Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I commend the member for Farrer on the introduction of this important bill, the Live Sheep Long Haul Export Prohibition Bill 2018. I also commend her and her co-sponsors for the courage they have shown in difficult circumstances. It is never easy to rally against your party's own policy position, and it is even more courageous to pursue the issue down the path of a private member's bill.

The reality is that the morality the live sheep trade relies upon is fundamentally broken. It has three basic flaws. First, it is reliant on the dreaded Northern Hemisphere summer trade—a trade which is completely incompatible with reasonable animal welfare standards. The science leaves us in no doubt about that. Second, the trade externalises animal welfare cruelty. The premiums earned by exporters as a result of cruel conditions, like excessive stocking densities, are externalised in the form of higher than normal payments to sheepmeat producers. This, of course, has the added disadvantage of putting at a disadvantage domestic processors here in Australia. Third, consumer preferences and community tolerance for the poor treatment of animals are both turning away from the live sheep model. The writing is on the wall, in any case.

It is a statement of fact to say that members and senators from a majority of parties represented in this parliament have now expressed support for the provisions within this bill, and they are important provisions. What this bill would do, first of all, is put an immediate stop to that northern summer trade: that practice of jamming tens of thousands of live sheep onto a vessel for a three- or four-week voyage in the hottest and most humid climatic conditions in the world. That has to stop. Second, it would phase out the balance of the trade over a five-year period, providing the sector with sufficient time to make the transition. When I say 'the sector', I'm talking mainly about those sheepmeat producers who have become dependent on the live-export trade for—in part at least—their livelihood.

I am very strongly of the view that, with the right strategic red meat industry plan, we can assist sheepmeat producers in making that transition, to take them to a better place both in animal welfare terms and in terms of sustainable profitability. And, at the same time, we can create a structure in this country which allows us to do more value-adding here in Australia, creating more jobs in Australia. So this strategic red meat plan will be good for sheepmeat producers, it will be good for the Australian economy, it will be good for Australian jobs, and, of course, it will produce better animal welfare standards.

We all know the reality of the difficulty in getting the member for Farrer's bill through this parliament. The Senate—not so difficult, in my view. I'm very confident about its prospects there. In fact, today, a bill pretty much replicating the member for Farrer's bill is being introduced into the Senate, so we'll give the parliament plenty of opportunities. But it will be difficult because the government will not give preference to either of these bills in the House, and, of course, to have them voted upon in the House will require an absolute majority. I was going to provide the parliament with yet another opportunity, and I've foreshadowed my intention of moving amendments to the bill proposed by the government which increases penalties in the live export trade. To secure support in the House for that amendment will only require, of course, a simple majority.

What has happened to that bill now? The government has pulled the bill from the legislative program to save the risk of losing those amendments in the House. If the government is confident of my amendment being defeated, it should just bring the bill on. We can only assume, as it withholds the bill, that it's not confident of defeating my amendments in the House. In other words, it's pushing against the will of the House of Representatives. It's clear this is the will of the House of Representatives. It's clear a number of members of the Liberal Party want to support me and the member for Farrer, and they should be allowed to do so.

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

I'd like to thank the member for Farrer for bringing forward the Live Sheep Long Haul Export Prohibition Bill 2018 and this important debate. Astute listeners will note that the area of Bennelong is quite ovinely challenged. In fact, to my knowledge, there is not one sheep domiciled in the corner of Sydney that I represent, but that doesn't mean people in my electorate don't care deeply about this issue. In the last few years, I've had hundreds of locals contact me to express their concerns with this ongoing trade. They demand their concerns be addressed. On the other side of this argument are the farmers who depend on live sheep exports for their ongoing livelihood. To stop the exports tonight would bring devastation to their families. Maintaining this policy may hurt some sheep but will save farmers. Stopping it helps sheep but hurts farmers. We need to move to a policy where both are safe, but, in this matter, as in many, the art of transition is key.

Politics is often a battle of heads against hearts. It's easy and tempting to take an emotive line on many issues, but government must always be led by facts. Governing should involve an information led, rational compromise that allows everybody to get ahead. For this reason, I am opposed to the policy put forward by the Labor Party. Stopping exports without a clear, thought-through time frame would devastate the industry and leave farmers destitute. This is a bad policy that will hurt families across our regions. At the same time, this is why I feel, if properly implemented, a policy like the member for Farrer's is sensible. A five-year transition period would allow time for the market to prepare for the impact of this policy while alleviating the most extreme of the shipboard conditions. The last Labor government almost destroyed the cattle industry with its overnight shutdown, and we can't make the same mistakes they did. I'll defer to the member for Farrer on the finer points of agricultural policy, but I would hope that five years would be enough time to make the relevant changes for farmers across the country. If this time is not economically viable, it can be amended, but it would seem a fair period of time.

