Steve Georganas (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This government supports strong animal welfare standards and believes all animals should be treated humanely. The Labor Party went to the last two elections committed to the phase-out of live sheep exports by sea. When I say that, we didn't do this ad hoc; there was an outcry from the public. We've seen over the last 10 years many images on our TVs of animal cruelty on those ships. We've seen the suffering of these animals and people in my electorate have been crying out about it. I've never received more emails on any topic apart from this one. We know that the Labor Party wants to bring in this phase-out of live sheep exports, but to do so we need to bring people along with us. There's the need for a long period of discussions with farmers, industry et cetera to have the least impact on the industry.

If we look at the industry at the moment, we know that, when it comes to meat exports, live sheep are only a small part of that. The majority of our meat goes out frozen to different parts around the world. We should also try to value-add to the industry. When I say 'value-add', if we go back 20 years in this country, in South Australia—in your home state, Deputy Speaker Sharkie, and mine—we had the Gepps Cross Abattoir, where nearly 3,000 people were employed over three shifts. They slaughtered animals for export. We can add value to the industry by ensuring that we slaughter animals here humanely, in a way that's within our control, and increase those export markets, therefore having a very small impact on sheep farmers.

The independent panel has completed the public consultations it has been undertaking to inform the government of the how, what and when it might phase out live sheep exports by sea appropriately. The panel undertook consultations to ensure that all stakeholders had an opportunity to have a say in this particular outcome. In the consultations, the panel engaged with over 2,000 attendees at in-person forums and 330 attendees at virtual forums. These were held over 80 meetings with organisations and farmer representative groups. The panel received over 800 submissions and 3,300 responses.

This government has invested millions into agriculture: $3.1 billion to protect and grow our virtual agriculture, fisheries, forestry and industries. Sheep farming is no different. We want to ensure its survival, and there are ways of doing that in a manner which doesn't upset the industry in terms of its exports. As I said, at the moment we're seeing minimal meat being exported in that live sheep cargo. We need to value-add to this industry. We need to do everything we can to assist abattoirs. We need to create new abattoirs in the country to employ people and to value-add.

We know for a fact that one particular country that we're exporting to has one of the biggest slaughterhouses in the Middle East. They slaughter the live sheep that we export to them and export them all over the Middle East as boxed frozen meat packages. Why can't we be doing that here in this nation? Why can't we ensure that people who want our meat can receive it? You might talk about refrigeration and a whole range of other things as well, but the reality is that it is minimal. The live sheep exports are minimal when it comes to exporting meat across the country. And we want to see animals stop suffering.

When you see thousands and thousands of sheep on these ships—and we've seen all the images on TV and in the newspapers—every Australian will tell you that they are cruel images. We want to see value-adding to help farmers be able to export more meat, ensuring that it's done in a humane way and in a way that most people would accept and that is not cruel to those animals.

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the member for Grey's motion condemning the Albanese government for its reckless decision to shut down Australia's live sheep export industry. I acknowledge that the member for Grey is, indeed, here with me in the chamber. I want to begin my contribution to this debate by thanking all of the members of the Coalition's Agriculture, Water and Environment Backbench Committee for visiting Western Australia and listening to our farmers who really are under attack—a visit, I might add, that the Prime Minister is yet to make.

We had members from this side of the House travelling from New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and South Australia. And what this trip really demonstrates is the unity of our coalition team. All of us on this side of the House are committed to the future of agriculture in this country and understand that the live sheep trade is an important component of that future. This reckless decision significantly affects communities within my electorate of Durack as well as farmers across the electorate of O'Connor, and I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the member for O'Connor for his advocacy as well.

As noted in the report, the decision to phase out the live sheep trade has already had a disastrous impact, with confidence in the industry being destroyed. As a result, local markets have been overwhelmed and prices have dropped significantly. Farmers are struggling to sell their sheep above the price of freight and, in some cases, have had to make the tragic decision to sell their sheep at a loss or kill and bury them on their own farms. Could you imagine how heartbreaking that must be for those farmers? The number of farmers deciding to quit raising sheep altogether is progressively increasing, which has left communities within my electorate reeling.

At the York committee hearing, we heard from Karen Thomas, the president of the York Business Association. Karen is a relatively new resident to York but has quickly picked up on Labor's bias against regional Australia. Although not directly connected to the industry, she said this decision will affect the town's long-term future. We also heard from Gavin Hagboom, a proud fifth-generation farmer from Dowerin, who said he is currently witnessing the demise of his own community with the town struggling to keep its general store open.

