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

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

This Government's reckless decision to shut down Australia's live sheep export industry harming regional communities and international relations.

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

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

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There's a term that has gone down in Australian political journalism history with some infamy called 'ideological bastardry'. It was mentioned by a left-wing journo from the ABC about a Liberal prime minister, but I can tell you right now that the legislation that I think shows one of the biggest acts of political bastardry since I've been in here has been the banning of live sheep exports by this Labor government.

This ban has been done simply on ideology; it hasn't been done for animal welfare reasons—we are the best animal welfare advocates in the world in this industry—and it certainly hasn't been done for economics. It's being done simply because of animal activists and this government kowtowing to animal activism. And they have history with this too. Let's not forget that, back in 2011, the leftie Four Corners program did a hatchet job on live exports and the then Labor agriculture minister shut down live exports overnight. What that did, and what the live sheep export ban does, was more than harm the live export industries that they affect. That affected cattle prices across the country. This live export ban on sheep has already affected sheep prices across the country. It affects every sheep farmer, whether they be on the east coast or the west coast. It affects international relationships. That live export ban back in 2011 did a lot of harm to the relationship between Indonesia and Australia, as this live export ban is doing to many other countries that we export to.

There were people in the gallery earlier and there are people in this building today who are good people. They're people who directly work in the live export industry, or they're suppliers; they might be truck drivers or veterinarians. But all their jobs revolve around the live export industry. I had the pleasure of speaking to many of them when I was in Western Australia a month or so ago, and they're good people. What they do is generate wealth and jobs for our country. I think we should—and we do on this side of politics—thank them for what they do. I think the Labor government should be apologising for the mental health anguish that they're giving to the people who work in this industry, as well as the financial and emotional trauma they're causing.

I can say with great pleasure that, if we as a coalition of the Liberal and National Parties on this side of politics are elected at the next election under the leadership of Peter Dutton and David Littleproud, we will reinstate the live sheep export industry. We will not shut you down. But let's be very clear to them and for them who is shutting them down. Again, so often in the legislation we talk about in this chamber, it is this city-versus-country divide. Who has decided that what our farmers do or how they do it isn't okay? Again, it is these inner-city, elite MPs. They start over there. They're the teal inner-city elites. They're the Greens, who are all inner-city elites. And then we go around to the Labor Party, and the majority of them again are inner-city, elite MPs. Let's be really clear that it is these inner-city, elite MPs who have voted this industry out of existence because they, living in their concrete jungles more often than not, think they know best what farmers can or should do in regional areas. Again, this is just another example of this.

We'll have five people get up opposite and talk about why they're doing this. They will say things like: 'We should process it here. We should do all the processing. We should value-add, and we should process here.' That again just highlights their absolute ignorance, because even the sheepmeat processors in Western Australia support the live export industry. They know that, for the sheep industry in Western Australia to have a future, they need processing, live export and wool. Even the sheepmeat processors know that they need this industry. They'll get up and go, 'No; we can process it all here in Australia.' None of them have probably been to a processor. I have had the pleasure of having a beef processor in my electorate, and right now no processor in the country can get enough staff. We are battling to process the demand for processing in this country right now.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Hasluck, you keep interjecting. We're coming for you on this one! We had a whole lot of people in this building, and they can't wait to doorknock your electorate—through you, chair. I just highlight that to the member. Again, they'll get up and say, 'We should process it all ourselves.' They probably won't get up, or, if they do get up and talk about animal welfare, that will be interesting, because we have the best animal welfare processes in the country and indeed the world. No industry is perfect. We have all seen images from the live export industry and other industries where they needed to improve. They have continually improved processes and standards, which is why they are the best in the world. Australia, as I say, has the best welfare standards in the world. This again shows the ignorance: the Prime Minister got up today and said that this is a dying industry anyway. But the numbers don't support this. Live sheep exports in 2022 were 380,000 tonnes. In 2023, they went to 640,000 tonnes. This is a lucrative industry. This is an industry that there is more demand in, and it's a growing industry economically. Again, this was inner-city, elite MPs, listening to the leftie press that they follow and saying they know best. They weren't talking to farmers, or talking to them about how they improved industry or why it's important to them. They were just listening to the leftie press that they follow in the inner cities.

