Andrew Gee (Calare, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Last night I was outlining the reasons why I'm opposing this bill and this ban. I wish to draw the attention of the House to the words of Bonnie Skinner, who is the chief executive officer of Sheep Producers Australia. She said in her submission to the inquiry looking at this bill:

Government has a responsibility to ensure that no Australian is worse off or left behind. However, should this bill be passed, that is what will occur for thousands of Australians.

Consultation on policy implementation has been done in a rushed and unprofessional manner that has left many producers feeling removed from a process that will impact their families, businesses and communities.

Xavier Martin from New South Wales Farmers has also made some very telling statements, just as Ms Skinner has. Mr Martin says:

… now they are switching off markets for farmers, and food for hungry people.

He asks:

What's next and can we continue to feed and clothe the nation if the decision-making keeps deteriorating?

I'll return to the words of Charlie Thomas from the National Farmers Federation in the NFF's submission to the inquiry. I think Mr Thomas makes some further, very valid and salient points. He says:

The Ending Live Sheep Exports by Sea Bill will end a lot of things.

It will end Australia's uplift of animal welfare standards in the Middle East.

It'll end the livelihoods of farmers, shearers, truckies, agents and stock handlers in WA.

It'll end the strong trade and interpersonal ties Australia has developed in the Middle East as a trusted food security partner.

In summary, it'll end the tremendous amount of good this industry creates, both here and abroad.

Again, this is very telling evidence from one of our key agricultural organisations in this country.

But it's not just the big organisations in the agricultural sector which are opposed to this bill. I'll leave the last word to one of our own highly respected local farmers from the Calare electorate, from near Carcoar, George King. He said that live export is not just about the ships and the animals; it is about improving human welfare through affordable and accessible food. It's about education, sharing knowledge and building relationships that subsequently have a positive impacts on animal welfare. Australia has an obligation, as a good global citizen, to export food and best practices to our neighbours. Again, salient points from one of the local farming leaders.

I'll conclude with a couple of remarks about upcoming events. Many in this House will recall the highly successful—and, I would say, evocative—move by the member for Kennedy to get me to dress up as a pig to draw attention to the Reducing Supermarket Dominance Bill 2024 and to stop supermarkets' snouts in the trough. That was a bill put forward by the Independents. The major parties refused to support our bill when it was put into parliament. When the pigs and the member for Kennedy came to Orange, that earned the ire of the National Party. The member for Kennedy quite rightly put the senator who was interrupting our press conference back in his place.

This leads me to my next point—and this is breaking news: the Keep the Sheep delegation will be in parliament next week on Monday and Tuesday, seeking meaningful consultation. Over 61,000 people have signed the Keep the Sheep petition. I'm also reliably informed by the Keep the Sheep delegation that they actually have a mascot. The mascot is called Murray the Sheep. I can't believe I'm going to say this, but they've told me that, to Murray's many and growing circle of friends, it's pronounced 'Maaa-ree'. So Murray the Sheep could be making an appearance with the delegation—and here's where it gets interesting. I ask: what happens if Murray the Sheep bumps into Murray the agriculture minister? That could be very interesting. Members of the press gallery might want to keep an eye out for that one. Pencil that into your diaries: the Keep the Sheep delegation will be coming here on Monday and Tuesday next week. Murray the sheep could well be joining them, and it could be a very interesting couple of days. So I urge all members of this place to consult with the Keep The Sheep delegation; they want meaningful consultation. That will be very interesting to see.

The agriculture sector does an extraordinary amount of heavy lifting for our economy and also for our national prosperity. The ag sector and farmers around Australia oppose this ban and they oppose this bill, and that's why I'm opposing it too. I urge all members of this House to oppose it as well.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Calare. Our Murray the minister is grey, rather than Murray the sheep, which I think is white, so we'll be able to tell the difference, thank you very much. We have a 'Murray Grey', you see!

Yes. Very good. I know that. The question is that the amendment be agreed to, and I call the member for Hunter.

Dan Repacholi (Hunter, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Export Control Amendment (Ending Live Sheep Exports by Sea) Bill 2024. Succulent, juicy, tender, delicious, scrumptious—these are all words that I and many other meat lovers associate with the wonderful meat called lamb. But now there is a new word to add to this list: jobs—and there will be thousands of them.

