Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Calare proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The urgent need for the Government to revoke the live cattle export ban.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

John Cobb (Calare, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture and Food Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on this incredibly important matter of public importance. The live export ban highlights the government's incomp­etence and the need for an early election. I believe this is without doubt the worst decision they have ever made—and that is a big statement given some of the decisions made by this government. This decision will have dire consequences for our nearest, biggest and most important neighbour, and the government did not discuss it with them let alone consider the effect it will have on this country. It is the worst decision I have ever seen by a government. The ineptitude of this government never ceases to amaze me, but when it comes to agriculture add an element of 'I could not care less' and you will begin to understand why the live export issue has escalated to such a crisis.

The Prime Minister said just yesterday that the government was torn between two competing extremes—vegetarians and those with little concern for animal cruelty—but would not resume the trade until cruelty problems were fixed. This is just the sort of ridiculous thing you come to expect from this Prime Minister. I have not heard anyone say it is okay to mistreat animals in the way it was portrayed on television. The competing interests here are those seeking to shut down live exports—in fact, shut down livestock production and have us all eating lentils—and those seeking a rational solution and a balanced policy response to ensure animal welfare is front and centre in livestock production and livestock trade. Of course this government could be depended upon to choose the irrational approach, an agenda driven by lefties who have never had to face life's realities. When the Prime Minister announced that this year was to be 'the year of delivery and decision', everyone thought she had just made a mistake and meant to say 'decision and delivery', but we now understand that she got it right. This Prime Minister tries to deliver before ever making a decision. She tried to deliver the mining tax before making a decision on how it might work. She tried to deliver the carbon tax before doing the same. On live exports she has tried to deliver an outcome without making any decisions on how to manage government diplomacy with Indonesia, without making any decision on how it would impact on the cattle industry in Northern Australia or any decisions about contingencies.

There is a cartoon in the Australian today where somebody you could be mistaken for thinking is our Prime Minister is talking to somebody you could be mistaken for thinking is our foreign minister. That person says:

You're the one to fix the cattle trade because you know what it feels like to have your throat cut while fully conscious.

Northern Australia is getting its throat cut while fully conscious. This is an example of Gillard decision making. Northern Australia has so much to lose here. Northern Australia has only one serious industry outside the mining industry and it is the live export trade, a job they do very well. They grow very good cattle, which are in very high demand. The coalition supported Minister Ludwig's original decision to ban the trade from the abattoirs which were exposed for animal cruelty and to review abattoirs in Indonesia.

How badly this government has acted is underlined by the fact that a very short time after the Four Corners program the Indonesian President was reported as saying, 'This is a serious issue we have to deal with.' If I were the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, I would have grabbed the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister, raced over to Indonesia and said: 'Thank you for that offer. We must sit down together and deal with this issue.' But what happened? Not that. No, a few days later, the Indonesians, along with the rest of us, read in the papers that they had been spurned, treated not like the most important neighbour Australia has but like someone who does not matter. While the member for Griffith understands this, the Prime Minister is too scared to ask the foreign minister for help. I think she is frightened that he will be successful in dealing with the Indonesians. In any case, I think she is just too frightened simply to talk to him.

The only sensible solution is to allow our cattle to go only to those abattoirs with acceptable standards. And let me tell you, having just been over there talking to both the Indonesian and the Australian operators, it is amazing to me how well they have got together to work out for themselves how to deal with this situation. We have a world recognised cattle tracking system which could easily be extended to manage traceability. Indonesian and Australian operators are aware of it and some of them are already using it. Some of them are already independently audited in total trace-back systems, as well as humane cattle treatment. Every beast which goes on a boat can be tagged and scanned and then be tagged again at the destination to ensure traceability through the whole process. With the hand-held scanners, this can be done in locations which are not near major cities.

The best message, the only message, this government should or could send to processors in Indonesia is that we will only do business with those who meet our expectations on animal care and treatment and we will continue to send cattle exclusively to complying abattoirs. That would have been entirely justifiable and would have encouraged attitudinal and behavioural change—but no, not this government. Scared of the people on the left of their party, they reacted not on the basis of good policy but on the basis of keeping the people on the left of their party quiet.

If the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry did not inform Minister Ludwig of the consequences to Australia of this ban, heads should role. If Ludwig did not inform the Prime Minister of the consequences of a ban to Australia, he should be sacked. If Julia Gillard ignored that advice, she must go.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister.

John Cobb (Calare, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture and Food Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I apologise. This decision to ignore our biggest, most important and most populous neighbour and to totally ignore the normal diplomatic relations is the worst decision ever made by government. I am sure the member for Griffith, had he been asked, would have informed both the Prime Minister and the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry as to what should have been done, but they were not interested. I wonder did they even stop to think of the relationship with those who take our cattle. We are talking about 25 per cent of Indonesia's beef intake. We are talking about 100 per cent of Northern Australia's beef output. It is unfathomable that a government could act in this way without talking to our most important neighbour.

Why can the government not resume the live trade to the abattoirs which have been shown to be doing the right thing? Why did they ever stop the trade? The resumption of the live trade lies in the Prime Minister's fumbling hands. This has gone on long enough. The Indonesian government, to its credit—I was amazed and surprised when I was in Indonesia with Senator Scullion—has lifted itself above the name-calling or the recriminations in which I believe it would be quite entitled to indulge. Why would Indonesia issue permits while we have a ban in place? The ball is firmly in the court of the Gillard government. It is in their hands as it stands now.

