Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to speak tonight about the issue of live animal exports. It is an issue I have spoken about many, many times in this chamber and it is getting a bit tedious and distressing to have the same issues come up time and time again with the same incorrect and dissembling responses from the government and the industry. As many senators would know, last night there was footage screened on the 60 Minutes program of appalling cruelty in the way cattle were slaughtered in an abattoir in Egypt—the abattoir that most Australian cattle transported to Egypt go through. I have seen more of that footage and footage from other slaughterhouses where Australian livestock go to in the Middle East. Frankly, the footage that was shown on 60 Minutes was G-rated compared to the stuff that I have seen. But, quite rightly, what was shown was enough. It was enough for the minister, Mr McGauran, to say it was completely unacceptable and completely inhumane.

However, the same responses that are coming forth from the industry and the minister have been heard time and time again. This, of course, is not the first time 60 Minutes has shown footage of the appalling mistreatment of animals that are part of the livestock trade out of Australia. It has also been shown on other commercial TV stations, which makes you wonder why the minister looked so shocked when he saw it again last night. I am not suggesting he was faking it; I am suggesting there is an amazing ability by those in the government who keep defending this trade to just block out of their minds the reality of what the trade involves. There is continual repetition by the industry and the minister of the same old arguments they have been using for decades now about why the live animal export trade has to keep happening.

I draw attention to the response that the minister, Mr McGauran, made to the dorothy dixer he got in the House of Representatives a couple weeks ago on 14 February. This chamber was not sitting so I did not have a chance to respond to it. He took the opportunity to criticise me fairly comprehensively for my call to phase out the livestock export trade. He once again repeated the same old fabricated nonsense that:

Muslim countries in the Middle East and Asia hold a strong preference for fresh meat because of consumer requirements and religious beliefs ... many of the markets do not have refrigeration—

Apparently they do not have fridges over there much these days. He went on to say:

... many communities cultural and religious preferences demand that meat needs to be purchased and consumed near where the livestock is slaughtered.

This is simply not true, and the fact that it keeps getting repeated does not make it true. Frankly, the fact that it keeps getting repeated year after year and is used to attack people who criticise the trade is offensive and incredibly irritating.

There already exists a very significant, substantial market from Australia in slaughtered meat, in processed meat, to the Middle East and to Muslim countries. I draw the Senate’s attention to a media release put out by the Federation of Islamic Councils on 24 February citing the facts with regard to this. For example, last year Australian lamb meat exports to the Middle East were a record 14,052 tonnes. Australian mutton meat exports to the region went up by 24 per cent in the same period. These are figures that are in the public arena. According to this statement, they represent the equivalent of more than two million sheep slaughtered in Australia for Middle Eastern Muslim countries.

The type of slaughter that has been shown repeatedly, including on 60 Minutes last night, is not by any stretch of the imagination halal slaughter. That would not pass for halal slaughter in Australia. We have accredited halal slaughter processes in Australia which are in accordance with the Islamic sharia. We might ask the great expert in Muslim and Islamic law Peter Costello about sharia law, which he seems to think is some reason for people to be chucked out of the country. In this case, it is simply an Islamic ruling regarding how cattle have to be slaughtered in accordance with Muslim practice. We already have accredited slaughtering in Australia and scope for that to be expanded. We already export to Muslim and Middle Eastern markets enormous amounts of meat slaughtered according to that practice, in accordance with Australian law and Australian animal welfare standards.

It is time to drop the myth that there is no alternative or that religious practices mean that they will not buy the product unless it is slaughtered there right in front of their faces. There is a very small component of that for religious and celebratory occasions, but to suggest that the entire live export trade has to keep going because of that is monumentally false. Similarly, the suggestion that they do not have enough refrigeration over there to be able to deal with meat that has been slaughtered overseas and chilled meat products from other countries, like Australia, is simply farcical and plays on people’s ignorance. Some of these countries are extraordinarily wealthy. If you have been to airports like Dubai airport and the like, there is a bit of refrigeration, and I think they have a bit of refrigeration in other parts of the country as well. It is a laughable excuse. It is tragic that it keeps being put forward and that the industry keeps repeating it. Presumably, some in the government keep believing it.

It echoes to me the attitude that has led to the tragic situation Australian farmers are facing because of the AWB scandal at the moment. I am not alleging kickbacks or anything like that, but it is the same approach of believing whatever it is the industry bodies, the people who run the industry and the people who profit from the industry keep telling people and the government. They keep telling the government, ‘We’ve sent people to these abattoirs and it’s all fine and the Australian cattle are well treated,’ and the government keeps believing them. It is the same as AWB. They ask them, ‘Is everything all right?’ They say, ‘Yes, it’s all right,’ and that is good enough for the government. Frankly, it should not be good enough any longer. I think the fact that the government has not recognised this from the ample amount of evidence that is already in the public arena is a sign of their incompetence and the responsibility they have to bear for some of the difficulties that the industry faces from these continual regular public controversies.

In making these criticisms and in regularly calling for the live export trade to be phased out, I do not in any way suggest that there are not economic consequences for some Australians or that people’s livelihoods would not be affected. But I do say that, if the trade were shifted and live trade phased out in an ordered way, it would have far less impact on people’s livelihoods than the sorts of sudden shocks that can happen to a market when you get bans like we have had—prolonged bans to Saudi Arabia, for example, and other sorts of things. This is not going to be the last controversy. Every time this controversy happens, I stand up here and make a speech. The minister stands up and says, ‘We’re very concerned about animal welfare. We’re onto it. We’ll fix it up. It’s not going to happen again. Everything is all right now.’ A year later, something else happens. I stand up and make another speech. The same thing happens again. Meanwhile, hundreds and thousands of animals continue to suffer extraordinarily and in appalling ways.

The other fact that needs to continue to be emphasised in this regard is that there is ample and credible evidence put together and studies done by agricultural economists, not rampant vegetarian animal libbers, that say that there are clearly viable strong employment and export opportunities in the trade of meat slaughtered and processed in Australia that is being lost because of the live export trade. It is a market like anything else, but plenty of markets have a self-sustaining way. That does not mean that there are lost opportunities if we go down a different path. It is time to go down that different path. It is time for the industry and for the government to finally open their eyes and ears and recognise not only the inherent cruelty involved in this trade that simply cannot be got rid of but also that there are many job opportunities being lost in Australia and many export dollars already being earned that can be built on if there is a simple recognition and the stubborn attitude is finally shifted. Recognising a need to shift does not mean that somehow or other you have lost— (Time expired)