I want to go through just some of the ways that this industry has improved its standards over the last few years. We've had: a moratorium on exports in the Northern Hemisphere summer; increased space for each animal; improved ventilation; automated monitoring; independent observers; and inspections of animals before they get on the boat to make sure they're fit enough to undergo the journey. Now, we even have examples of livestock putting weight on during these journeys. I'm a modest cattle farmer, Deputy Speaker, and I can tell you that if an animal is putting on weight, they're doing very well. Mortality rates are lower than the national mortality rates we have in paddocks. We even monitor—we have a look at—the feedlots and the abattoirs that these live exports go to, to make sure they're at standards that are up to our standards. Again, we have been a world leader in improving the standards of this.

But no! No, that isn't okay, 'We know best, because the ABC have told us, or the animal activists, have told us, "You've got to shut this down.''' Again, it has been absolutely ideological bastardry. But—

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

Member for Page, I'm just going to remind you that even quoting language that is unparliamentary is disorderly.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Okay. I'll tell Laura Tingle she used unparliamentary language—

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

No! I'm reminding you about the use of other people's words—

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Okay, I won't use the term again—

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

and to be careful about that.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Okay, I take that—

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

You can make your point forcefully without it.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I take that point. The other thing I want to come to is international relations. What are we saying? Who are the biggest markets for our live sheep exports? I will run through the countries: Kuwait, Israel, Jordan, UAE, Oman, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Most of these countries do this because they want to do it; it's a cultural thing where they want to do their own meat processing. What are we saying to those countries?

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

The member for Hasluck!

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Are we just saying to those countries that the fact that they want this, that they want live exports to their countries, means that they're bad? If we're saying that we shouldn't have the live export industry, are we then saying to the countries which want live imports that because they demand, or want, that product, that they're bad people, because of what that entails? Of course that's exactly what those opposite are saying, and that is insulting to every country in that trade—and there are a lot of other countries which we do live exports of beef to, and that's effectively what those opposite are saying.

Again, as we know, the Keep the Sheep campaign—the 'farmy army'—is coming to a marginal Labor seat near you. I say to them right now: as the coalition, we support you and back you, and we'll reverse this decision when we win government at the next election.

Kristy McBain (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think what the member for Page forgot to say is that they support you and they back you, but only in opposition. Because when they're in government, it is crickets at any time there's an issue in the ag sector.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We didn't ban it!

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

The member for Page!

Kristy McBain (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Any time there's an issue in—

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We didn't ban it—

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

Minister! Member for Page, I'm not going to have it. That is a lot of yelling and screaming, and you're encouraging yelling and screaming in response. It brings down the dignity of the House all round. You can have robust, passionate debate, but the slanging match at each other is going to stop. I give the call to the minister.

Kristy McBain (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. At any time there was an issue when those opposite were in government, it was crickets. I have just had the member for Page say that we should respect other people's—

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We didn't—

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

Member for Page! Okay—Minister, please sit down for a moment. Member for Page: I have asked for no interjections. Yelling is disorderly—

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wasn't yelling.

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

Member for Page, you've been here long enough to know full well that it is highly disorderly for you to be interjecting right now. I have warned you; the next time I'm just going to ask you to leave the chamber, okay? Minister, you have a call.

Kristy McBain (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We've just heard from the member for Page that we should respect other countries' views. But when they were in government, I'm not sure whether they respected anything that China did, because their advocacy, when they were on this side of the House, resulted in farmers losing markets and losing money, making sure that they couldn't export to a country that was one of our biggest trading partners. Since we've been in government—

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

Member for Page, under 94(a), you can just leave the chamber.

If you keep doing this on the way out, it is even more disorderly than doing it from the frontbench. Minister, you have the call.

Kristy McBain (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think that says a lot about the member for Page but not about the Deputy Speaker.

On this side of the House, since we came to government, we've taken seriously our relationships with other countries. We've made sure that we've worked with China so that our wine exporters, in the last year, have exported more wine to China than in the previous two years because those opposite decided loudspeaker diplomacy was better than actually working with the country. We've seen a number of tariffs come off our agricultural products because we take seriously that farmers need to export out their produce.

Over the last two elections we have committed to phasing out live sheep exports by sea. This move hasn't come as a surprise to anyone. In fact, what we've done is put in place a long timeframe so that we can help the industry to transition. It wasn't done lightly and it wasn't done without consultation. Yes, we know there is going to be an impact in WA. But we also know we can do more if we actually process more here. The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union said the government's policy would create between 500 and 800 extra direct jobs in meat processing, with more indirect jobs that will flow from that. It means more jobs for WA and paves the way for WA farmers to supply Australia's nearly $8 billion sheepmeat industry with more.