Why would Indonesia issue permits when there is a ban in place?

Every day that goes by there is an unfolding economic, environmental, social and animal welfare crisis in Northern Australia of monumental proportions. One station has a destocking order to reduce its number by 6,000 this year because in Northern Australia they do not hold stock beyond an age, they are used to knowing how many they are going to have, getting them on the boat and getting them off the land. It has 2,000 head which they have to remove because otherwise it would create much bigger animal welfare issues due to overgrazing. The cattleman believes that from tomorrow he will have to start destroying 200 head a day. These cattle are his livelihood and worth conservatively $120,000, which he has to destroy per day. I own cattle. I once had to shoot sheep because of drought and age and I do not think I could do it again, let alone cattle in the prime of their life worth a lot of money. It is beyond believable. This is devastating for him and anyone who has ever had to raise cattle.

It is a disgrace that a government so inept, so uncaring and so cruel is causing cruelty to humans and cruelty to animals—because that is what is on the horizon. There are 82 Indigenous stations and a community of some 17,000, depending on the scale and it is an enormous scale. These are people who are proud of the fact that they are the best stockmen in Australia; they are proud of the fact that they look after Australia's pastoral regions. I implore the Prime Minister and this government to revoke the ban.

There is in front of us a very short window of time in which to get this trade up and running again. The government have committed that they want to see it get going again. Well, if they wait much longer it will not get going again before the wet season comes back to us. If that is what they want, then they are going the long way about it towards achieving it. The handling of this has been absolutely abominable. I cannot think of what could have possessed them to act without thinking. As I said, if no-one advised them as to what the repercussions were and are, then they should be totally sacked.

I want to talk about the cattle industry for a minute. Those of us who own cattle are very proud of our industry. We are proud of what we do and the way in which we do it and we are very proud of our cattle—no-one more so than the people who do it hardest in the north of this country, whether it is in WA, whether it is in the Territory or whether it is in Queensland. None of us who own cattle or work with cattle or have anything to do with cattle will stand for cruelty, but this continued ban promotes animal cruelty, promotes environmental devastation, promotes human devastation and promotes absolute economic madness. For how long must regional Australia be a plaything of Gillard and the Greens? What has happened to our country? Consider the ancestors of the people who created it and who set the mantra of the way in which Australia is perceived as a mob of pioneers. I ask because the people who raise these cattle are the closest to it. What has happened to the people who set Australia up to be what it is and simply want to get on with their living and want to help the Aboriginal and Indigenous communities do the same? What has happened that we cease to matter? I again stress that if the department of agriculture did not inform Minister Ludwig of the repercussions and of the disaster for Australia that is resulting and will result from this ban, heads should roll. If Ludwig failed to advise the Prime Minister, he should be sacked. If Julia Gillard ignored that advice—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The minister and the Prime Minister must be referred to by their name.

John Cobb (Calare, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture and Food Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

if the Prime Minister ignored that advice one assumes she was given—then she must go. Enough is enough. We cannot stand by in this country and see a government with no credibility, with no ability and with no compassion continue to simply ignore the people who need them to act. Lift the ban.

Gary Gray (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service and Integrity) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a fraudulent representation of the issue. You fraud! Did you go to Jeddah in 2003? No, of course you did not. Fifty-seven thousand sheep at sea for three months! Did those opposite react then? No. And what did the opposition do at that time—behave responsibly, so did not create fear and did not create scaremongering, and did not create a situation of businesses fearing that they would fail? No. Why? Because you put your desire for electoral success ahead of the interests of those farmers and those cattlemen you fraudulently claim to represent here. You disgrace! And you know you are a disgrace! You stand here with your con­fected indignation. You have been scuttling around the countryside, scuttling around the regions like a cockroach, arguing this case. You disgrace!

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Special Minister of State ought to direct his remarks through the chair. When he refers to 'you' he is referring to the occupant of the chair.

Gary Gray (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service and Integrity) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I accept that. The red-meat export industry is a West Australian industry. Around 75 to 80 per cent of live sheep exported are from West Australian properties. Many pass through feedlots in my electorate. Forty-five per cent of exported live cattle are from Western Australia. It is a good industry. It is an industry that should not be played with by pathetic politicians. It is an important industry. The people who work in it are good people. This is an industry that can be made stronger. It can be made better and it can be made sustainable through the processes and measures that will be put in place by this government. I do not defend the events depicted in the images carried on the ABC Four Corners program a month ago. Nor do I take the view that all Australian cattle producers and exporters should be condemned for those images. We need to get accountability, quality verification and assurances into our supply chain. We need to act quickly and we need to ensure that we have the facilities, training and skills at the points of slaughter, in stock handling, in animal health and have quality systems to support the industry. All of this adds up to verification that the supply chain meets the standards that we set.

Recently I had cause to meet the Indonesian Ambassador. At that time I was told of the intemperate and unreasonable protest actions that some Australians have taken towards the Indonesian embassy and its staff. Mr Deputy Speaker, intemperate behaviour is not acceptable. The Indonesian Ambassador is an excellent representative for his country leading an excellent group of diplomats. Indeed, today, students from one of my local schools are visiting the Indonesian embassy to participate in their school education program. It is a program that enriches the cultural and Indonesian language programs in our schools; and so it strengthens our relationship with Indonesia.