You can't beat Australian lamb. We have the best in the world. We've known this for a long time, and now the rest of the world is catching up as well. But sometimes we can improve the way we do things, and sometimes making these improvements will benefit the entire industry. The live export of sheep is one area of industry that can be improved.

In April 2018, media outlets aired footage showing approximately 2,400 sheep dying from heat stress and overcrowded conditions on board the vessel Awassi Express. This made it clear that something needed to be done. That's just too much—and what a waste of great-tasting meat that is as well. Instead of these sheep dying humanely and being sold for consumption, they had to suffer in horrible conditions and became inconsumable. I wouldn't wish that sort of suffering or pain on anyone or anything, not even one of my favourite sources of meat.

I may be able to eat a fair sized meal, as you can tell by the size of me, but I'm happy to admit that I'm not able to eat $4.5 billion worth of lamb, which is the value of our lamb and mutton exports. That's a lot of roast dinners. Combine that with our $3.5 billion domestic retail market—some of which I may be responsible for consuming—and it's clear that this industry is extremely valuable to our economy. We would never do anything that puts this industry at risk. We are about creating jobs, not taking them away. Just because there is a better way that things can be done doesn't mean it has to be done at the expense of jobs and at the expense of the thriving lamb industry that we have here in Australia.

Changing the way we export our lamb does not have to change the fact that we reap huge economic rewards from this industry. In fact, it can bring opportunities for even more jobs to be created right here in Australia, which means the industry will grow to be even bigger than it already is today. So don't believe all the doomsday cries from those opposite. I think everyone will believe me when I say I love lamb as much as any of those opposite me right now. I appreciate and understand the importance of our lamb industry just as much as those opposite, but the difference is that I want to see it exported in a way which avoids sheep suffering, and I truly believe that this can be done and achieved in ways which bring even more benefits for the industry right here in Australia.

As a government we know that there needs to be a transition and it needs to be done in a way which does not come at the expense of the industry. We are committed to making sure that this transition is managed as smoothly as possible. We also want to make sure that we make the most of every opportunity for jobs that will arise because of this change. We expect that sector to adapt, which will see more sheepmeat processing in Australia. Value-adding can also increase farmgate returns. It keeps jobs right here in Australia, not overseas. It boosts regional development right here in Australia, not overseas. It's good for jobs, it's good for farmers and it's good for the industry. It's also good for the delicious-tasting sheep. I know this issue has two very passionate but different arguments, both in favour of and against banning live exports. Some want to stop it straightaway and others want it to continue. I understand both sides of this argument. I've met with many people and spoke about both sides of the argument with them.

The live sheep trade today is not what it once was. Live sheep exports by sea have already declined to just 10 per cent of what they were a couple of decades ago. It is currently a market returning $77 million a year. A $77 million a year market is still extremely valuable, but this just allows us to make those changes more smoothly without devastating this industry. The numbers show that the industry is booming. There is no need to worry about or fear for its future, but there are plenty of reasons to feel optimistic about growth that will continue to be created.

This decision hasn't been made lightly. The bill aligns with recommendations of an independent panel appointed by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry to consult with the stakeholders. The independent panel undertook extensive public consultation on how and when the phase-out could occur, including engaging with more than 2,000 people in person and considering 4,100 submissions and survey responses.

It's in the best interests of sheep and the industry to legislate a firm end date. We think this is best for producers, businesses and markets as it allows all stakeholders to make business decisions with a level of certainty and to work within clearly defined timeframes of the closure of this trade. If they know how and when this is going to happen, they can be prepared for changes and be in a strong position to make the most of new opportunities that will come in the preparation of the meat here on our shores—and these opportunities will come, there's no doubt about that. It's also important to remember that this ban isn't happening overnight. This bill will instate an absolute prohibition on the export of sheep by sea, but not until 1 May 2028. It should also be remembered that the bill only applies to export of live sheep by sea. It will not restrict live export of sheep by air or the live export of cattle.

We are not leaving those impacted in the dark. We aren't introducing this legislation and then walking away from the issue. The bill helps us to deliver a $107 million transition support package to help those affected by the phase out to be well-positioned, resilient and ready for when the trade ends in 2028. This support package will do this by assisting sheep producers and supply chains, increasing processing capability, enhancing demand for sheep products in Australia and overseas, and diversifying agrifood markets in the Middle East.

