Kelvin Thomson (Wills, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In response to the terrible atrocities to Australian cattle in Indonesia exposed in 2011, the Labor government introduced the exporter supply chain assurance program, known as ESCAS. Since its introduction, there have been no fewer than 24 formal complaints of cruelty in importing countries under ESCAS, most of them instigated not by the industry, not by the ESCAS auditors, but by animal welfare groups. This suggests that exporters are still having to be dragged kicking and screaming towards good practice rather than embracing it.

But in October one player within the industry stooped to a new low. During the recent Festival of Sacrifice, thousands of Australian sheep were sold outside approved supply chains in Jordan. These sheep were dragged from their pens, abused, shoved into car boots, and eventually had their throats slashed open on the streets and in private backyards. The approved supply chains that were supposed to protect these sheep from abject cruelty are controlled by Livestock Shipping Services, LSS, which is wholly owned by a Jordanian parent company. The evidence strongly indicates that LSS showed complete disregard for the rules of the ESCAS, but it gets worse.

Livestock Shipping Services is now the prime suspect in a further extremely disturbing case of on-selling involving Australian cattle exported to Palestine. I have seen footage taken in the Gaza Strip of what are almost certainly Australian cattle once again during the festival of sacrifice this October. It is the most horrific footage of animal cruelty I have ever seen. It is barbaric and an affront to Australian values. It is incumbent on each and every MP and everyone who wishes to comment or to be informed on animal export issues to watch this footage personally, however distressing it may be. The footage documents cattle being chased, dragged and beaten in the streets of Gaza by frenzied mobs. The cattle are repeatedly slashed, even stabbed in the eyes, before having their throats sawed open with blunt knives amid cheering crowds. No animal should be subject to this level of cruelty, anytime, anywhere.

The footage makes a mockery of the claims of the live export industry that by being in the market, we will improve animal welfare practices in importing countries. There is strong evidence linking these cattle to LSS. It is the only company listed on the departmental website with a supply chain to Palestine, and the ear tags on the cattle match those of LSS. LSS continues to carry on its business as usual, purchasing sheep and cattle from Australian farmers for export. The Maysora, an LSS ship, is currently in Fremantle awaiting loading. This government's apologetic indifference and inaction tells LSS it has nothing to lose and everything to gain if it flouts the rules. If ESCAS means anything, the export licence for LSS should be suspended while departmental investigations are undertaken with the view to revoking it, subject to the investigation's conclusion. (Time expired)

Eric Hutchinson (Lyons, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

During the adjournment debate on Monday this week, the member for Parramatta took it upon herself to champion the Tasmanian Forests Agreement. Perpetuating a myth is no substitute for fact. To correct the record, firstly, the Tasmanian forestry industry does not have FSC certification. Only Norske Skog and SFM Forest Products have this for plantation timber, along with Mr Peter Downie for his private native forests. Gunns Ltd has FSC controlled wood status for plantation wood being developed and delivered to woodchip mills at Bell Bay and Burnie. This relies on wood delivered having a valid forest practices plan and AFS certification.

Next, there is no requirement for certification for exporting. Some customers do demand FSC, others either FSC or AFS, and naturally, the majority of customers demand the wood come from legal sources. This is what happens in a free market. Finally, Ta Ann has no FSC wood coming into its mills in Tasmania. The majority of its wood supply comes from native forests managed by Forestry Tasmania. FT has AFS certification and is working towards full FSC certification as part of the dictated outcomes of the Tasmanian Forests Agreement.

Let us be clear: having certification does not makes Australia's forests more sustainable. Tasmanians have a right to be sceptical when a Sydney based member suggests she knows what is best for the state of Tasmania—my state—and the electorate of Lyons, my electorate. Alarm bells should start ringing when the same member makes a series of inaccurate statements to the House, espousing how Tasmanians should manage their natural resources.

A key reason I stand here today is that the 7 September election was a referendum on the future of forestry in my home state. Sitting around the negotiation table for the development of the TFA were hand-picked representatives from big business, big unions and big environment. The broader forest industry was never represented. The private forest growers were never represented, let alone the scores of small communities and businesses that were dependent on the most renewable of resources. TFA negotiations were purely a political stunt to appease the Greens and allow state and federal Labor governments to abrogate their responsibility. Industry did sit at the table, but negotiated with a gun to their head. As people around the state know, these ENGOs were systematically sabotaging companies legally carrying out their day-to-day business, and finally the industry capitulated.

The TFA process was born out of a commercial decision by Gunns Ltd to exit native forest. It was meant to deliver ENGO support for a pulp mill using only plantation feedstock, and see the Triabunna woodchip mill in my electorate reopen. We got neither. Labor have shown they do not have the capacity to achieve good outcomes on forestry. Their mates, the Greens, have shown that enough will never be enough.