This piece of legislation provides some certainty for farmers. It provides a timeline of transition. Let's be clear: there is going to be a transition. There is a total of $107 million to be provided over five years to help the industry transition. That is $64.6 million to assist those sheep producers in the supply chain to transition, allowing farmers to capitalise on existing and emerging opportunities so they are well positioned when the trade ends; $27 million to enhance demand within Australia and internationally for sheepmeat products, to maintain and develop market opportunities; $2.6 million to continue to improve sheep welfare standards so that they are practical and meet community expectations, including in engagement with the World Organisation for Animal Health; and a $1.7 million package to appoint a transition advocate to facilitate two-way communication between the industry and government, to pave the way for that.

Unfortunately, we have seen live sheep exports decline over time; that is just a fact. Over the last 20 years we've seen live sheep exports decline from 6.5 million head to 652,000 head right now. In a decade of decline, what did those opposite do? Nothing. Crickets. They did nothing to improve regulation, nothing to help support the industry and nothing to grow the industry anywhere else. In 2023 Australia exported $4.4 billion in chilled and frozen sheepmeat—almost 60 times the value of live sheep exports by sea. And we want to increase that. There were approximately 70,000 tonnes of chilled meat air-freighted from Australia to international trading partners between 1 September 2022 and 31 August 2023.

We heard from the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party, the member for Farrer, when she introduced a private member's bill in 2018 seeking to ban the trade:

The live sheep trade is in terminal decline.

…   …   …

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

We know things need to change. We're putting in place a substantial timeframe to do that. We want to capitalise on those onshore opportunities in sheepmeat processing. It follows the recommendations of the independent panel who conducted exclusive consultation with stakeholders.

It takes a Labor government to act and do more in this space. It is incredibly frustrating to stand here and listen to the member for Page talk about how there is a bunch of inner-city Labor MPs driving this. I can tell you: I am not from the inner city, and I represent a lot of agricultural industry in my electorate—an electorate that has seen an increase because of what this government has done in its work with China, making sure that our wine producers can export more in the end and making sure we're taking tariffs off wheat and barley. There is still more work to do with our lobsters as well.

We are a government that takes thing seriously. It was all crickets when those opposite were in government. I didn't hear a single word, not a single word, when there were transmission lines going on agricultural properties in my electorate. When you were in government, there wasn't anything that you said, not a single thing that you did to make it easier for farmers in that consultation process. Yet in opposition, it's all: 'Hold on! You're doing something that's making a difference.' No, these things didn't start when we came to government two years ago; they started years before. You could have done something about it when you were in government, but those opposite did nothing to help communities dealing with renewable energy projects that came into their electorates.

It took a Labor government to say consultation by renewable energy companies has not been good when it comes to regional communities. It took a Labor government to put in dollars—$20 million in the last budget—to say: 'You need to do better, and you should do better, by consulting properly with communities. It's not a tick-a-box exercise.' Over and over again it was crickets when those opposite were in government and yet, when they're on the opposition benches, it's loud, it's ferocious, it's 'Oh, we've got to stand up for the regions.' When those opposite are in government, they're here for each other, they're here to stab each other in the back and take each other's positions, they're here for power's sake. They're not here to make a difference for the community. What we see, time and time again, is all of these issues are left until a Labor government comes in. There is a very, very big chasm between what you say you're going to do in government to what you actually do.

I actually support the National Farmers Federation in their bold ambition for a $100 billion industry by 2030. I absolutely support that. I think that's a great aim and, as a large country with a big agriculture industry, we should absolutely be aiming for $100 billion by 2030, and more, in a whole range of sectors across agriculture, on land or in the water. We have all of the expertise, all of the knowledge right here in this country. But time and time again our farmers have been let down when you have been in government. Time and time again.

It is not good enough now to sit on the opposition benches and say, 'Look, there is a declining industry, but we were going to do nothing about it.' What we want to do is increase local sheepmeat producing, we want to open new markets, we want to make sure farmers are taken care of, which is why there is a long transition period, out to 2028. We need to provide certainty to people, and that's exactly what we're doing with this bill, with this government, because on this side of the House we believe in providing certainty for people. People knew what they were voting for in the last two elections. That's exactly what we've legislated, and we've made sure that there is a long transition period to help sheep farmers.

Rick Wilson (O'Connor, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to speak directly to my farmers today. I want to say, despite what happened in the other place last night, be proud of what you do. Be proud of what you do because the country rides on your back. The farmers of this country feed us and they provide the prosperity. The inner-city has now turned on you, that is true, but you should be very, very proud of what you do.