This transition away from live sheep exports will lead to an increase in domestic processing. This means one thing: jobs, and thousands of them. By processing our meat here, we will need more people on hand in businesses like abattoirs and businesses that deal in the transportation and packaging of lamb and meat. By not exporting live sheep, those jobs would have been done by someone overseas after receiving our shipment of sheep. We'll now be doing it right here in Australia, keeping more jobs on our shores right here in our country.

By phasing out live sheep exports our already glowing reputation about our lamb industry will only get better. The sheep being consumed by international customers will be of higher quality because the sheep will be in better condition, having avoided the crammed, hot and stressful environment of being exported on the ship alive. A happy sheep equals a great-tasting meat! We will stand with the industry and we'll be here to offer support to anyone who is impacted every step of the way, making sure there are no losers as we move towards a better way to export our sheep. There is a lot of time between now and 2028, when the ban comes into full effect, and we'll make sure that we work with everyone who we need to in making sure this transition is as seamless as possible.

Our agriculture trade is a vital part of the Australian industry, there is no doubt about that. But the reality is that we must do more things in the Australian way—in the humane way—and we must exercise our humanity when conducting our business. Live sheep exports simply cannot provide that and cannot comply with that. That's what we have committed to at successive elections, so it should come as no surprise of those opposite that this was always going to happen once Labor were in government. We said it and it has been an election commitment, so this is definitely no surprise. As I said at the start of these remarks, even members of the Liberal Party themselves—even the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party—have thought it was time to phase out live sheep exports. That's why she introduced a private member's bill on it. But it's like what often happens from those opposite: they say a lot, but then when push comes to shove, they're not willing to follow through on what they apparently stand for.

We will do what's right, while ensuring that the jobs and livelihoods that are impacted are supported within this process. We've allowed time to be able support those who are no doubt facing a difficult time in this transition. I take no joy in knowing that there will be people affected by this; we don't shy away from that. But it does mean an end to a practice that, frankly, has been unacceptable for far too long. There have been too many awful instances of animal cruelty and they'll all come to an end. We will transition away from live sheep exports and there are better ways that can be taken advantage of.

We will do this through an orderly transition process. The Australian people have made clear that they expect their government to uphold the standards of animal welfare. We don't need the live sheep export trade; it has been shrinking, it has had too many chances to repair itself and it hasn't done that. This bill will bring an end to live sheep export. It's an important reform, and one that we committed to for the last two elections, just as we said we would. So the Labor government are introducing this bill. There's a lot to gain for the whole industry if we do this properly. This bill gives every opportunity to get this right for jobs, for farmers and for Australians.

Everyone has heard the phrase 'Get some pork on your fork', but I say, 'Feed the fam some lamb', because this industry isn't going anywhere and I reckon that the jobs are about to boom. This bill is good for industry, good for jobs and good for the delicious-tasting sheep. I commend this bill to the House.

Gavin Pearce (Braddon, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Health, Aged Care and Indigenous Health Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Export Control Amendment (Ending Live Sheep Exports by Sea) Bill 2024.

Deputy Speaker Freelander, I ask you and all those in this place to cast your minds back to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. It was a grim time, and something that shook the nation. It was something that took us by complete surprise; something that hit us from the side. Suddenly, families went to the supermarkets or to town in a panic. They didn't go to buy a new car, or a new iPhone, or a new coat or a new pair of jeans. They didn't buy gold or other precious metals. Instead, they went to the supermarkets and bought food. When push came to shove, when the pressure really came on—and it was a life-or-death situation at the time—people resorted to buying food as a first priority. And that priority should be maintained as a paradigm and a pillar for our thinking as we move forward. The food production of this country is a sovereign risk, and it's something that we must look at, first and foremost, if we are to preserve the security and the food security of our nation.

Dwight D Eisenhower once said that farming looks very easy when your plough is a pen and you're a thousand miles from a cornfield, and I think that summarises and underpins the decision when we start looking at the export control amendments around live sheep exports. People in Canberra, people who have no idea about the agricultural sector and bureaucrats that do not understand what it's like to run an agricultural operation are posing implications onto the agricultural sector which they cannot possibly deal with.