In this parliament we need to be respectful of the Indonesian government's steps to support good policy. We know that they want this matter resolved quickly. Indonesia, like Australia, wants a humane, healthy and growing industry. We need to ensure the sustainability of this industry because there is still potential for growth in the live cattle production industry in Northern Australia. According to the Northern Australia Land and Water Taskforce significant opport­unities exist to grow the Northern Australian beef industry through changing enterprise structures and increasing intensification. Leading producers in Northern Australia have a vision for this. I believe this parliament has a vision to increase the production of our beef herds in Northern Australia. We believe we can more than double production from Northern Australia's cattle herd and possibly lift output as much as fourfold in value in some areas. The Northern Australia Land and Water Taskforce also found that the northern beef industry produces potential for substantial wealth creation for Indigenous communities through direct employment and business ventures.

There is good cause for confidence. Australia is a major player in the global red meat sector. We are among the world's largest producers of red meat and the second largest exporter of beef and sheep. In 2007-08 the gross value of beef and veal produced in Australia was more than $7.4 billion and for sheep meat it was around $2.2 billion. Australia is the world's second largest exporter of beef and sheep meat. That is why, in fact, there is a common cause on both sides of this House to make sure that our industry is sustainable and to make sure that we can properly and appropriately track our cattle exports and ensure that sustainability is maintained through the maintenance of public support for this great industry.

In 2007-08 around 64 per cent of beef produced in Australia was exported. Forty-five per cent of lamb and 82 per cent of our mutton was exported. As I said earlier, most of that is from Western Australia. Indeed, my family are producers of lamb in the Western Australian wheat belt. The combined value of beef, lamb and mutton exports in 2007-08 was slightly more than $5.4 billion. Australia is also a major player in the global live export trade. The trade is worth around $1 billion to Australia's economy each year and it supports about 10,000 jobs, most of them in regional and remote Australia. Live exports are a key part of that red meat industry.

This sector provides a valuable alternative market for Australia's livestock producers and is particularly important to the economies of the sheep-producing areas of Western Australia and the cattle regions of Northern Australia. The beef cattle industry involves around 60 per cent of the land area of Northern Australia—around 90 per cent if Indigenous land is included—and it accounts for around five per cent of Northern Australia jobs. It also accounts for about 30 per cent of Australia's cattle and produces 80 per cent of Australia's live cattle exports, worth about $300 to $400 million a year.

Australia also leads the world in animal welfare practices. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Senator Ludwig, acted appropriately to suspend the trade of live cattle to Indonesia following the unacceptable practices shown in images on the ABC's Four Corners program. Then, rightly, the suspension will remain in place until new safeguards are established for the trade, but not for one day longer than is necessary. We will not see cattle at sea for 90 days, without the minister visiting Jeddah, as happened in the early 2000s. The minister for agriculture has asked the former Australian Ambassador to Indonesia, Mr Bill Farmer, to examine the whole live animal export supply chain, from paddock to the point of slaughter, for all markets that receive Australian livestock.

As one would expect the opposition have been demanding that this trade be resumed immediately. That is not what they did in the case of the sheep bound for Jeddah. They were at sea for 90 days without a minister visiting Jeddah to argue the case. It is worth recalling the performance of the Howard government in managing the live export trade. The Howard government banned livestock exports for extraordinary periods of time. For example, all livestock was banned to Saudi Arabia for 19 months in 2005.

In particular, as I said, it is worth revisiting the management of the MV Cormo Express fiasco in 2003. As I say, I do not recall any Australian minister visiting Jeddah. A consignment of more than 57,000 sheep was purchased by a Saudi Arabian livestock importer, Hmood Alali Alkhalaf, and his trading and transportation company left Fremantle on 6 August 2003. This consignment arrived in Jeddah on 21 August 2003, was inspected by Saudi ministry of agriculture officials and was rejected over alleged disease concerns. The Howard government was then caught with a ship full of Australian sheep that were owned by a citizen of another country on a foreign vessel thousands of kilometres outside of Australian waters, but no Australian minister went to Jeddah.

The Australian government opted in those days to buy the sheep from the Saudi owner for $4.5 million. It then tried to offload the sheep in southern Iraq as food aid, allegedly based on advice from the British field commanders in the region. However, the British then raised concerns about security and any diversion of resources from key security roles. Discussion on options to place the sheep were then conducted with parties in Iraq, Kuwait, the UAE, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Jordan, Egypt, Pakistan, Libya, Cyprus, Tanzania, Eritrea, Qatar, Italy, Poland, Israel, Ukraine, Argentina, Mauri­tius, Indonesia, Malaysia and a number of other countries, but no minister went to Jeddah. Consideration was also given to slaughtering the animals at sea, and the government even talked about bringing them home and putting them in quarantine. Finally, the government of the day was able to reach an agreement with Eritrea to off-load the sheep in that country and, after 80 days, they finally walked off the ship. It was a great deal for Eritrea. Australia provided the consignment of sheep to the Eritrean government as a gift. We also threw in 3,000 tonnes of pelletised feed, a special team to provide technical assistance and an additional $1 million to offset the cost of Eritrea handling the animals—and they got to keep the change, with the Howard government agreeing that any funds remaining could be used for any other project in Eritrea.

The coalition is interested only in the politics of the situation, feigning indignation as they seek a political taproot here—nothing to do with the support of a sustainable industry. Why? Because we can look at the practice MV Cormo Expressdemonstrates—their real view. When put under pressure, when those opposite had to make a call, we saw how they behaved. No minister went to Jeddah. They do not share our interest in establishing sustainable supply chains and long-term sustainable solutions for the industry. In a joint press release of 15 June, Warren Truss, John Cobb and Senator Colbeck stated:

Coalition MPs, like all Australians, were appalled by the mistreatment of animals in some Indonesian abattoirs featured on the ABC's 'Four Corners' program. This behaviour is unacceptable to all Australians, especially our farmers, who take great pride in breeding and raising healthy and well cared for animals.