These are heart-wrenching stories. We are literally talking about towns that have been around for well over 100 years vanishing before our eyes, and those opposite are directly responsible. I see we have a few Labor members to speak on this motion. I hope they are so committed to phasing out this industry that they read this report and what it means for regional Western Australia. I hope they comprehend exactly what they are doing.

What adds insult to injury is that this decision has been falsely justified. Our live export industry is leading the world in terms of animal welfare. Over the past several years, multiple actions have been taken to ensure that exporters are meeting the highest possible standards, so high in fact that the onboard mortality rates are often better than on the farm. What do those opposite think will happen if our industry collapses? Foreign markets certainly won't move to frozen supply from Australia. Instead, foreign competitors who don't care at all about animal welfare will fill the void, so not only will Western Australian farmers suffer but so will the animals.

I'd also like to note the timely fashion of this report being delivered, so well done to the member for Grey. Despite only visiting regional Western Australia just a few short weeks ago, the committee has been able to table this report today. If only the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry worked to such a timely schedule. As we know, the independent panel delivered their report to the minister in October, and it has still not seen the light of day. I expect it's gathering dust as we speak. The independent report is supposed to detail potential mechanisms to phase out live sheep exports, a suggested time frame and potential ways to support the transition.

I'd like to conclude by reflecting on the words of David Connolly, the outgoing president of the Northern Territory Cattlemen's Association, speaking on the latest delays—can you believe it?—to the class action lawsuit against the Gillard government's actions in shutting down the live export of cattle overnight in 2011, when he said that this government is 'hell-bent on punishing the rural sector'. I couldn't agree more. Once again, we see the needs and the desires and the livelihoods of regional Australians being put under threat just to satisfy the desire to get votes from the inner-city Greens.

Libby Coker (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Albanese Labor government is committed to phasing out live sheep exports. Over many years, I've advocated tirelessly for an end to this trade. In doing so, I've always wanted an outcome that supports farmers and, importantly, delivers better animal welfare outcomes. I'm proud that the Albanese government has a plan and is working with farmers and the agricultural sector to deliver a sensible transition away from live sheep exports. I know that, for many of my constituents, a ban cannot come soon enough. They know that the live exports industry has declined by more than 90 per cent from its peak.

In its place, the export of frozen and chilled product has significantly increased. According to Meat and Livestock Australia, last year was the biggest year on record for frozen lamb and mutton exports, and the latest ABS data reveals that frozen product is now 58 times the value of live sheep exports by sea. This data reflects the fact that there are alternatives—alternatives that add value but also mean that tens of thousands of sheep are not left confined in their own waste, having to endlessly endure the motion of a ship and, at times, unbearable heat, not just for a day, not just for a week, but for several weeks at a time. None of us want to see another crisis like what happened on the MV Bahijah.

At markets, in cafes, on my morning walks, people are coming up to me concerned and upset about the live sheep export trade. I've had countless phone calls and hundreds and hundreds of emails from constituents who have told me it's time to phase out the trade. I want you to know that I hear you and I stand with you in advocating for a sensible phase-out of live sheep exports. In my home state of Victoria, we no longer have a live sheep export industry, and, as the member for Fremantle has said in this place, live exports make up less than 0.1 per cent of Australia's agricultural exports as a whole and less than two per cent of sheepmeat exports. To put it simply, it is an industry in decline.

But we must support our farmers in transition. Australians recognise this, and they now have a government that will stand firm on this issue, an issue that has plagued our nation for too long. All the way back in 1985, the Senate Select Committee on Animal Welfare concluded that, if a decision on the future of the trade were made on animal welfare grounds alone, there was enough evidence to stop the trade. Of course, economic circumstances were different then. The trade was much bigger and stood as a cornerstone of our agricultural industry. But things are different now, and they have been for the best part of a decade. A decade of coalition government has ignored the issue altogether. Although for the briefest period of time the now Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the now shadow education minister, Senator Henderson, demanded a ban on live sheep exports, they quickly abandoned their convictions and sided with their coalition colleagues and stood in the way of a bill to ban the trade. I know that the people of my electorate of Corangamite remember this very well. How different things could have been!

Our communities demanded action, and they were denied action, but this government is listening and it is acting. I would like to acknowledge the work of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. The minister is working through the details of the report, and I know there has been much consultation with the agricultural sector, and recommendations will be forthcoming.

