to create outrage. That first stat dec said that footage was sent and the person was told that that footage wasn't good enough, that the quality wasn't good enough and then, lo and behold, months later, much better quality footage was then used to shut down this industry. That is something that frustrates and devastates the farmers that are impacted.

What is also galling to those farmers and those communities—and we heard testimony after testimony over this—is that, since the incident that started this, there have been systematic and significant reforms and changes. The mortality rate on ships has dropped over 80 per cent, to the point where now more sheep in a flock pass away in a paddock than on the ship. So this industry, to be clear, has learnt the lessons, taken them on board and improved their practices to the point where even those vets and other experts that criticised the industry acknowledged that Australia is leading the world in standards for animal safety with live sheep exports. This industry listened, it reacted and it was still shut down, with no benchmark given by those opposite.

Let's understand how significant this impact will be, and it's acknowledged by the government. We hear from those that will vote for this bill about a just transition and how it's going to be okay. Well, it's going to be okay if you live in the city. If you live in the city, you can find another job pretty easily because there are thousands of businesses and opportunities. But that is not the case when you're on the farm and not when you are a fourth or fifth generation farmer. We know the impact, which the government acknowledged, that this legislation is going to have. To be clear, the $107 million allocated is less than the independent committee appointed by the government recommended.

I would note that we put in a dissenting report. During that inquiry, we had less than two weeks and only two hearings to talk to people, stacking everything against the community and rushing the process. In that rushed process, over 35 per cent of submissions were not even read or looked at. Even in that process that was so congested, the committee urged the government to commit more money to the transition. That's how obvious it is, but we're going to vote on $107 million.

That package includes support for the mental health of those impacted. Let's think about that for a second. That is an acknowledgement that this decision by this government is going to seriously impact the mental health and wellbeing of community members. If it wasn't going to have an impact like that, why would they put the money towards supporting mental health? But they're doing that without even acknowledging the hard work of the industry—ignoring everything that it has done over so many years. Then, to make it worse, they don't even have the respect for the industry or for the community to give them a proper hearing.

Senator Murray Watt, the minister for agriculture, promised these communities a Senate hearing into this process. What did he give them? Less than two weeks as part of an inquiry by the Standing Committee on Agriculture. As I said, almost 35 per cent of submissions were not read or processed, because the secretariat did not have the capacity. I want to put on record that that's not a criticism of the secretariat. They did an amazing job in an impossible situation. I want to apologise to all those people that took the time and effort to put a submission in that was ultimately ignored because the ALP were running a sham process to rush it through. I'm sorry that your voice wasn't heard in that process. That's not how this House, this parliament or that inquiry should have operated. But the decision was made before we started. I respect the chair of the committee and those opposite. They were in a tough situation. They were given their marching orders by the minister and the government and they rushed it through and they did what they had to do—no doubt deeply uncomfortably. But this is people's lives. This isn't politics; this is people's lives.

Others have referenced this, but let's understand what the government were prepared to trade. They're prepared to trade communities, people's livelihoods and agriculture for preferences in a by-election. The Animal Justice Party were nice enough to be honest about this. This is a direct quote from the Animal Justice Party:

We are proud that the AJP could deliver the knockout blow by demanding the end of live sheep export as a requirement for our preferences at the Dunkley By-election in March. Ongoing conversations behind-the-scenes between AJP and Labor leadership has helped to finetune government policy.

So this government are prepared to destroy families, communities, a whole industry for preference in a by-election. The quote is there, and it's there in their actions. For everyone in agriculture, that leaves the question: what's next? We heard testimony from those vets and other groups criticising the live trade export, and it included cattle, so how long will it be before the Northern Territory cattlemen get closed down in another preference deal with the AJP? That's the question they're asking. That's the uncertainty it has created.

Those opposite say it won't happen. Well, the cattlemen remember 2011, and they'll remember this dirty deal with the Animal Justice Party. Those opposites can't make that guarantee. We saw it on the agriculture committee. Those members opposite were deeply uncomfortable, asking those questions, but they followed the orders from the leadership. We know in the ALP that, if you cross the floor, you're out. We're going to see in the next 24 hours if that still applies. So those opposite on the backbench can say that it's not going to happen to the live cattle export traders in the Northern Territory, but unless they're the Prime Minister of this country, which they're not, they can't make that guarantee. What we know is that if the Prime Minister, from the inner city of Sydney, can get political advantage by throwing another agricultural industry under the bus, he'll do it in a heartbeat. He'll sell out the Australian people. He'll sell out the hardworking farmers of Western Australia for preferences. And if that is the start, what's next?

As I said, this is an industry that has made significant improvements. Mortality rates have dropped over 80 per cent in the last five years. We're recognised as having the highest standards in the world. Let's be clear: this trade will continue in the Middle East because this is cultural and this is their region. Live sheep export will continue from Africa, South America and other countries at a lower standard. This will actually lower global animal welfare standards. But it will make some feel better and it will get the ALP preferences, so it's worth throwing Australian farmers under the bus.

See this speech in context