Despite this feigned concern, Mr Abbott, Mr Truss and Mr Cobb, amongst others, continue to call for an immediate resumption of trade—that is, when they are not calling for an election. They do this regardless of whether or not animal welfare standards can be assured, which is the licence to operate, the support from our community for this industry. I support the industry; they are just looking for supporters. As stated by the minister, the government has two clear objectives.

Mr John Cobb interjecting—

I am not sure which minister went to Jeddah. It was not you. Firstly, we want to ensure a system that provides appropriate welfare outcomes for Australian livestock and, secondly, we wish to provide the basis for a sustainable livestock export industry over the long term. As you know, Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the live animal export industry. I have made this clear over the years that I have served the people of Brand—not just over the past months, when I was looking for votes, not just when trying to win votes but when it is hard, when you actually have to talk to the protesters, which I have done. I support Indonesia as a key market for our live exports and I have made clear that the industry should be conducted humanely. I have inspected the ships, I have inspected the feedlots, I have talked to the workers and I have met with the protesters, and I still support the live trade.

The government is committed to recom­mencing live cattle exports to Indonesia as soon as is practicable. We are working closely with the Indonesian government to ensure this important trade has a strong and sustainable future. The government understa­nds that this suspension is difficult for industry and it is fully aware of the impact on rural and regional Australia, especially in the north. That is why Prime Minister Gillard announced the $30 million assistance package for those communities. It is also why members opposite seek merely to obtain political advantage from the distress of cattle producers and farmers. It is simply disgraceful.

I know the industry understands and supports the government's actions to ensure animal health and herd management practi­ces are in place before this trade resumes. The live export trade is a key part of our livestock industry and a key part of regional economies in Western and Northern Austra­lia. The government are working with authorities and industry to put in place systems that will ensure animals are treated humanely so we can get the trade with Indonesia up and running again as soon as we can, and as soon as possible. We as a government are not prepared to abandon the potential growth in this industry. We recognise the mistakes the Howard gover­nment made during the Cormo Express fiasco and the long-term impact that this had on the sheep industry and on our country, and we will not repeat those mistakes. Eighty days at sea and not one minister went to Jeddah. Contemplate killing those sheep at sea, and not one minister went to Jeddah. The disgrace of those opposite is palpable for all to see. As part of her speech, the member for Farrer, Sussan Ley, said:

We urge the government to do everything in its power to restart the live cattle export trade to facilities that can demonstrate humane killing methods.

We in the government could not agree more. Once we have established supply chain assurance that cattle are processed in appropriate abattoirs with tracking and transparency and independent auditing, we will restart that trade. We will not have a situation where cattle are left as the sheep were left—at sea, drifting around from country to country while discussions were held with the Iraqis, the Kuwaitis, the UAE, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Jordan, Egypt, Pakistan, Libya, Cyprus, Tanzania, Eritrea, Qatar, Italy, Poland, Israel, the Ukraine, Argentina, Mauritius, Indonesia and Malaysia. We take action. (Time expired)

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind the minister that he also ought to observe the provisions of standing order 64.

Barry Haase (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I find quite amazing the feigned angst that has been discussed by the previous speaker. I have never seen such a performance and I do sincerely trust that, being a union supporter, the member has paid his dues to Actors Equity, because he is nothing but a stalking horse on this issue. There is no doubt whatsoever that when the accusation is made across the chamber that we are simply looking for political mileage out of this issue nothing could be further from the truth. Our speakers involved in this matter of public importance today are directly involved in the industry. We are not metropolitan dwellers. We are not simply trying to cover up for a minister who has failed so significantly that he ought to be sacked. And this side of the House would be calling for that sacking far more vocally if it were not for the knowledge we all share that this poor innocent individual, Senator Ludwig, is simply another victim of an ignorant action by a Prime Minister who is out of touch with the cattle industry here in Australia.

If it were truly the case that this Prime Minister was well and truly aware of the pain, the suffering, the lack of ability to attend to financial responsibilities, she would take it upon herself to be involved personally in the outcome that would be a solution. As it is, she is standing back not wanting to be sullied by the situation because she believes that the majority of city dwellers must have more knowledge about this subject than the people that actually work in the industry. How wrong could she be. If ever there was an example of mistakes being made because of the constant pursuit of populist politics, this banning of the live trade by this Prime Minister is the greatest example. It will go down in history that a Prime Minister dared to inflict so much pain on the Australian people that puts this whole industry, which last year was worth $1.012 billion, at risk for all time.

Those battler families that have carved out a niche and a difficult lifestyle in Northern Australia—where their only ability with the pastoral land at their disposal is to rear and export live Bos indicus cattle—are damned by this Prime Minister without any indication of conscience. She spoke in this House yesterday about her desire to see this problem solved as quickly as possible. She overlooks the fact that it was her action that caused the problem in the first place.

We can go back to the footage and look at the circumstances of, firstly, its collection and, secondly, its distribution to the Australian people as a matter of absolute urgency. It was collected months ago. It went to air five weeks ago as a matter of urgency. What a lot of nonsense! The commentator in that footage, having collected the informa­tion, every night knew that those cattle were being treated in a similar way in those 11 abattoirs out of 735 across Indonesia. Did the ABC run any counterargument? No, they did not.