In closing I'd like to recognise the continued advocacy of the member for Fremantle, who has stepped up on this issue. He has been consistent in his calls over many years for a phase-out of live sheep exports, and he recently moved a motion in response to the MV Bahijah crisis. I want to see the sensible end of the live sheep export trade as soon as possible. I want farmers to be involved in the transition so that there are avenues to ensure that their livelihoods are supported. This is why it is taking time. The minister is working hard on this. We as Labor are committed to the end of live sheep exports and we will deliver on this.

Sam Birrell (Nicholls, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't have a live sheep export industry in my electorate, but I am a supporter of agricultural industries and I like to see them thrive. I think they're important for regional Australia. However, I grew up on a cattle farm and worked on another cattle farm nearby, and people who haven't worked in that industry perhaps don't understand how connected you get to the animals. You really care for them, and their welfare is of paramount importance to you as a farmer, and that's the way it was for me.

Given those two competing thoughts, when I had the opportunity to go to Western Australia, I went with an open mind. I joined the coalition policy backbench to visit Adelaide and discuss some things in relation to South Australia, but, then in Western Australia—we went to Wagin, Hyden, Katanning, York and Fremantle, where we saw a live export ship—I went with an open mind, so I want to talk about what I found as someone who went with an open mind.

Firstly, there has been huge reform in the industry, and there needed to be. That reform has addressed animal welfare in a really significant way in relation to airflow, drainage, spacing, food and water, separation of sick animals in transit, vessel compliance and mortality rates. These days, mortality rates are better on ship than in the field on some of the farms that we saw in Western Australia. There's been a moratorium on shipments during the northern summer to address that heat issue. All of this has meant that, when there was a problem—I say 'problem', but it was caused by a geopolitical issue—and a ship that was out to sea for quite a while had to be unloaded, the sheep on that were on that ship had actually put on weight and were in better condition than when they left. I think that speaks to the way that these people care about these animals.

Australia's live sheep export industry is an important issue for Western Australia in particular, employing more than 3,500 people. It's worth $85 million in direct payments to producers, and, with the multiplier effect, that's close to $300 million. The other thing I'd like to say is that there is a market for live sheep exports to the Middle East. That's not going to stop based on what the Australian government decides. The Middle East will source their live sheep from somewhere. The question we've got to ask ourselves is: is it better that they source them from a country with now world-leading animal welfare standards, or should they get them from other places such as Sudan, Somalia, India, Iran and Georgia, where the animal welfare standards aren't as good? I think that's an important issue.

I was also prepared to ask the question—it's been brought up by some of those opposite, and it's a conclusion that you might jump to—about why we don't just build more abattoirs and produce more meat products that we can freeze or send as fresh meat overseas. It doesn't quite work like that. It's not quite as simple as that. The live sheep industry is sort of an overflow industry. When there's an abundance of sheep and the commodity prices line up, it's a very attractive market, but sometimes that doesn't happen. The upshot is—people who have analysed this say—that, if we did build an abattoir to try and take all of this extra meat processing on board, it would probably be closed for half of the year and would not be profitable. So 'why don't we just build more abattoirs and process more meat' doesn't quite work, and I didn't have a full appreciation of that until I talked to the producers involved and talked to people who actually analyse this industry and are involved in this industry all of the time.

I close by saying that I went with an open mind. Animal welfare is really important to me, having previously been a cattle farmer. What I saw was incredibly impressive—what the industry has done to ensure the welfare of animals. It's an important industry economically. If we get out of it, then it will perversely lead to worse animal welfare across the globe because these Middle Eastern markets will source the sheep from places that don't care in the way that we care, and we should care. So I think it's a mistake to go down this path of trying to phase out the Australian live sheep industry, and I urge those opposite to reconsider.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Australian farmers are renowned for their production of world-class food and meat. The Australian people know this, and so does the world, who have long enjoyed our farm and agricultural exports. There's no question that farming and agricultural industries are vitally important to our economy, and the Albanese Labor government is absolutely focused on supporting Australian farmers to continue exporting the quality produce that Australia and the world expects from us. That is our responsibility and that is what Australians want. But that doesn't mean we have to put up with animal cruelty. The live sheep export trade is cruel, and, with world-class abattoirs and meat-packaging facilities right here in Australia, it is unnecessary.

The Albanese Labor government supports strong animal welfare standards. We believe that all animals should be treated humanely, and we have long been concerned about the cruel and inhumane treatment of animals aboard live export ships. And, when they arrive at their overseas destinations, we have little or no control over the conditions in which they live or indeed die. That's why we're committed to phasing out live sheep exports. This is of no surprise to anybody in this parliament. It's a commitment that we took to the Australian people; we were very upfront about that at the last election.