I also want to address the fact that this industry, which is so important to the farmers of Western Australia, is not finished. The phase-out date, 1 May 2028, has been voted on by the government in this place. That allows two elections between now and that phase-out date, so I say to my farmers: believe in your industry, believe that this government will change and the trade will continue after 1 May 2028. I say that with some confidence when I look at the New Zealand situation. When Jacinda Ardern was at her peak and much loved by everybody, mainly the media around the world, she banned the live export trade out of New Zealand—those were dairy heifers—because a vessel sank in tornado conditions off Japan. Interestingly enough, the effect of that ban meant poddy calves, those dairy heifers, were knocked on the head at three days of age because there was no market for them.

The conservative government in New Zealand, which was elected on the same day as the referendum was held here in Australia, committed to reintroduce the trade. This week, their parliament is debating and passing that legislation to reintroduce the trade. So I say to my farmers, this trade will continue. This government will be gone at either the next election or the following one, and our leader, Peter Dutton, and the Leader of the Nationals, David Littleproud, have committed to reintroduce the trade. That's to my farmers. I understand your confidence has been knocked around. The price has collapsed since the phase-out panel started to do its rounds last March and April in Western Australia. But I say to you, we will turn that around, and this trade will continue and thrive. It will thrive because our international customers value and demand our product.

I had the pleasure of visiting the Middle East in May, just a couple of weeks ago. While I was there, by the way, I hand delivered a letter to the Kuwaiti government from the President of the WA Farmers Federation, John Hassell, and the Chairman of the Pastoralists and Graziers Association, Tony Seabrook, saying directly to the Kuwait government that we reject the Australian government's policy and we want to continue to provide you with the best quality sheep in the world. The Kuwaitis accepted that letter very gratefully because they have an enormous investment in this country. It's not just in the live sheep trade, although they do own feedlots and facilities here, and they do own the boats. They also have up to $50 billion of investment across a whole range of industries in this country. Let me tell you, they're not that happy that the Australian government is effectively kicking sand in their face. The Australian government is saying to our Kuwaiti partners, who we've been dealing with for 50 years now: 'We don't want your trade. We don't want your investment, and we don't want to sell you our product.'

The Kuwaitis love Australian sheep. I went to a butcher shop in Kuwait and bumped into a random man who was there doing the family shopping. I explained that we were from Australia, and he said: 'I love Australian sheep. I can't get any today.' The only sheep he could get was South African sheep. Guess what—South Africa have just had an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. So, unfortunately, they won't be able to get sheep from South Africa either. But they are going to get sheep because that's what they want. That's what they demand. They want fresh sheep, and they will get them from North Africa or the Black Sea, where there is no regulation. There is no ESCAS. There is nothing to protect those animals. When Australia steps out of that market, those standards that have been set in those countries, our destination countries, will disappear.

Once again, on a trade perspective, we have an opportunity. We have Saudi Arabia who are taking our sheep for the first time in 13 years. For the first time in 13 years, we're getting sheep back into Saudi Arabia. They import eight million sheep a year—far more than we can ever provide. But I tell you what, they've accepted ESCAS. They've accepted our system of animal welfare, so because of the 150,000 sheep that we might send them next year—we haven't got enough to send them any more—the other 7.85 million sheep are going to get treated a lot better. Member for Fremantle, you should remember that when you make your remarks.

Josh Wilson (Fremantle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What we're doing is taking responsibility for managing a transition that's been under way for 20 years. Under the previous government, in the period that covered their time on this side of the chamber between 2012 and 2022 more or less—they were in government from 2013 to 2022—the live sheep trade declined by 75 per cent in that period alone. The sheep flock in WA remained exactly the same at 13½ million head, and the wool output at 65 million tonnes remained exactly the same in that period. There was a 75 per cent decline on their watch in a trade that has declined by more than 90 per cent.

I'm very proud of Western Australian agriculture. It is a vital part of the national economy. It's a vital part of my state's cultural and social fabric. It's strong today; it will remain strong. Last year, we set sheepmeat export records. Meat and Livestock Australia have said that they expect that to grow in 2024. The fact is that agriculture changes over time. Agriculture improves over time. That's the history of Australian agriculture, and that's the approach of Australian farmers who always want to be more productive, more effective, more humane and more sustainable. That is the story of Australian agriculture, and it continues to be the story, and that's why the live sheep export trade is on its way out. It has been on its way out for more than 20 years. We are doing the responsible thing which governments do, and that is to help manage change—not to bury your head in the sand, not to tell people stories, not to be in denial about the past and not to be in denial about the future but to look the facts squarely in the eye and take responsibility for managing change.