Who is culpable in this? We were told that we ought to be conscience stricken and ashamed of ourselves for allowing this practice to proceed, yet the very person that wormed her way into 11 select abattoirs to find some evidence of misdemeanour sat on it for nearly seven months, apparently without any conscience whatsoever. What is the credibility of this practice as demon­strated, horrendous as it was, as unacceptable as it is to anyone? Any human being would not accept that practice, more so those who are concerned with the breeding and fattening of good high-quality beef from Australia. Those persons would be the last to engage in such cruel activity. But where is the evidence that this is general practice?

I charge that, if that photographer went into abattoirs across Australia—indeed, even Tasmania—and waited to get selected footage, they would have been able to put something together that would shock every city-dwelling Australian in this nation. People in cities today have no contact with the bush. They do not understand the breeding of stock for slaughter for food. They do not understand the significance of that shiny package that comes on a supermarket shelf, that it was actually a living breathing thing and that an agriculturalist, possibly a pastoralist, deliberately bred it knowing that it was going to be slaughtered. That concept has been far removed from city dwellers today. To be confronted with evidence that was held for months and then promoted in the most dramatic way was, of course, going to have an impact. Of course, there were going to be innocent, impressionable MPs scurrying to the Prime Minister saying: 'The actions of our agriculture minister are not sufficient in declaring that the majority will be banned. We want the whole trade banned.' What thought for a moment did they have of the families across northern Australia, infiltra­ting into southern Australia, that would go broke as a result? It has nothing to do about conscience, about fearing and denying cruelty to animals. It has nothing to do with that. It has got to do with the coldly calculated process of shutting down an industry in Australia that the perpetrator of that footage declared publicly was her aspiration before she went and collected the evidence.

If I were a vegan, I might have some cockeyed idea that I should stop the world from eating meat also. But I do not think I would be morally justified in sneaking into the night to gain evidence to send to an innocent population of Australia to gain an outcome for my organisation to extract dues from hoodwinked Australians to keep me in the self-promotion that I was accustomed to. If we are looking for dastardly deeds here, if we are looking for perpetrators of horr­endous action, we should look no further than the member of Animals Australia who went to Indonesia and collected that damning footage.

There is a huge question mark over the legitimacy of the collection of that footage. We are getting all manner of stories back from abattoirs concerned about the circumstances under which the footage was allowed to be taken. If you analyse the footage, you see rank amateurs inapp­ropriately dressed, grinning like cheshire cats, posing almost as momentary movie stars. What were they promised? We do not know that. We have not been told that. We were not given a balanced view from the ABC; yet this government, without a second thought, without any communication or negotiation, insulted a nation. They insulted a lifestyle. They insulted a process to the world and declared that Indonesia and their culture was substandard and unacceptable; and then the Prime Minister has the gall to suggest that she was surprised by the reaction from Indonesia. Well, the egg is on her face right now. She needs to make the mea culpas. Until such time as she personally involves herself in this debacle and develops a solution that will see the reinstatement of this industry and the compensation of the members of this industry, she has no right to claim legitimacy as a good Prime Minister for this nation. The PGA has already called for the sacking of the minister. This side of politics has not as yet because we know where the real responsibility lies for this debacle. It lies with the Prime Minister fairly and squarely. Only she can make amends.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let me comment on the member for Durack's contribution. It was all about shooting the messenger and not dealing with the issue of where the problem was. It was all about politics and not dealing with his own constituency. It was a really poor effort and did not represent the cattlemen and the cattle families of his own electorate or the cattle families of northern Australia at all. I reject his allegation that Tasmanian abattoirs would be found to be the same as the images that we saw on the Four Corners program. I believe that Tasmanian abattoirs work under Australian standards and meet all of their obligations very well.

To restart this trade before we have resolved the issues that brought about its interruption could bring about an end to the trade forever in my opinion. It is ridiculous to give simplistic answers. The interruption to this trade took place because the slaughtering of Australian cattle did not meet the community standard that we demand in this country. That is why it was suspended. Meat and Livestock Australia has the responsibility of looking after Australia's reputation and the standards of this nation. I believe the restraining boxes that were set up in Indonesia were more about show than reaching the standards that Australians believe should exist. Animal welfare requires a much higher standard and I believe that Meat and Livestock Australia would have known that it was not reaching the standards it should have been. The social licence for Australia requires a much higher standard than that. The public response to those images on televisions around Australia is what brought about the intervention.

There is a need to face up to the mistakes that have been made. There is a big need to face up to that reality and to accept that there were mistakes. I thought by now there might have been some resignations. When the other side of this House calls for resignations on the political level, they should be calling for some resignations from their own side, from some of the people that would be their supporters. Why there have not been any resignations I do not know. Nobody has accepted the responsibility. I believe that there needs to be an acceptance of responsibility for us to move forward.

I was looking through LiveCorp's documentation on their roles. It reads:

LiveCorp also implements industry policy as determined by the Australian Livestock Exporters' Council (ALEC), delivers timely industry communication and drives additional value adding programs.

I have never seen any of those and I have never seen any communications from them through my office. They also have as one of their 10 industry goals:

To maintain government support and increase general community support for the industry through transparent operation.

I do not think they have lived up to their own missions and industry goals. I am sure they have failed every time, but we still have not seen any resignations from people who have been found wanting and certainly have not shown any responsibility or any transparency.