As a farmer from Tasmania, I'm somewhat removed from the process of exporting live sheep, but the process of exporting and moving cattle and sheep by sea isn't removed from the great state of Tasmania. In fact, last year we moved 834,000 fat lambs out of my port in Burnie in the electorate of Braddon for the Coles and Woolworths slaughter job in Victoria. You might ask yourself: With that amount of lambs, why shouldn't Tasmania have their own abattoir? Why wouldn't they have their own meat processing in the state of Tasmania? The answer to that, when we start looking from an agricultural perspective—from those that know the business—is that if we were to build an abattoir that was capable of dealing with that amount of animals then they would probably kill that amount of animals in two months. What are the slaughtermen and all the process workers going to do for the remaining 10 months of the year? It isn't economically viable. It isn't viable to sustain that level over the full 12 months, and that's why the movement of those live animals out of Burnie into Victoria is absolutely necessary and is crucial to the maintenance of that industry in Tasmania.

When it comes to the standards that are required to move those animals from A to B via a ship, it's the most regulated industry that I've ever come across. The rules, the regulations and the compliance that are involved with moving a live animal are enormous. I visited Wagin in Western Australia last year and I listened to farmers. I listened to the honesty in their voices when they said they had complied with every direction that had ever been given to them—every rule, every regulation in relation to the export of live sheep, they had complied with. They have done their due diligence and they have been responsible stewards of that industry. They've done themselves a proud justice of maintaining all of those protocols. What do we do in return? We shut their industry down.

Farming is about mitigating risk. Farming is a multilayered pursuit whereby it's not simply one thing one day and the same thing the next day. There are a number of moving parts, and it's all dependent on a number of issues. Farmers have to deal with climatic conditions and with climate variability. When you start talking animals, there are a thousand things that can kill them; a farmer's job is to make sure they don't. A farmer's job is to make sure that they look after their animals. I know that I care for my animals deeply, as I do of my own children, and I cannot bear to see them in any suffering whatsoever. But, when it comes to external forces like bureaucratic decisions that come out of Hobart, that come out of Canberra and that come out of the cities, that is an external force, an external influence that farmers simply cannot deal with. It comes from the side and it has no relationship whatsoever to the nature of farming and the fact that a farmer deals with nature every single day of his or her life. And that's the difficult thing. It gets back to that quote that I used earlier: 'Farming looks very easy when your plough is a pencil, and you are a thousand miles away from a cornfield.' And I think there's something in that.

The deepening divide between urban and rural is another issue that I want to discuss briefly. The people in the cities and the towns, those people I talked about earlier, who, during the COVID outbreak, rushed to the supermarket and stocked up on food—I doubt very much whether any of them, when they were ransacking those shelves, gave any consideration or thought for the farmer that put the food there. That is where we need to get back to.

I see that the shadow minister for energy and emissions reduction has just come into the chamber. When he starts talking about the 280,000 kilometres of poles and wires that are going to go around, linking our intermittent power sources up to the grid, they're not going to be going through the bush; they are going to be going across the path of least resistance, and the path of least resistance in most cases is a prime agricultural land. And I'm here to tell you today that we have very little of it, and it is precious. It is precious to that vital food security and sovereignty issue I talked about—that security of producing food to feed our people first. If we cannot feed ourselves then we will not survive. And it's not until push comes to shove that we start to even consider this.

Our WA farmers have borne enough. As I said, they've complied with every direction given to them over many years. This has been going on since the sixties. I've been on those ships. I've visited them. I've had tours on them, and the conditions onboard those ships are impeccable. I was surprised and shocked at the thought that has gone into, and the protocols that surround, the transportation of live animals by sea. They are more likely to die in the paddock than they are on that vessel, on that voyage. They are more likely to die of natural causes than they are to die on board a ship. And if they do then the regime, as far as compliance is concerned, is immeasurable; it's out of control.

My point is that this is a very regulated industry. It is world's best practice. Farmers care very deeply about their animals. At the end of the day, if we don't produce the very best animal, and if we don't get that animal to the place of sale in the very best of conditions, then that isn't going to do our bottom line any good. So it's in our best interest to look after our animals. As a farmer myself, I understand that if I don't look after my land then I'll have no land to make a living on and my next generation won't have a farm to make a living on. We understand that intimately.

The next point I want to make is that of the thin end of the wedge, as I call it. We might talk today about the removal from WA of live sheep export to the Middle East. Where does that stop and when does that start? When does the Labor government intend to knock off? Where is their limit of exploitation? We started talking about the movement of cattle—and I know that's slightly removed, but we are on a similar train of thought here. If they're going to stop live sheep export out of WA, what's going to be next? The stopping of live cattle, Bos indicus cattle, out of Darwin into the Indonesian market? Some 600,000 animals go to that market. Is it going to stop there?