At the turn of the century, the live sheep export industry was absolutely booming in Australia. There were 6.5 million sheep being sent overseas for slaughter. But, for years now, Australians have seen and heard horrific stories of sheep stranded for weeks and months at sea on board ships, often lacking adequate ventilation, in scorching temperatures, unable to sit, sometimes drowning at sea and even drowning in their own excrement. And we've seen shocking footage of the most unbelievable and inhumane cruelty occurring when they arrive at their overseas destinations.

Over the past 20 years, the numbers of live sheep exports have been in freefall, declining by more than 90 per cent now. In the same time frame, the trade in Australian slaughtered and packaged chilled and frozen sheepmeat has increased by 369 per cent. Lamb alone has increased by 532 per cent. In 2022-23, chilled and frozen sheepmeat exports were a $4.5 billion industry. Live sheep exports in the same period were valued at $85 million. The statistics don't lie. The live sheep export industry is coming to an end.

Farmers across Australia have increasingly recognised this, shifting towards chilled and frozen meat exports, and many are pivoting their businesses towards this high-value trade alternative. Animals are slaughtered and packaged in Australia under strict regulations that ensure adherence to Australian animal welfare standards. Jobs that that expanding chilled and frozen meat export industry creates remain on Australian soil—employing Australians and profiting Australia. And farmers know that this growing industry means greater certainty for their future too.

The Albanese Labor government knows this phase-out will affect the export industry, as well as others across the supply chain, including farmers and communities that rely on the trade. That's why Labor is committed to supporting those affected through the transition. This is why we have appointed an independent four-person panel to consult with stakeholders and develop an orderly transition plan. That will be executed across several years, and we are considering the recommendations of their extensive review to inform those next steps. We are exploring options to upscale domestic meat-processing capacity and, through this, to employ more Australians to produce value-added products for our export markets and, ultimately, not to increase the price for everyday Australians, who are already facing cost-of-living pressures.

By phasing out live sheep exports, the Albanese Labor government is showing leadership in this area that is long overdue. I know this will be welcome news to Novocastrians, as it is to many Australians around the country, who not only want an end to animal cruelty but want to see more jobs remain in Australia for Australians. It's a sensible, reasonable and humane way forward, and we as a government are proud to be taking these important steps towards ending this cruel and unnecessary trade.

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Together with, amongst others, the members for Grey, Nicholls and O'Connor, I travelled to Adelaide and Western Australia between 5 March and 8 March to hear firsthand of concerns from those most impacted by Labor's dreadful decision to phase out animal exports. As a result of that trip, we have prepared a report, together with submissions. I seek leave to tender that report.

Leave granted.

I am grateful to my friends. We sought that leave in the House and were denied it, so I'm grateful. Labor have obviously reconsidered their position. I must congratulate them on that because there was vehement opposition to the tendering of that material previously, which was consistent with the Labor Party's approach to the consultation with stakeholders and others.

The member for Newcastle was just talking about how upfront those opposite are with respect to the phase-out. If they were so upfront, they would not be denying the numerous requests we have made to the minister to release the report to stakeholders, farmers and industry groups. The reality here is that the Australian people deserve to know what the impact of this decision will be. It's perhaps timely that we talk about the impact of this decision because we are still dealing with the consequences of the knee-jerk reaction to ban live cattle export during the period of the Gillard government.

Over the weekend, a scathing press release was issued by the Northern Territory Cattlemen's Association. This speaks directly to the impact on lives. On his departure, the outgoing president of the NTCA, David Connolly, said: 'Too many of our friends have already gone to their graves waiting for the compensation. This was money that was stolen from our families and businesses by the actions of the Gillard government. This compensation is not the reward for being right; it's justice for having been wronged.' Here we are more than a decade later and those opposite are seeking to perpetrate the same wrong, this time not on the cattlemen of the Northern Territory but on the sheep meat producers of this country. As we toured, in particular, Western Australia, the seats of O'Connor and Durack, those areas most impacted, I could see the wrong being perpetrated in the expressions of these people who were attending these meetings. They were, quite frankly, desperate. They have done every single thing this government, this parliament and the industry have asked of them. They have got death rates on these ships down to less than 0.2 of one per cent. For those opposite, who might not be in the practice of raising livestock, I can tell you that a survivability rate in that order is something you could expect out in a paddock.