Our largest market is China. Last year, of chilled and frozen exports to China, lamb was up 30 per cent and mutton was up 70 per cent. In our second-largest market, the Middle East and North Africa, sheepmeat was up 63 per cent. These are record sheepmeat exports from Australia, the largest sheepmeat exporter in the world. Why? Because we've seen a 400 per cent increase in chilled and frozen and humanely, Australian processed sheepmeat of higher value—and more jobs—out of this country at the same time that the live sheep export trade has dropped off a cliff. It has declined by 90 per cent on its own terms. Why? Because it's not the way the world's going. It doesn't make sense, and unfortunately it has always involved animal suffering, and that animal suffering continues.

Since 2018, when the previous government were dragged to make changes that the Moss review and the McCarthy review said had to be made, 60 per cent of all voyages that have had independent observers have involved unacceptable levels of heat stress, and heat stress is now the accepted measure of animal welfare in this country. That is the case today. Anyone who says that the trade is vital is wrong. Anyone who says that the trade is a significant part of Western Australian agriculture, when it's worth less than one per cent of Western Australian agriculture—it's worth less than 0.1 per cent of Australian agriculture. Anyone who makes that claim is wrong. Anyone who says that the industry has overcome the intrinsic, chronic and occasionally acute animal welfare problems is wrong. And those opposite know it.

When those opposite came to government, what did they do? They got rid of the animal welfare advisory council, they disbanded the animal welfare unit within the department of agriculture and they abandoned our proposition to create an independent inspectorate of animal welfare. And what happened? In 2017 there was the Awassi Express, just the latest in a parade, really, of animal welfare atrocities that the Australian community will not accept. They will not accept it. We don't allow our animal welfare standards and the treatment of Australian animals to be set by anyone else but us, and the Australian community does not take the view that some might take that there's a sliding scale that makes animal cruelty acceptable at a certain price. The Australian community will not accept that, and they don't have to, because this industry has been going through this transition for a long period of time.

We remain the largest exporter of sheepmeat in the world, and that will only grow because chilled and frozen boxed exports are rising and all of the markets that we export to are taking that product. Kuwait is cited by those opposite. It is the largest importer of live export product, but they already take more than twice as much in processed meat. That is the case for Kuwait. That's the way the world's going. We are responsibly managing that change.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On 14 May, federal budget night, the Treasurer, the member for Rankin, went to that spot and adjusted his red tie, and in his budget he announced the biggest spend for agriculture would be that he would pay farmers to stop farming. He would pay farmers to stop farming. Wouldn't you think that a government which wanted to be there and wanted to govern for everybody would at least have something in the budget which would help those people who the member for O'Connor quite correctly thanked—and we should thank our farmers every day, three times a day. They grow the food and they grow the fibre that puts food on our table and clothes on our back, and not just for us but for many other countries besides. Yet the biggest item of expenditure in the federal budget this year was to pay farmers to stop farming—$107 million to Western Australian sheep farmers to stop doing what they're doing. That is a disgrace.

I've got a little bit of advice, too, for the member for Eden-Monaro. In the next election, under the new New South Wales federal boundaries, she is going to take over Goulburn. That's if she wins her seat. Goulburn, since 1985, have had one of those 'big' things—many of our cities and towns across Australia have them—and for Goulburn it's a big merino. They are very proud of their sheep production. For her to say that the Labor government is bringing the farmers certainty—well, I'll agree with her; she's very right on that. They are bringing to the Western Australian sheep farmers a certain end, and this is just beyond belief, because our farmers are the very best in the world. We are also telling the world that their business is not good enough for Australia. What we're telling the Gulf States is, quite frankly, the insult that we no longer want to trade with them, just like in June 2011 we told our Indonesian friends—one of the largest, if not the largest, importers of our cattle—that we didn't want their business any longer.

Tony Mahar, Chief Executive Officer of the National Farmers Federation, had this to say in a recent media release:

The Government's political decision to end live exports showed scant regard for its own departmental advice, and caused widespread financial damage, family breakups, and even suicide among those impacted.

We do not want to do that to our WA sheep farmers. Paul Brown, speaking today in this building, said that this will have an effect on the sheep industry. He said it will have an effect on families and on people's mental health. He knows full well the impacts of this sort of thing. He ran a feedlot which didn't do that well, and he said that he was very affected by it. He was very emotional when he spoke. We also heard also from Mark Harvey-Sutton, from the Australian Livestock Exporters Council. He was talking about the 31 May rally in Perth, and he said he's never seen anything like it in his life. The cars and the sheep-transporting trucks extended 20 kilometres long. This rally, he said, created solidarity.