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Gavin Pearce (Braddon, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Health, Aged Care and Indigenous Health Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Deputy Speaker. Is it going to stop there?

Tania Lawrence (Hasluck, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Only if you repeal it.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Member for Hasluck! The member is entitled to be heard in silence. You may not agree with him, but he's entitled to be heard in silence.

Gavin Pearce (Braddon, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Health, Aged Care and Indigenous Health Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Deputy Speaker. In fact, that's the way it works: they have a turn, and we have a turn.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I've worked that out. Thank you.

Gavin Pearce (Braddon, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Health, Aged Care and Indigenous Health Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The other issue I want to raise is the amount of cattle that we move out of Tasmania. I've got King Island in my electorate. There are about 93,600 head of cattle on King Island, and it's in drought at the moment. Those farmers are pressured. They've got to get animals off that island, and the only way off that island is via boat—live cattle on a ship. That's another thing: 26,000 head of cattle are transported 63 nautical miles from the Grassy port on King Island to the port of Stanley, and then they're slaughtered by Greenham & Sons as the Cape Grim Beef brand at their Smithton facility. It's done in the most professional world's best practice methods. The other market that exists in Tasmania is the JBS market at Longford. As well that, we're always sending stall cattle to the mainland and buying cattle in. The movement of cattle is immense, and it happens all over the country. I have quite a lot to do with the livestock industry and the movement of animals through the livestock carters' association, and the world's best practice that they have to provide and employ in their business is incredible. They care very deeply as well about the professionalism of their industry and getting their animals from A to B in the best possible conditions. Again, where is this going to end?

Never once have I heard of a farmer saying: 'I think there are too many coffee shops in that street in Sydney. I don't like that car park in inner Melbourne. I don't really like it there.' You never hear that. You never hear a farmer grabbing his or her mates together and forming a protest around whether or not we should have a park in the city. Farmers don't stick their noses into the business of others. It's a bit like you, Deputy Speaker, maintaining the control of both sides of this House. You control one side, and you control the other side, and you do it well, Deputy Speaker. You bring order to the House. All I'm saying is that we need order in this argument. We need the same respect and the same manners given to those on the other side. Why should city folk so far removed from the rural agricultural sector interfere with them? That's the point I'm making, and I want to make it strongly.

Finally, the friends who I met along the way in Wagin in WA last year—they were decent, honest, authentic and genuine folk who genuinely want the best for their industry—have had to leave their farms and come all the way to Canberra on a program called Keep the Sheep. They'll be here on Monday, and I urge everybody, whether you're from the bush or from the city, to get behind these folk, because this is their livelihood. This is their future. This is not only the future of their operation and their children's operation; it also provides food security and sovereignty to our nation. On Monday, Keep the Sheep are in Canberra; get behind them.

I want to leave you with the thought that if we don't start prioritising our food and supporting our farmers—getting behind our farmers and allowing them the latitude to go about their business—then we won't have an agricultural sector. We are biting the hand that feeds us. Eventually, that hand will bite back.

Tania Lawrence (Hasluck, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Export Control Amendment (Ending Live Sheep Exports by Sea) Bill 2024. Change is tough. It brings uncertainty, anxiety and fear. Farmers are living and working in an environment that is in a constant state of change—the weather, the market, the rules and the price. There is so little that farmers have control over. They rely on good farming practices, discipline to rise out of bed before dawn, skills to fix and repair, and relationships to see their mates and families through the tough times and the great. I'm not saying this from a theoretical perspective. I am saying it from a lived experience—from my grandparents settling on country in Carnamah and Cadoux in the WA Wheatbelt, to my sister building on the success of generations with her husband and family on their farm in York. York is where I grew up. It's a beautiful farming community representing so much and responsible for so much of our cereal crops—wheat, barley and oats—and grazing sheep for meat, of course, but particularly for their merino wool.

I've seen firsthand the toll that farming takes on farmers, families and towns when things out of their control are difficult. I've also seen how those same communities are resilient and rise to every challenge, adopting new technologies, new genetics and new advances in agronomics to create more food and more wealth not just for those living in these small towns but for those in our cities, our state and nations abroad. So when I was asked to temporarily cover for my colleague and great friend the member for Gilmore on the House Standing Committee on Agriculture to inquire into the banning of the live sheep trade, I willingly took up the opportunity because I knew the change being proposed in this bill could be tough without understanding the impact and consequences. Change needs to come, but we need to ensure that farmers are best positioned to not just deal with the change but come out stronger for it.