Australia is a major global player in the red-meat sector and we are among the world's largest producers of red meat. We are the second largest exporter of beef and sheep. In 2007-08 the gross value of beef and veal production in Australia was more than $7.4 billion—a considerable amount. We were right to suspend the trade after what had occurred. The members of this House would have received many communications from their constituents. I know how many I received from farmers in Tasmania about their concerns. There was a constituent in my office last week, a rather large one, who told me that he believed people should go to jail. He believed that we should be doing everything we can to re-establish the trade and reorganise it, but he also believed the people who are responsible need to bear their responsibility. I am sure there are many others around the country who agree.

To improve the animal welfare level and to get back to an established supply chain we need a system that we can all have confidence in to ensure that Australian animals are treated in accordance with OIE guidelines. Stunning-preferred processing is one of the major issues we have got to make sure happens. On traceability, the National Livestock Identification Scheme in this country is a very good scheme—something we should be very proud of, as I am sure you are, Acting Deputy Speaker Scott. It is something that gives us a lot of security. It certainly gives us biosecurity, meat safety, product integrity in our overseas markets and of course market access in many areas. We need to make sure that that system is working right through this livestock export trade into Indonesia and that as animals leave Australia on a boat we can identify them as they go into the feedlot and into the abattoirs. We need to know where Australian animals are being slaughtered and the outcome. That is the way for us to get this trade back in place.

This industry needs to have credibility and it needs to have the support of the Australian people. It needs to have the social licence to do what it wants to do, and it will not get that unless it has credibility. It will not get credibility just by saying it has been done; there will have to be process that proves it is achieving what it said it would.

Let me clearly state that there is no question about the value of the live animal export industry—to Indonesia and beyond—to the Australian economy. I think it is worth about a billion dollars a year. There are people who are certainly finding it hard going now that this trade has been suspended. We know that, and many of us feel for them. We know that this goes right across the industry, from the landowners and the pastoralists right through to all the others who are working in the industry. Personally, being a former meatworker, I would always prefer to have no live exports and concentrate on giving our meat producers the opportunity to work towards maximising their income through ensuring that animals can be traced right through to the supermarket or to the local shop. It always strikes me as a waste to ship beautiful, almost finished animals offshore to be marketed there just as meat, without us having a chance to brand it, to regionalise and identify it or to have some control over quality.

No-one in this government would want this suspension to last a day longer than it needs to, and I believe that we can work towards a proper and sustainable industry that can have the credibility of the Australian people. But if we fail that, this industry will be lost to Australia. Racing back in is not the answer.

Natasha Griggs (Solomon, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this matter of public importance: the urgent need for the government to revoke the live cattle export ban. As I stand before you today, not only are our farmers suffering but thousands of cattle are starving in stockyards across Northern Australia. I refer to an article dated 29 June in the NT News, titled 'Cattle "have to be shot"'. I would like to quote a few words from the article:

The live export ban means 8000 Brahmans will have to be shot before they die of thirst, a shellshocked Marlee Ranacher—daughter of NT cattle icon Sara Henderson—said last night.

She said the water was drying up, and the Bullo River Station dynasty had run out of cash to buy diesel to run the bores.

'We can't pump water for them—we have to start shooting them. I can't watch them die of thirst. It's a disaster beyond comprehension.' …

'I actually thought we lived in a democracy - not only have (the Government) not looked after the welfare of its people, they've not considered the welfare of millions of cattle. I don't know what we're going to do.'

That was a week ago, and the Gillard Labor government continues with what we can only describe as an economical, human and animal welfare disaster happening right before our eyes. These now starving and thirsty cattle were stopped from being exported because of a knee-jerk reaction by a panicked Gillard Labor government. The result: an animal welfare issue in our own country.

I have been asked by the people of my electorate of Solomon and the greater Northern Territory to tell you today that this total ban on live exports is damaging. It is damaging to families, businesses, Indigenous and non-Indigenous jobs, the greater community and the welfare of our cattle. This total ban must be lifted as soon as possible.

I stand before you today as a concerned member of parliament and a lifetime Territorian through and through. No-one can deny that animal cruelty is wrong, but a blanket ban on live exports will be disastrous for Northern Australia and will not stop the cruelty inflicted on animals exported from other countries into these rogue abattoirs. Blanket banning of Australian animals from being exported to Indonesia will not stop the cruelty. Let me make this very clear. Australian cattle farmers are appalled by the treatment of their cattle. They are appalled by these rogue abattoirs. This Gillard Labor government should resume the livestock trade immediately and trade with the abattoirs that comply with best international standards. The rogue abattoirs will have two choices: either meet the international standards or lose the business.

If we turn our backs on this trade we lose our position to negotiate, to resolve the issue and to stop the cruelty. Cattle production is worth around $300 million a year to the Territory economy. The live trade to Indonesia represents a massive 47 per cent of our total live cattle trade. The total ban directly impacts cattle producers and businesses such as the transport or trucking industry, farming families and feed suppliers. The ban also indirectly affects accountants who do the books for the cattle producers, the fuel suppliers and so on.

I was recently on Pete Davies's radio show, 360. During the show we received so many outraged calls from Territorians who were not happy about the total ban. Most of them were not from farming families. They were people who know that they will be indirectly affected by this total ban. These people were not happy, because they know not only that the ban will impact farmers and the Northern Territory economy but also that it will not stop the cruelty. This total ban is going to hit all of the Territory, and it is going to hit it hard. About 10,000 Territorians, including 700 Indigenous Australians, are being directly and indirectly affected. There are an estimated 54 Indigenous cattle properties in the Territory. All of them are affected. They, like the other businesses in the Territory, face an uncertain future. The damage to the Australian industry will be vast and difficult to recover from. As one of my constituents said to me last week: 'The cruelty seen in Indonesia is now being dealt out to our farming families of Northern Australia.' How true that is. Their livelihood is about to die as cruelly as the cattle in Indonesia. The constituent who said this to me is not alone and he is not wrong.

