Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The Leader of the Opposition stood outside this place today and told farmers he has their backs. Well, if that was true he would come clean on his nuclear plan. How much water will his nuclear reactors use and how much more will water cost as a result? How much more will farmers be paying for energy under the Liberal-National nuclear plan? The CSIRO and others say it will be at least twice as expensive and perhaps up to six times as much as it would cost under renewables. If the Leader of the Opposition had farmers' backs, he would acknowledge that the National Farmers' Federation is one of 18 major business and farming groups that last month issued a statement saying Australia requires more renewable energy at all scales.

The Leader of the Opposition would acknowledge that 12,000 farms are located within 80 kilometres of his seven reactor sites in regions that are major contributors to Australia's food supply, with cattle, milk, lamb, grain and vegetable production. Under international standards, that radius is classified as an ingestion exposure pathway, and farmers must take preventative measures to protect food supply in the event of a nuclear accident. Farmers would be required to inform customers of the risk of nuclear contamination. They would have to stump up for the cost of decontamination and livestock destruction. Will the Leader of the Opposition tell farmers how much that is going to cost them and what the implications are for their farms? No, because this is a Leader of the Opposition interested in only one thing—his own relentless political ambition—and he will tear down and rip up anyone and anything who gets in his way. He will say anything for a headline—wedge, divide, dog whistle, drive Australians apart. That is the stock in trade of this Leader of the Opposition. He won't support renewables, even though they are already delivering results for farmers and regional communities, cheaper power and more jobs for the regions, and it is the Liberals and Nationals standing against it.

Now outside this place today we have a couple of hundred sheep farmers from WA who don't agree with our government's decision to phase out the live sheep export trade. They have the right to express their views. Our decision directly affects them and we accept that, which is why we have put a $107 million transition package on the table. The fact is our decision is consistent with the position we took to the 2022 election. We have been upfront and fair dinkum. It is worth noting the live sheep export trade is valued at $77 million, which is one-third the value of Australian's total mandarin exports, by way of comparison. It also contrasts to the $4.5 billion sheepmeat export trade and the $3.5 billion domestic sheepmeat industry. It is also important to say that that $77 million doesn't disappear. Those sheep, once destined for live export, go instead to domestic processing.

Our Labor government is not alone in supporting the transition away from live sheep exports. The deputy Liberal leader, the member for the regional New South Wales seat of Farrer, has referred to the live sheep export trade as 'an awful trade'. The member for Farrer said the trade 'fails on both economic and animal welfare grounds'. So, when the Leader of the Opposition falsely seeks to paint this issue as Labor versus the bush, remember we have a regional, senior Liberal MP—his own deputy—who is on the record in sharing our position.

See this speech in context