This phasing-out process would need to echo many of the policies already implemented by the government, and it is pleasing to note that the government has accepted all recommendations from the McCarthy review of sheep exports to the Middle East during the northern summer, which was released on 17 May 2018. Facts show us that live sheep exports are now safer than they have ever been before. More sheep actually die on road transports than at sea. The government can be congratulated for the great improvements made to the trade by making it safer.

We also know that the value of live sheep exports has decreased dramatically over the past few years, which has been confirmed by the department of agriculture. Live exports are now only six per cent of the total sheep turn-off. The other 94 per cent is processed, packaged and frozen domestically before being exported. The extra processing employs more Australians and makes economic sense. In 2016-17, the total global value of Australian lamb was $1.9 billion, and mutton was worth $719 million. Both lamb and mutton value have increased dramatically from 2010-11 figures, reflecting growing demand and the opening up of new markets such as China. Most of this growth is in the frozen product. So there is a market here that we can expand into and capitalise on.

The art of transition is the most important skill in politics and one we need to get much better at. Knee-jerk responses to crises are never sustainable and usually hurt more people than they help. This seems like a sensible policy of transition and, so long as it stacks up economically, the government should consider it further. The countering views have been expressed. It is now time to settle on common sense.

Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At the outset, I commend the member for Farrer for having the courage to introduce this bill, and those of her colleagues who have supported her. In my understanding of my community, I would summarise the community attitude to this as being: 'enough is enough'. After all the outrage, the numerous reviews, the years of hand-wringing, and the stalling, it's time that the parliament acted decisively and passed this private member's bill, to end the live sheep export trade once and for all. It is an issue that crosses the political divide. It matters in the cities, it matters in the towns, it matters in the bush. No Australian who has seen the latest footage could be anything but appalled and horrified. We cannot unsee this. We cannot just turn away. We should not be cramming live sheep into boiling metal ships and casting them out in the Indian Ocean for weeks on end, in the hopes of propping up an already failing industry. The reality is that there is no way to regulate this trade that will prevent animals dying cruelly at sea. As the member for Farrer said when she introduced this bill: 'Regulations written on paper in Australia cease to mean anything once the ship departs.'

The government's weak response just makes things a little bit less awful. At best, the government's policy will give the sheep a bit more space: an extra A3 sheet of paper—a better class of cruelty, if you like. It's a tacit admission by the government that they're going to keep letting sheep be slowly cooked alive. That may sound shocking. It's appalling language, if you think about the reality of what that means. But, listening to those opposite, who continue in tortuous bits of flawed logic to defend the indefensible, it wouldn't surprise me if one of them jumped up and said: 'Look, I think we need to innovate this industry. We'll export the missing tomatoes and rosemary and garlic, and they can be pre-cooked meals on arrival.' The state of those sheep is nothing short of disgusting when they arrive.

Should this bill pass, it will end the live-export trade in the hot Northern Hemisphere summer months and phase out the trade altogether over the subsequent five years. For years now, the government has used the issue of live sheep exports as an electoral wedge, so that anyone speaking up on this and expressing a view somehow means they are antifarmers or antitrade. The tenure of the former Deputy Prime Minister, the honourable member for New England and minister for agriculture, was disgraceful. He didn't just do nothing—he actually took pride in weakening and undermining the existing protections for animal welfare. The initial reaction from the current minister to the latest footage was positive and strong, but it was a short-lived breath of fresh air, in my opinion. Sadly, he has gone back to normal programming. The government's lack of moral compass is seen in its crab walk away from any real action.

The review was headed by a veterinarian who works for the industry, and it is a profound disappointment. With respect to my colleague the member for Bennelong, the government haven't adopted all of the review's weak recommendations. They've said they accept them, but they won't implement them. It's tricky words. You say you accept, but won't do. Nothing changes. This is particularly so with recommendation 4, which would have practically ended the live sheep export trade in the sweltering Northern Hemisphere summer. So it's unclear to anyone outside the cabinet whether the minister has caved to the industry, was rolled in cabinet or just lost his spine, which seems to be a fairly common thing for those opposite when they enter the Turnbull cabinet. But, whatever happened, he has precious little to be proud of—he's certainly no misnomer.

The overwhelming scientific and economic evidence supports ending this trade. The Australian Veterinary Association, the RSPCA and countless animal welfare groups have told us that there is simply no way that the northern summer sheep trade can continue if animal welfare considerations are to be adequately met. And the economists have told us there's simply no long-term future for this failing industry. It's been in decline for over two decades. So, as legislators, we should act now to ensure the welfare of Australian animals and to provide transitional support, in a timetable, for farmers who currently rely on the industry for their livelihood. There've been some people in animal welfare groups who've said five years is too long; others have said it's long enough. In reality, the five-year period probably strikes a reasonable and correct balance in allowing farmers and exporters time to transition.