My office has been inundated with calls, emails and letters from people all over Australia but mainly the Territory. Most of them are fearful and angry about this total ban, particularly the implications that it has for them and the Northern Territory economy. This issue needs to be resolved in a matter of days, not weeks, not months. This industry is at risk and so is the Northern Territory economy.

Another recent article in the Northern Territory News read: 'Cattle catastrophe coming: don't penalise us for rogue aba­ttoirs'. The article focuses on the Muldoon family, who run 40,000 head of cattle in the territory. Mrs Muldoon said in the article:

The government has made a serious misjudgment here; they made a really bad call on this.

True. They, like many of the 300-plus cattle-farming families in the Territory, will lose their income and may have their mortgages foreclosed on them. This is simply unacc­eptable.

The Northern Territory Cattlemen's Association know full well the live export trade is not something you can just turn on and off when it suits you. They know the impact it has on the local and greater community. This is their industry, it is their livelihood, but unlike Labor they are looking at what is in the best interests of the farmers and the best interests of the cattle.

Luke Bowen from the Northern Territory Cattlemen's Association summed it up when he said:

Your government tried to turn the power off at the wall and do you now expect to just switch it back on at a time when it suits and expect cattle to be on boats the next day? It takes weeks for the supply chain in Australia alone to start to move again from the property to the port. Get off your hands and show some commitment, and try and resolve and fix what you broke before the north implodes.

I am not convinced that this government cares about Territorians, especially those Territorians who will be affected by this total ban, nor do I think it cares about the thousands of cattle starving and dying of thirst. Well, I care. I want my colleagues in this place to know that this Gillard Labor government, through its failure to comp­etently administer Australia's live cattle export industry, has put serious pressure on Northern Australian families. Desperate to get the message to the government, a constituent of mine has started a Territory-wide petition urging the Gillard Labor government to stop the cruelty, not the trade. I will table that petition in the next sitting period.

The Northern Territory Legislative Asse­mbly was specifically recalled early to discuss this total ban and the impact on Territory families. Unlike the Gillard Labor government, the federal and Territory Coun­try Liberals have flown to Indonesia to try to find a way to resolve this issue. We the coalition believe that there are ways to ban the cruelty and not stop the trade. The point that seems to be missed in this debate is that there are internationally accredited abattoirs in Indonesia. Why are we not exporting to them? That is why the Gillard Labor government should lift the export ban.

Unlike the Gillard Labor government, the Territory Labor Party has used its common sense to realise the decision of the Gillard Labor government was wrong, rushed, not thought out, arrogant and ignorant. Like many Territorians I am sick and tired of this Gillard Labor government's knee-jerk rea­ctions to issues as important as this. This total ban on live exports is another example of the government making decisions that affect our country without considering the short- and long-term implications across our nation.

As a federal representative from the Northern Territory I have some questions for those opposite on behalf of the people of the Northern Territory: why isn't the Labor member for Lingiari representing the people on this issue? Why hasn't Senator Trish Crossin voiced her people's concerns? Why are they silent on this issue when the people of the Northern Territory, who elected them, are calling on them to speak up? I call on the member for Lingiari and Senator Crossin to join me and Senator Scullion and represent the people of the Northern Territory by calling on the Gillard Labor government to revoke the ban on live cattle exports. My Liberal colleague Senator Scullion and I are certainly being vocal on this issue.

The issue here is obvious. Yes, animal cruelty is wrong, but the issue is not trading live cattle overseas. The implications of this ban stretch far beyond the property lines of Australian cattle stations. The Gillard Labor government needs to open its eyes, look at the bigger picture, admit it got it wrong, fix the cruelty and save the trade.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have listened to all the babble from those opposite, particularly the member for Durack, who spent 10 minutes not facing up to any facts or realities but just coming up with more three-word slogans, more drivel, more rubbish. He wants to blame the messenger for this.

We should sit down and have a mature conversation—I know it is difficult for those opposite—and look at why this trade was suspended. It was suspended because of cruelty to animals. Everyone who has seen that footage knows that that cruelty was appalling. The question I would like to ask those opposite, as they sit there with their empty blank faces, is: how long did Senator Coonan have that video footage? She never came out and said that she had it. Has she been talking to you about it? Did she say to you that she was in possession of that video footage long before it came on the ABC? No. That is the hypocrisy of what goes on opposite. You sit there and want to blame the people who brought the footage to everyone's attention.

When I was working at DPI in Victoria we went to markets and we saw cruelty here in Australian. The member for Dawson wants to blame religion; he says that is the problem. That is just the sort of absolutely appalling thing that you would expect from such a barbaric person as he is.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for McEwen will withdraw that reflection on the member for Dawson.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw. They want to blame the religion and they want to blame the people that brought the video footage to people's attention, but they do not want to stand up and face up to the fact that they are partly to blame for this. They were the ones that set up MLA, they were the ones that set up self-regulation and they were the ones that set this industry up for failure. During the whole 11 dark years of the Howard government, they did nothing—they closed their eyes and hoped that it would go away, but they did not do anything. What did you do when there was an issue with the live export of sheep to Saudi Arabia back in 2003? What did the government do? I know the member for Bennelong, who is in the chamber, would not have a clue, but what they did was impose a blanket ban, a straight two-year blanket ban. You put the live sheep industry at risk for two years with a blanket ban—not a temporary ban until the problem was sorted out.