Western Australia has 18 per cent of Australia's sheep flock, or around 12.6 million sheep, and last year Western Australia exported fewer than 600,000 of those animals live—live sheep export still exists only in WA. Over the last 20 years the value of that export has declined dramatically, by about 90 per cent, to the point where it is now worth about $77 million. The government's budgeted transition package exceeds this amount, and our committee has recommended the consideration of more.

In other comparable countries such as the UK and New Zealand, and even here on the east coast, live exports were phased out without a transition package and with either much shorter transition periods or none at all, as it was deemed commercially unviable as more productive markets emerged and the farmers simply moved on. But I know $77 million is still a significant sum for the communities from Dowerin to Wagin through to Esperance in the south. It supports the vibrancy of the towns, shops and sports clubs, and the $77 million provides the certainty needed for the shearing teams to schedule their move across the Wheatbelt, for the truck drivers to schedule their pick-ups to port, and, critically, for farmers to know they have a market to sell to when the weather is not optimal for wool or where the processors are overbooked.

With this in mind, I was determined to hear the perspectives of those directly impacted—farmers, shearers, processors, abattoir workers, truck drivers, shearers, vets—and from those many people across the nation who want to see Australia stand for better welfare of animals. The volume of engagement was enormous. There were over 13,000 contributions to the inquiry on the bill over the past few weeks. I note most of those submissions support the passage of this bill, but I'm not diminishing in any way the weight of those who oppose it; I will return to this shortly.

This engagement is on top of the engagement undertaken by the independent panel consulting on the phase-out of live sheep exports by sea, comprised of the chair, Phillip Glyde; the Hon. Warren Snowdon; Ms Sue Middleton, a local to the Wheatbelt area in WA; and Ms Heather Neil. The panel met with over 2,000 individuals, held 96 stakeholder meetings and received more than 800 submissions and 3,300 survey responses across the nine months between March and October 2023.

At the recent committee hearings both here in Canberra and at the Muresk ag college in the WA Wheatbelt, just outside of Northam, we heard from people on all aspects of agriculture, business, trade and civil society. In listening to the witnesses who gave evidence to the inquiry, these are the themes that came through for me. Firstly, there was a unanimous agreement that the welfare of all sheep being shipped was paramount, and that since more than 2,400 sheep died of heat stress on the Awassi Express voyage in August 2017 significant improvements had been achieved that have seen a much reduced average mortality rate in recent years; in 2022 the average was 0.14 per cent. The second theme was there was not an agreement on the extent that morbidity issues experienced for the weeks on board are welfare issues of concern. Concerns were raised around starvation of sheep, the ship motion, ammonia exposure, heat stress, stocking density, unhygienic environments from standing in faeces, unnatural lighting, scabby mouth and respiratory infections. The heat stress is particularly problematic. Ammonia builds up on board, creating humidity which leads to the wet bulb temperature increasing beyond the heat stress threshold of the sheep, which leads to suffering.

The most recent shipments that departed for Jordan and Saudi Arabia in the last few weeks sailed into conditions where temperatures were even exceeding 52 degrees. Hundreds of humans died in these last couple of weeks. We don't yet know the fate of the sheep on board because there's no independent vet, unfortunately, at this point, due to the security issues in the region. It is worth also noting that the temperatures involved in the Awassi Express tragedy were in the mid-30s. Therefore, on this matter, I've accepted the advice of the independent vets and believe morbidity is a welfare concern. This is coupled with the reality that Australians hold the view, as evidenced by our national processing practices, that our sheep should be killed humanely. Sadly, those arriving into the Middle East do not experience such a fate.

The third theme I heard was that opportunities to keep the sheep in WA and process them domestically are real, as is evidenced by the success here on the east coast. Many witnesses spoke about their concerns that a farm would be destocked because of a failure to find a market and that then their towns would suffer significantly. However, there was recognition that, if the numbers were held, then towns—particularly those that support abattoirs—would in fact grow. Matthew Journeaux, federal secretary of the Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union, said:

Regardless of whether those animals are exported live or are processed locally, all the jobs up to the sheep being put on a boat or being processed remain the same. The only difference is, if the truck turns right to the ports, the live export sheep are loaded with a handful of stockmen, and an Australian vet accompanies their journey; if the truck turns left and takes those animals to a processing facility, it immediately employs between 500 and 800 people directly and many more in industries that support the processing plant. Those wages are spent in the local community, and flow-on benefits are significant.

