Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

ator O'SULLIVAN (—) (): I would like to take note as well. Coming from Western Australia I fully appreciate and understand the significance of the live sheep export industry. The live sheep export industry is an important contributor to Australian agriculture. It's a vital source of revenue and jobs for our rural and regional economies, particularly for my home state of Western Australia.

The livestock export industry in general contributes $1.7 billion to Australia's national economy every year. The live sheep export trade alone is worth around $250 million, with about 85 per cent of that income generated in Western Australia alone.

Since 2018 the industry and its regulatory framework has undergone significant change. This commitment by industry demonstrates the industry's strong desire to ensure a sustainable industry for future generations. The industry has not sought to ignore the responsibilities that it has to animal welfare. Rather, changes have delivered an improved animal welfare performance.

Rather than seek to improve and refine the regulatory welfare of the trade, there are many here in this place who would rather see a ban on the live sheep export trade altogether. Banning live-sheep exports is reactionary and would only result in substantial job losses throughout the industry. It would decimate an industry that, like mining and other industries, has underwritten the success of the Australian narrative since Federation. Those who seek to ban live-sheep export do not care about the generations of families who have contributed to this country with their hard work and sacrifice. Continuing to strengthen the oversight of the industry is a prudent path forward that will ensure a successful and sustainable future for it.

Since 1985, there have been at least 10 government and parliamentary reviews that have examined the live-export system and its associated animal welfare issues. These reviews have led to significant regulatory reform of the animal welfare standards by which exporters must abide and have increased the level of oversight of the export process. We have seen evidence that a sensible approach does work. Every six months the minister for agriculture must table in parliament a report from the department that includes details of the livestock mortalities of every sea voyage.

We all saw on television and on social media a few years ago those appalling images of cruelty and situations where animals were not treated humanely. Notwithstanding the fact that some of what we saw was confected by activists who were intent on portraying the industry and those voyages in a certain very negative way, we have seen the industry take enormous steps, significant steps, to improve conditions. These improvements have been led chiefly by the producers and the transporters themselves. The sheep mortality rate decreased from 14,000, or 0.8 per cent, in 2016 to just over 1,300, or 0.21 per cent, in 2021. That is a significant reduction. In view of the fact that more than 660,000 sheep were transported last year, this diminishing mortality rate serves only to highlight the industry's attitude towards better animal welfare. We know that producers, in particular, value the dignity of every single one of the animals they have in their care. We have seen a commitment by this industry to ensure that these animals are treated humanely on a journey. There are restrictions on the time of year that the ships can travel. Measures have been put in place so that veterinary officials are on board to ensure that safeguards are in place to ensure that animals are treated as humanely as possible.

The COVID pandemic has served to underscore how food security has become a major issue for many of our livestock export destinations. Many countries simply cannot produce the food to support their populations, and they need security of supply. So Australia, and Western Australia in particular—Senator Sterle knows this very well, having worked in the transport industry—plays a critical role in ensuring that these markets are able to be met with good produce and in ensuring the supply of this to the countries that need it. If Australia, and Western Australia, is not supplying, then those suppliers are going to come from other countries that may not have the level of integrity that our industry in Australia has taken up. These countries will not be able to meet their needs internally and they will seek it elsewhere. We can't be assured of the integrity and safety that we in this country want to ensure.

Only live export can meet the protein needs of countries where refrigeration is not always available. Phasing out the live-sheep trade will have wider trade implications for the exchange of products and services between Australia and the Middle East. The impact here is much greater and is beyond just the trade of sheep. It can impact many other sections of our trade relationships with many countries, particularly in the Middle East.

Above all, it will have a real impact on families and jobs and people that derive their livelihoods from these farms, from these products and from these services. We would not want to see that, particularly in my home state, sacrificed on the altar of ideology by those that are just determined to see this trade wiped out. We're not going to see that happen. We will not see that happen. We can't allow that to happen, because it would be a devastation to the producers, to the families that rely on them and to everyone that's involved in this industry and has done absolutely everything that they can to support this industry and see the improvements that have remarkably been put in place. To see that reduction of mortality down to 0.21 per cent is a remarkable achievement that everyone in that industry must be really proud of.