We are trying to do the right thing by the industry by giving them the chance to go forward, giving them the chance to continue for the long term. Do you remember, when there was a problem with poor handling of cattle in our exports to Egypt in 2006, who was the minister at the time who imposed the blanket ban? I know the member for Bennelong would not have a clue, but it was Minister McGauran of the Nationals. He is the one who put the suspension in place in 2006, a suspension that was not lifted until 2008.

They sit there and make this feigned outcry: 'Oh, the poor industry!' But when you actually have a look at their history, when you look at what they have done over time, you see that they have actually put this industry more at risk than anyone else. So it is up to us, the Gillard government, to sort it, to fix it and to get it back on track. That is what we are doing. The member for Bennelong laughs but that simply beggars belief. You have no idea what you are laughing about.

John Alexander (Bennelong, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a very good idea.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You have no idea at all. You have yourselves imposed blanket bans which have lasted for two years at a time, yet you say how bad it is that we have suspended live exports.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The honourable member for McEwen, by use of the word 'you', is referring to the occupant of the chair. I am sure that is not his intention and I would counsel him to observe the standing orders.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was definitely not referring to you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I apologise if that is the indication that I gave. There is no way I would do that.

Those opposite know that an independent reviewer has been appointed to undertake a complete supply chain review of the live export trade for all markets. The independent reviewer, Bill Farmer, will inform us on both the design and the application of the new safeguards. We need to put these safeguards in place.

I notice the member for Casey over there. I am sure that if he went back to his electorate and checked his local markets he would probably find that there were a couple of issues with DPI and animal cruelty in his area going back four or five years. But, as is typical, he has his back turned and is not interested. It is far easier to sit there and try and claim a political point than to sit down and say, 'How do we get through this properly, quickly and effectively so that we sustain the industry in the long term?' That is what Bill Farmer is doing. He is going to inform us on the design and application of these new safeguards.

We, the Gillard government, are working extremely closely with the Indonesian government and with industry to bring about improvements in practices in abattoirs to make this important trade sustainable for the long term. In the meantime, we have provided a package to assist the people out there who are hurting during this temporary suspension. This assistance package will make sure that employees and small business owners who earn the majority of their income from the live cattle trade to Indonesia receive support in the short term. That is important because we know that this is a painful issue. We know that when industries are facing hardship we have to try to help people along.

We can remember, during the Howard government, that the only time any industry that was going bad got any support was when it was run by a bloke named Stan Howard. They did not care when jobs were lost in many industries and many businesses. People turned up for work on a Monday morning and were told, 'Sorry—no superannuation, no pay, no job.' You could not have cared less about that. When it was Stan Howard, though, you were in there straightaway and sorting it out.

I also have to pick up on what the member for Durack said in his 10-minute rant. He tried to say, 'We do not need to have this city-country divide,' but then he said, 'All the people in the city are stupid; they do not understand cattle and they do not understand what goes on on farms.' That is an absolute joke—to sit there and say that all people in the city have no idea. You have to wonder about the credibility of someone when he comes out with such silly remarks and then tries to blame the people who brought the video footage out. It shows that they are out of touch, that they are arrogant, that they have absolutely no idea and that anything more than a three-word slogan is beyond their intellectual capacity.

We know that we have a lot of work to do to get this trade back up and running and to do it quickly. We know that and we have been working closely with key stakeholders. I met with the Northern Territory Cattlemen's Association in the last sitting week and I spoke to them about the issues they are facing. They all agree that we have to sort this out—that we cannot have our animals sent over there when we cannot guarantee the supply chain and when we cannot guarantee that each animal that goes across there is going to be killed in a humane manner. Until we can do that, until we can be assured that we have those safeguards in place, we need to work through this to get things up and running.

You would think that a company such as MLA, who get many millions of dollars a year, would be out there, as the peak body to the industry, doing their best for that industry. It is clear that they have not done that. It is clear that they have failed the cattlemen; it is clear that they have failed the industry. They should be out there working hard to get the industry going again, but they are not. It gets left to the government to do the work because of their incompetence—and I say 'incompetence' because a peak body should be making sure that markets are safe. If that is their key objective and that is their key product, they should be out there making sure that their product is safe and there is a sustainable future for that market. But they have not done that. They have let the cattlemen down. As was suggested previously, maybe that is where heads need to roll. Maybe the people at MLA should be told: 'You have failed. You should take responsibility. You should make the ultimate sacrifice.' I think that is what needs to be done.

Paul Holmes a Court, a cattleman, said that there was no doubt that the suspension was going to be financially devastating for everyone in the medium term, but that it was necessary if we were to establish the systems required to secure the industry's long term future. He also said on 10 June:

Currently our industry can't guarantee that our standards will be met all the way down the line. The ban should only be lifted once we have an independent, auditable system which will allow that to happen.

The government is working with the industry and working with the Indonesian gover­nment, and we should be ignoring the hypocrisy from those opposite, which has become so predictable. They are saying one thing and doing another. This government is doing the right thing by the producers, by the cattle, by the trade and by the families that are involved. We will defend and support the long-term interests of the live cattle trade and we are committed to doing so in a sustainable way. (Time expired)

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The discussion is concluded.