But the current limitations on WA's abattoirs having sufficient skilled labour, regional accommodation, feedlots and cold room capacity and, critically, ensuring that the processors themselves are competitive and that, by extension, the supermarkets can offer the farmers a fair farmgate price are of paramount importance to first resolve.

The fourth theme was that the confidence in and the prospects of new markets to displace the live export market of some 500,000 sheep per annum are good, particularly on the back of new trade agreements finalised by this government with the UK and India, and perhaps in the EU and UAE, plus the growth in demand for mutton to China, which, as Mr Patrick Hutchinson from the Australian Meat Industry Council indicated, would be able to absorb the greater expected quantity as a result of this change. He stated that 'the global mutton market is performing exceptionally strongly and, obviously, Australia is the biggest exporter of that'. With trade into South-East Asia forecast to grow by around five per cent year on year, Mr Hutchinson continued by saying that, particularly for mutton trade, there were places like Malaysia et cetera and the UK for higher value product, and that we do have an opportunity in India.

Just yesterday, the Australian agricultural analysis firm Mercado noted that the current market for processed sheepmeat is strong. Both lamb and mutton volumes are well above what they were a year ago and for five-year average levels for the year to May, with the US and the Middle East soaking up extra supply. Current lamb exports are 25 per cent higher, year on year, for the January to May period, sitting just shy of 155,000 tonnes. Mutton exports sit 14 per cent above year-ago levels for January to May and 33 per cent more than the five-year trend, with the month of May also a record for mutton. The Middle East is a demand driver for both markets.

The current strength in the market for processed sheepmeat and the prospects for growth for many of our export partners mean this is the best time for WA to commence the transition to increase the capacity of processing facilities. Mecardo notes that this growth and the multitude of destinations will support processing levels and help protect the farmgate price from large supply. The confidence and growth in the processing sector is already evident too, with V&V Walsh investing $50 million in a new cold storage facility, and Wammco, a WA farming cooperative, committed to building a new facility and increasing capacity by half a million head by early 2026. And, as Countryman reported in November last year, the newly refurbished Geraldton meat exports facility aims to supply chilled and frozen meat products to customers in Malaysia, Singapore and the Middle East. Group executive director, Mr Syed Ghazaly, said the company had customers lined up in Brunei, Malaysia and Singapore, and he would aim to process the maximum 2½ thousand head per day of mostly chilled and frozen sheep, mutton and lamb for those markets.

From the themes to the report, the committee made three recommendations: first, that this bill be passed—it is time; second, the government should consider making additional funding available to support the transition. In my view, following discussions with people like Ms Bonnie Skinner, CEO of Sheep Producers Australia, following the hearings, the focus over the next four years must be on addressing the structural competition deficiencies in Western Australia in order to achieve a fairer price for farmers.

During the committee hearings, due to the variability in fluctuations in price, it was not possible to land on a single dollar value that needs to be bridged for the price achieved by live export by sea. However, there seems to be consensus that there is around a nominal 15 per cent increase potentially between the specification for mutton and what goes on the boat. The goal in the transition is to create competition and markets so that farmers get that fairer price for the 11 per cent for the approximate 500,000 head that are currently shipped by sea. What needs to change to enable more of the 29 licensed abattoirs in WA to be certified to international export? Of the eight current export-accredited abattoirs to process sheep and lamb, what needs to change so they can do multiple gradings on site so the processors can compete with each other for the different sizes and aged sheep?

We have heard about the success of the East Coast on air freighting sheep to Southeast-Asia; however, we can see the volumes have not returned to pre-COVID levels and the air trade is dominated by East Coast farmers. I think there is an opportunity for Western Australia to fill that gap.

We heard from experts like Dr Melanie Latter from Australian Veterinary Association, who spoke about the options around altering the genetics of the flocks so they will be more suitable for meat markets; for instance, the dual-purpose merino. She also said that veterinarians can assist producers to alter feeding and nutrition programs, summer cropping, containment feeding on farm and many other mechanisms so they are able to finish off the animal so they're suitable for processing industries.

We heard about the $4½ billion value in sheepmeat exports. Sheepmeat consumption is forecast to grow by seven per cent domestically and 15 per cent globally. Over the past eight years WA has generally sent a higher proportion of sheepmeat exports than the national average, yet we have not seen a return to those pre-COVID levels, so, again, it is an area in which gains can be made.