So, in summary, we can stop this cruel trade. We must stop this cruel trade. The moral, scientific and economic case is clear. The evidence requires us as legislators to act. The community have had enough, and Australia's international reputation will be damaged if we don't act. Allowing this to continue is not who we are as a people.

Rick Wilson (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to oppose this private member's bill, the Live Sheep Long Haul Export Prohibition Bill 2018, on four grounds: firstly, the effect it will have on the hardworking farmers, truck drivers, stock agents and ancillary industries such as pellet manufacturers, who rely heavily on the live export trade for their livelihoods; secondly, the loss of the positive impact the ESCAS has had on animal welfare outcomes for not only Australian animals but all animals in destination countries; thirdly, the wider trade implications with the Middle East; and, finally, the live sheep trade in the Middle East is much larger than Australian supply, so our animals will be substituted with animals from sub-Saharan Africa, the Black Sea and South America.

The live export trade is worth around $250 million to the Australian economy, with over 85 per cent of this income generated from WA, largely from my electorate. After the closure of the live export trade in 2011, prices for shipping wethers fell from the $80 to $100 per head range to $5 per head, recovering to the $20 to $30 a head range in the months following. This of course dragged the entire sheep market down by over 50 per cent and sent many businesses to the wall.

I have received hundreds of emails from constituents who have been suffering great uncertainty and anxiety over the future of their businesses following the introduction of this private member's bill. Many farmers, like me, were shocked to see the animals they had raised and nurtured suffer due to the extreme weather event on the Awassi Express. But it's worth noting that live export mortalities currently average 0.7 per cent per voyage, compared to 1.9 per cent in the 1990s. So this is a massive improvement over the last 15 years. This can be compared to Australian annual grazing losses of up to five per cent. One farmer reminded me: 'Mother Nature imposes things on us that can cause livestock losses, despite our best intentions.' Livestock transporter Andy Jacobs sits on the committee of the Livestock and Rural Transport Association of WA. He states that over 25 per cent of their members will be adversely affected by any industry closure, and many are only just recovering from the 2011 shutdown. Andy also provided this sobering reminder: 'Human life is important too. In 2011 we lost good people to suicide as a direct result of the loss of this trade, let alone the animals that needed to be destroyed.'

Our ESCAS has actually lifted animal welfare standards across export destination nations for all sheep, not only Australian sheep.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You should give the Labor Party credit for it.

Rick Wilson (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I give the Labor Party credit for that, Joel. What will happen to the sheep from countries with less stringent welfare requirements? Middle Eastern countries import around 10 million sheep per annum, of which Australia contributes only 1.6 to 1.8 million. Contrary to assertions that this market is shrinking, global food company GIRA forecasts that demand will increase by 2.5 per cent per annum between now and 2022.

The Saudi market accounts for around 56 per cent of the world live sheep market and sits outside the ESCAS. Prior to 2009, these sheep came largely from Australia, but the bulk of these sheep are now sourced primarily from Djibouti, Somalia and Sudan. The assumption that ceasing live exports will simply drive substitution to chilled Australian meat is incorrect. We only have to look to Bahrain to see that in 2015, when the live export market became unviable due to changes to government subsidies, MLA figures showed that our chilled meat exports have shrunk from 11,987 tonnes in 2014 to 7,423 tonnes in 2017.

The fact is that live export is actually increasing. Comparisons have been made between New Zealand and Australia, but New Zealand has always been a prime lamb producer and has never had a substantial live export industry. Australia, on the other hand, is primarily a wool-producing nation with mutton meat a lower valued by-product for domestic consumption. Chilled mutton is worth roughly half of what chilled lamb is. Livestock Shipping Services exports both live and chilled meat from WA to the Middle East. LSS recently purchased export shippers from WA farmers for over $100 a head, but managing director Paul Keenan informed me that, if these shippers were slaughtered at the Hillside abattoir in Narrogin, they would have only returned around $70 per head. General manager Ahmad Ghosheh added that the current capacity to move chilled product to the Middle East is full and that it will continue to diminish with the withdrawal of Etihad Airways daily flight from Perth to the Middle East.

Meanwhile, last month Al Mawashi, the Kuwaiti livestock transport and trading company that buys most of the 1.8 million live sheep exported from Australia, warned of wider ramifications for Australian agricultural commodities. CEO Usama Boodai stated:

… doubts about Australian sheep means Al Mawashi is already looking to find other secure sources of livestock—

in countries such as Somalia and Romania. He also said:

This could also bring into question the significant volumes of fodder we import for feeding Australian sheep in our feedlots, as well as the chilled and frozen sheep meat we also import.

In closing, I commend the minister for the strong stand he has taken with the imposition of stricter stocking density rates, independent observers on all voyages and significantly increased financial penalty. (Time expired)

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for the debate having expired, the debate was interrupted, and the resumption of the debate made an order of the day for the next sitting.