Every agriculture body supports the Keep the Sheep campaign, and the Keep the Sheep campaign is coming to the electorates of those WA the members. The WA members need to heed the warning that the member for Curtin very much listened to when she got up and spoke in support of the legislation to ban live sheep exports and then voted against it. Why did she vote against it? It was because people power came to an electorate office near her, and people power will come to an electorate office near those WA members. They want to keep the sheep, and so they should. Despite what the member for Fremantle tells us, the animal husbandry—the animal welfare standards—on those ships was world's best practice. We are the only country in the world to have that exporter supply chain assurance system in place. Every one of those sheep was well looked after. The animal husbandry was first class, with veterinarians on board. We looked after the sheep. It's a pity Labor didn't do the same for our farmers.

Meryl Swanson (Paterson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I stand proudly today as the member for Paterson in the New South Wales Hunter Valley, which has a lot of agriculture, but I'm even more proud to be the Chair of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Agriculture. I want to take a moment to thank all of the committee members that joined me to conduct the advisory review of the legislation that went through the parliament last night to end live sheep exports here in Australia.

In another life, I came from talkback radio, and I can tell members of this House that this is the issue that, in recent decades, has received by far the most incoming correspondence. Whether people are for or against the export of live sheep, it is something that brings up a lot of emotion. I can still remember those days on the radio, talking to people about this practice. I received a lot of calls, and, interestingly, they were not just from 'woke inner-city greenie types', who have been labelled as the vegan underground trying to cut live sheep export—

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And I just walked in!

Meryl Swanson (Paterson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Sydney has just arrived, but I'm certainly not directing my comments at her! Over those years of talking about live sheep export, I had many calls from farmers themselves, who said: 'You know what? Eventually we won't be doing this anymore. We care for our animals. We love our animals, and we do not want them to be subjected to cruelty.'

I know that Australian farmers are some of, if not the most, innovative people across the globe. They know this change is coming. They themselves have been part of the change for the last three decades. We have seen an industry in decline. Some members opposite have said, 'Well, if it's declining, why didn't you just leave it to decline?' Because we are a responsible government. We take notice of the industry and farmers. We know that they need assistance with this transition, and that's why we've put up $107 million. As part of this review of the legislation, the agriculture committee have requested that the government have a look at that package with an eye to increasing it.

Like my fellow committee members, I travelled to Muresk, and I want to take a moment to thank people from the Muresk Institute. The member for Durack come along, as the local member. I want to take a moment to thank those people who came. Over 3½ thousand people came. Admittedly, a lot of those people were upset by the decision, but we turned up and we listen, and I'm pleased that we went there. It was actually very important. That's why we have said, 'Yes, we need to assist the industry in the transaction.' We know that it will mean change. But this industry has already been changing, and what we are doing is the responsible thing, the thing that responsible governments do. They recognise when change is coming and they manage it, unlike those opposite, who just turn a blind eye and say, 'We'll just let this industry wither on the vine; we'll just let it die on the boat.' We won't stand for that. We won't stand for the animal cruelty. We won't leave our farmers high and dry. We will be working for them and with them.

It is disingenuous for those opposite to say: 'Oh, we're sticking up for our industry. We're doing the right thing by them. We understand it,' when actually they're not. If they were supporting this industry, they would be helping them. They understand that at the moment we are exporting the same number of sheep in 12 months that are processed in four days across Australia. Roger Fletcher, one of the biggest meat processors across the country, gave evidence to our committee that said we will be able to process the same number of sheep that go on those boats, many of them under incredible duress, in four days. Not only that; we will be able to create good jobs in Australia. We'll be able to increase the boxed meat that goes offshore.

Can I say to those people who are very concerned about their future, we do get it. We do understand. We want to make Australian agriculture even more prosperous and sustainable for the future. We do want to work with you. The future is coming fast, and those opposite deny it.

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

Yesterday was a very dark day in the history of this time because last night the Labor Party, the Greens political party, Senator Pocock and Senator Tyrrell teamed up to destroy the livelihoods of at least 3,000 Western Australians and destroy an agricultural industry. Those opposite, at the last election, promised to stand up for Western Australia, yet last night they sold out our state because of this government's desire, purely this government's desire, to curry favour with inner city voters. Not only was this decision reckless, as the MPI suggests; it was shameful. The live sheep trade in WA predates Federation. It is a truly Western Australian industry that has done absolutely everything that has been asked of it to improve animal welfare standards and more. In fact, our live export industry leads the world in terms of animal welfare standards, a fact even the minister of agriculture has acknowledged.