I thought I knew most things about this debate. I have been around agriculture for a long time. This has been a perennial point of discussion. But something on this trip stuck with me, and I want to share it with those opposite. Those opposite think that by bringing in the phase-out they'll end live sheep exports globally. No, they won't. All they'll do is punish Australian farmers, who won't be able to participate in that trade. The reality is that the world will still demand live sheep. Many jurisdictions around the world demand this for cultural and logistical reasons. Those opposite are just saying to Australian producers: 'Sorry, you're not going to be able to participate in that.'

In the early 2000s I attended the Mount Gambier cattle market. I was having a discussion about animal welfare, and an old farmer, who's no longer with us, said to me: 'Tony, what you need to be more focused on is human welfare, famer welfare.' People receive prices that are below the level that anyone should expect for the work they do. The reality is that this decision is having a detrimental impact on the value of live sheep everywhere in Australia. Sheep meat producers in my electorate are being punished by this decision. Sheep meet producers in the member for Grey's electorate are being punished, and for no good reason. For the benefit of those opposite, I repeat: this industry has done every single thing this parliament has asked it to do. It has made those difficult decisions, exercised in accordance ESCAS, but for those opposite it's: 'Not good enough—you're out of business.' (Time expired)

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't doubt for a moment the sincerity of members opposite when they speak on behalf of the farmers they represent, and I have no doubt that many of those farmers are genuinely struggling. But I would make two points in that respect. Firstly, this policy has not yet taken effect, so to argue that farmers are struggling because of an end to the live sheep export trade is absolute nonsense and, quite frankly, dishonest. The policy is one that Labor has committed to, but it has not come into effect as yet. The industry has been on a decline for a long time. Secondly, I say to members who say that we have the best standards in the world: yes, that may be so, but those standards still can't guarantee the safety of those sheep, as evidenced by MV Bahijah incident only this year. Even with the best standards in the world, for reasons beyond the control of the exporters, the sheep ended up suffering. I'll come back to that in a moment if time permits me, but I have other examples to refer to.

Back in 1980, under a liberal government, the trade to Egypt was suspended because of animal welfare concerns. As a result of that there was a Senate committee inquiry, which the member for Corangamite alluded to earlier on tonight. The committee was chaired by Queensland senator George Georges, and the committee's report said:

… if a decision were to be made on the future of the trade purely on animal welfare grounds, there is enough evidence to stop the trade.

The committee, recognising the economic implications of stopping the trade, went on to recommend that the trade be phased out and replaced by the chilled meat trade. That was back in 1985, 40 years ago, so the industry has had four decades to transition out of—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Makin, I'm sorry; would you mind pausing? This is a small chamber. Could we please have silence in here? Other members were heard in silence. Thank you.

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The industry has had four decades of notice to phase out the live sheep export trade. I will point out the incidents that have occurred over that time, and this is only a short list of what I was able to quickly gather. There was the Farid Fares in 1980, 40,000 sheep; the Uniceb in 1996, 67,000 sheep; the Cormo Express in 2003, 50,000 sheep; the Ocean Drover in 2012, 21,000 sheep; the Al Messilah in 2016, 3,000 sheep; the Awassi Express in 2017, 2,000 sheep; the Queen Hind in 2019, 14,000 sheep; the Al Kuwait in 2020—that's when we had the COVID debacle; and the MV Bahijah in 2024, 12,000 sheep. Most of the incidents I just quoted came after the implementation of the ESCAS conditions, which members opposite say are the best in the world. I agree that they are, but, even with those conditions, there is a litany of failures with respect to this trade.

It has also been pointed out, separately to anything that any government has done, the reality is that this is a diminishing trade. Right now, we have an industry that's worth $4.5 billion. The value of live sheep exports, which are still carrying on right now, as we saw on the MV Bahija only two months ago, is 58 times less than the meat export trade. That's how much it has declined, particularly over the last two decades—with the first seven years of that under a coalition government. It was also a coalition government which supported the McCarthy review after the Philip Moss review. Both of those also highlighted serious concerns with the industry. Members ought to get a reality check about what has really been happening in this industry.

There are alternatives. The argument that other countries don't have freezers and the like is simply nonsense today. That might have been true 40 years ago, but that is simply nonsense today. Even the now opposition's own deputy leader argued that this trade needs to come to an end and said that the live sheep trade is in terminal decline:

Unfortunately this is an industry with an operating model built on animal suffering.

Those aren't my words, they're the words of their own deputy leader.

New Zealand ended its trade in 2007. In 2023, New Zealand said, 'No more animal exports of any kind,' not just of sheep, of any kind, and that's what they agreed to only last year. It didn't kill their industry.

Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.