I call on all those who will sit around the table to shape that transition package with all of these promising realities in mind to ensure that the value in growth is not just left to the benefit of our supermarket giants, export agents and processors. A mechanism or model is needed to ensure farmers share in that value and are not priced gouged. To this end, a reminder to those opposite and to farmers around the country listening to this: it is a Labor government that is taking action to address the imbalance of bargaining power between supermarkets and suppliers. We are making the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct mandatory to crack down on anticompetitive behaviour and to get a fairer deal for the farmers and families.

The third recommendation of the report is that the government will continue to work with the WA government on the transition, and we will. To end: I thank all those on the committee, the secretariat in particular, but mostly all those who appeared before the inquiry for your genuine care and concern to ensure farmers come out on top, and to all those who have written and spoken with me as well.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I start by thanking all members who have contributed to this debate on the Export Control Amendment (Ending Live Sheep Exports by Sea) Bill 2024 and the spirit in which you've contributed. I know this is an issue where passions run high and that is understandable given we are talking about—while it's declining—the livelihoods of many of our regional farmers. The member for Hasluck represents some rural communities as well and I thank her for her contribution. There are those of us who live in regional communities. In my own constituency I have live sheep exporters. That has been declining—not so much over in the West—so we are acutely aware of the decisions we are taking here, and I thank honourable members for the spirit in which the debate has been conducted.

This bill does deliver on a commitment to phase out live sheep exports by sea that this government made to the Australian people at the last election and in fact the election before that. This legislation does provide the certainty to farmers and the community that they have been calling for. The bill does prohibit the export of sheep by sea from Australia on and after 1 May 2028 and facilitates the rollout of the government's $107 million transition support package to allow the industry to adjust in the meantime. This assistance will support farmers and supply chain to make transition plans with confidence while capitalising on opportunities for more value-adding and local jobs right here in Australia. Phasing out of this trade marks a considerable step forward for sheep welfare and paves the way for farmers to further leverage the $4.5 billion sheepmeat export market and the $3.5 billion domestic sheepmeat industry.

The bill has been subject to parliamentary inquiry by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Agriculture, and I thank everyone who participated in the inquiry and committee for its consideration of this bill. The House inquiry built upon the extensive consultation already undertaken by the independent panel in which over 2,000 individuals were consulted, nearly 100 stakeholder meetings were held and more than 800 submissions were received. I note the committee heard evidence that the government's policy would create between 500 and 800 direct jobs in meat processing with many more indirect jobs to flow. The standing committee released its advisory report on 21 June and recommended that the bill be passed. The government welcomes that recommendation.

The committee also recommended the government consider making additional funding available to support the transition potentially through the 2026 stocktake and continue to seek opportunities to work with the Western Australian government to refine and implement the transition support package. The government acknowledges these recommendations.

We are committed to supporting sheep producers and the sheep supply chain through the transition period. The government's transition plan includes appointing a transition advocate in 2024-25 and undertaking a stocktake of transition progress in 2026-27. These are key elements in monitoring the transition away from the trade and will help inform the government as to whether further funding is needed to assist the transition.

The government recognises the importance of local knowledge and connections when delivering support to individuals, businesses and communities in regional areas. The government would welcome the Western Australian government's partnership in delivering support to Western Australian sheep industry and supply chain participants. We will continue to look for ways to complement WA government efforts that help position affected individuals, businesses and communities for success up to and beyond the phase-out.

From the outset, we're committed to ensuring a planned and orderly transition away from the trade. The government's transition plan sees implementation based on: independent advice; the provision of certainty, time and support for the transition; ongoing management of and measures to enhance sheep welfare; and transition oversight and continued engagement with domestic stakeholders and our trading partners. We're providing certainty and time for adjustment through setting the end date for the trade and enacting this date in legislation through this bill. This is a level of certainty many have been calling for and allows four years for the planning and decisions to be made by those impacted by the phase-out, appropriate to their individual circumstances.

If this bill is not passed, uncertainty will continue for sheep producers, sheep supply chain businesses and exporters of live sheep by sea. We need to ensure that those affected by this phase-out have the opportunity to be well positioned, resilient and ready when the trade ends on 1 May 2028. I commend the bill to the House.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question before the House is that the amendment moved by the member for Maranoa be agreed to.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question before the House is that the bill be read a second time.