I'd like to share a quote from a March 2023 letter Minister Watt received from the then Kuwaiti Minister of Commerce and Industry:

The requirement for live sheep cannot be substituted with chilled or frozen meat for our population, and it is not our preference to switch our live sheep source. Australia's forced exit from the trade will mean we lose out to nations with little to no standards.

So I say to those opposite: don't dare try and pretend that the banning of live sheep exports is anything to do with animal welfare standards. Our WA farmers just want to keep doing their jobs and feed the world. It is a noble occupation. I have been absolutely disgusted at the insults that have been levelled at our WA farmers, our WA truckies, our WA rousies and more by extremist animal rights activists and from those who sit on the opposite side.

We often talk about the difficulty of getting people to work yet here we are: we have some 3,000 Australians who are being forced out of their industry and probably out of our towns. This will impact the local shops, the local sporting groups and, of course, our local schools. While the legislation has passed, let me tell you, the fight is far from over. I want to acknowledge my friend and colleague the member for O'Connor, who is here with me as well. We are up for this fight.

Regional Western Australia, let me tell you, doesn't give up that easily, so be warned. The grassroots Keep the Sheep campaign is well and truly up and running in Western Australia, and a few weeks ago I was so pleased to join in that rally which went through Perth CBD. I was so touched by the support that was provided to our farmers, our regional Western Australians, by the people of metropolitan Perth. I say to them: 'You need to keep supporting your farmers, because they need your support now more than ever.'

Keep the Sheep have said if they can't change policy, which sadly they were unable to do, then they would change the government. Well, they are now planning to mobilise and target the Western Australian Labor members who failed to stand up for Western Australia. In just a few short weeks 63,000 Australians have signed the Keep the Sheep petition. Unfortunately, at least one Labor member threw those words back in their faces. 'We are keeping the sheep,' the member for Hasluck posted on her social media last week. 'This means more than 3,000 new jobs for the regions,' she said, with a smile on her face. Honestly, the arrogance, the ignorance and the disrespect of those opposite is beyond belief. Does the member for Hasluck and the rest of those on the other side of the House honestly believe that they know what is better for farmers, for regional communities than the farmers and the communities themselves?

So, look, we know it has been a tough week, but what I want to do is recommit to my Durack community that my coalition colleagues and I are committed more than ever to reinstating the trade, and we will always have your back. But you have to ask yourself: if it is sheep today, what is next? Cattle tomorrow? People in my electorate are good farmers, pastoralists. They feed us, they employ us and they support our communities. We are eternally grateful for them and we are fighting for them every day.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to compliment the one-term member opposite for her contribution. If it's all right with her, I might put that on my Facebook page so that I can explain to my constituents exactly what's wrong with this place at the moment! Why don't those on that side just say, 'I don't know any details about this. I know we're going to get votes for it'? But we had a patronising contribution like that one! The member opposite just said that to get a better price for farmers, we're going to reduce one of the markets for their sheep, which is for live sheep.

Yes—I don't know what market that would be. And, oh, yes, she said that the market has declined. Does the member know how many sheep crossed the Nullarbor after the eastern states' drought? One of the reasons fewer sheep moved out of Western Australia was because they were put on road trains and moved across. One of the reasons that Roger Fletcher can process so many sheep now is because the eastern states' flock was built by buying sheep from Western Australia a couple of years ago. But does the member over there know anything about that? We're talking about boats here. They've all jumped on this 'stop the sheep' boat and there aren't enough lifeboats. You've already hit the iceberg, and you're going down. This is a political decision, and any attempt by those opposite to make out that it's anything else, that it's about animal welfare—well! They say: 'It's because we care for farmers. We went to Western Australia, and we listened to the farmers, and we did nothing; we just listened to them.' Seriously! The member for Fremantle said, 'Oh, this is only one per cent of the product of Western Australia.' But it's 100 per cent for some of those farmers that are getting cut off. We are just going to sacrifice them at the altar of feeling good about ourselves.

It seems to me that every day in this place we have to stand up and defend the people of regional Australia as they come under attack from those opposite. It's just ridiculous. The idea that—

I am not even sure where the member is from, but I'm sure he knows a lot about this. These sheep are put on ships. They are cared for, fed and air-conditioned. There are vets on board. They arrive, and they get to the other end in a healthy condition, and they supply a market. This idea that we have a processed market or a live sheep market—one or the other. We need both. What happened to the idea in this country of actually increasing our markets? We can kill more sheep and sell them to the chilled and frozen meat market. It doesn't mean that we have to shut down another industry to do that. It doesn't mean we have to do that.

There's no concept of the farming systems where these sheep come from. These are wheat and sheep mixed farming operations where the sheep play a very important role in having rotations on those farms so that they use less chemicals and less fertiliser, and they fit just nicely into that market. To have that ripped out like this—I saw this with the cattle. Overnight, we saw this with the cattle. I think I got 170 emails in one night on the cattle from people in the cities. Not only did that devastate and is still devastating the northern Australia industry; that flew right down through the eastern states to Victoria, devastating that cattle market, and this decision is going to do the same.

There won't be one healthier sheep. You won't be able to take me to Western Australia or anywhere else in 2028 and point to a sheep that's somehow healthier, better cared for, or has a better life. Are we going to have maybe a book club for sheep in Western Australia so they can expand their minds because they are not going to be put on boats and sent off to the Middle East. This is ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous.

I'm listening to interjections of the one-term member over there, because I've been here long enough to see people come that are quite yappy, but they really don't stay here very long. I hope you enjoy your interjections because they are not going to be going for long. (Time expired)

Josh Burns (Macnamara, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I, for one, am looking forward to joining the sheep book club by the member for Parkes. I think that sounds like a fantastic idea. It was a little bit of a tangential speech but an enjoyable one, nonetheless.

Those opposite are quite angry. They're angry today, and that's fair enough. But I thought that instead of directing their anger over here, maybe there is somewhere else they could be directing their anger. There has actually been someone who has had quite a bit to say about the live sheep export industry, and they said something along these lines:

I think this trade in sheep is a shame and a stain on our international reputation.

Goodness me, that's a very strong statement. That one had a bit of muscle. This person went on, and they said:

This has been a trade marked by disaster—

goodness me, this person doesn't like the live sheep export industry—

following debacle and that's gone on for 33 years, it's had a very sad history, a very dismal history.

They're not my words. I wouldn't be using those words. That's the member for Farrer, the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party. She absolutely came out swinging in 2018. In fact, she was so angry that she wrote an opinion piece about it. You'd think that maybe she'd take that opinion piece down from her website. No, she is that angry, it's still up there. It's still up there for all to see the member for Farrer's very strong views about live sheep exports. The member for Farrer went on in this op-ed and made some very interesting points. She said:

The Middle East is transitioning away from live sheep—

which is true. She said that the dynamic has changed, and live sheep export is a significantly small percentage of our total sheep export. That's not me speaking; that's the member for Farrer on her website, and the op-ed that she wrote. She went on to acknowledge:

Moving away from the live trade is not straightforward for West Australian farmers.

She said herself:

Hence, my call for a transition of five years.

This bill gives time, and it also gives a comprehensive transition package. As the Prime Minister outlined today, there have been conversations going on, and those conversations will continue.

The member for Farrer had much more to say. She said that there is a market opportunity for Australian grown meat in the Middle East and around the world. She acknowledged that our quality and standards are trusted, so why would we put that at risk? That was the member for Farrer, not me. The member for Farrer concluded—this really had some muscle to it:

Producing food and fibre in the 21st century requires ethics and sustainability. The live sheep trade to the Middle East has neither.

Goodness me, she really wanted to make some points in her op-ed. She was very unhappy.

Those opposite like to come into this place and say, 'Labor, Labor, Labor,' but actually—

A government member: And the teals.

teals, and all the rest of it, yes—but those opposite, amongst their ranks, have many people who know that the bill to end the cruelty of the long, hot journeys for sheep going to the Middle East is the right thing to do. Those opposite should also know that we came into the election with a commitment to end live sheep exports. Through that process, we have acted like a responsible government and engaged with industry and put a timeline in. It is not tomorrow; there is time. There are years. It will be beyond the next election—probably beyond the next two elections. But that bill has been passed into law, and it should come as no surprise to those opposite.

There was another bill, actually. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition put in her own private member's bill to end live sheep exports. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition really didn't want live sheep exports. She really didn't want them, but something changed. Something changed for the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, and it miraculously made her bill disappear. Who can guess what that is?

A government member: She lost her timber.

She was promoted back into the cabinet—a bit of a promotion and all of a sudden it's 'What bill?' It disappeared more quickly than the night sky after the sun rises in the morning. It just went away. But it wasn't just her. It was also a senator in the other place. Senator Sarah Henderson co-sponsored the live sheep export private member's bill. So there are many people among those opposite who are being quiet right now. While those opposite like to come up and rant and rave and stamp their feet, the bill that we passed through the parliament was the right thing to do; the cruelty needed to end. Those opposite should speak to each other before criticising those on this side of the House.

Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The discussion has concluded.