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

Given there are no other speakers on the list, I shall ensure that the time has not gone to waste in raising another matter of significance in the adjournment debate on what is already the final sitting of the Senate until March. Last week we had a very significant court finding in Perth which, whilst it related to a charge under Western Australian law, has very direct ramifications for the federal government and particularly the new Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Mr Burke. The court case was over a cruelty allegation with regard to a live sheep shipment to the Middle East. The magistrate found that there was clearly a breach, proven beyond reasonable doubt, of the Western Australian animal cruelty act. However, the charge was dismissed because, in the words of the magistrate:

Whilst the elements of the offence of cruelty to sheep ... were proven, the AWA is ... inoperative, to the extent of its inconsistency with Commonwealth law.

In other words, the fact that the exporter had an export permit issued by the Commonwealth government overrode the fact that their export practice breached the Animal Welfare Act of Western Australia.

I think this clearly indicates inadequacies in the export provisions under federal law and the way that they are implemented. Clearly, and by way of a finding beyond reasonable doubt in an Australian court, the export licences are being issued which directly enable unnecessary cruelty to significant numbers of livestock. I know it is fairly traditional in Australia to be dismissive about cruelty towards livestock. But let it not be forgotten that there are literally millions of livestock exported from Australia each year which undergo very unpleasant—to put it politely—journeys of two to three weeks and sometimes longer in very clearly uncomfortable conditions to meet an extremely unpleasant fate in the manner of their offloading and their slaughter in many of these countries.

In a clear example of just how contemptuous the industry is towards these issues of animal cruelty, in response to the finding of the court—and this was a court that found that the Animal Welfare Act was breached in causing unnecessary harm to tens of thousands of sheep—the exporter on the PerthNow website on 9 February hailed the outcome as ‘sensible’ and said that Australian sheep ‘travelled business class’ compared to others around the world. This is an example of the level of contempt that exists. Straight after a finding by a court that the Animal Welfare Act of Western Australia has been breached, you have an exporter saying that sheep travel business class. You could not get a clearer example of how contemptuous the industry is towards this issue.

For those who want to dismiss this as an issue of no great import, let me remind the Senate, particularly the new government—who, to their credit, have indicated a willingness to pay more attention to petitions submitted to this parliament—that by far the largest petition tabled in the Senate in at least the last five years has been with regard to this issue. On last count, I think about 170,000 people in Australia have signed petitions expressing concern about the live export trade. So this is an issue of significant concern to Australians. It may be traditional on the part of some people to just dismiss sheep and cattle as being not worthy of major concern, but let me draw a comparison with the very strong outpouring of concern amongst many Australians—reflected, I might say, by a vote of the Senate today, supported by coalition members, and regular statements by government ministers—and the strong opposition to the cruelty of the slaughter of whales.

Sheep and cattle are mammals, just like whales. They are obviously different in a few other ways, but with regard to their ability to suffer, let me say that there is no doubt, there is well-established scientific proof, about the ability of these mammals to experience suffering, to know that they are experiencing suffering and to suffer great distress. Whatever you might say about the extraordinary and abominable cruelty inflicted on whales in their slaughter, it is at least only an abominable cruelty for the last hour or two of their lives. For these mammals—the sheep and cattle—it is for the last month or more of their lives that they are subjected to continuing, unending suffering from the moment their transportation begins, and certainly from the moment they are put on the ships for weeks of transportation to face a particularly cruel form of slaughter. The thing that frustrates me most about this issue is the continual contempt from the industry and, with regard to the previous government, the continual dismissal of mountains and mountains of evidence about the extreme cruelty that is involved in this trade.

Let me also remind the Senate that there is a clear alternative. The grossly dishonest excuse that has been used by the industry for years has been that the animals had to be exported live because they had to be slaughtered in the Middle East because people there wanted the slaughter according to halal requirements. Eighty per cent of slaughterhouses in Australia are halal certified. Indeed, there is already a thriving export trade in processed and refrigerated meat to these areas with halal certification of their slaughter. There is no need to transport these animals halfway round the world alive and suffering when they can be slaughtered here humanely and then the meat sent across to those countries. That is clearly provable because that trade already exists and, indeed, it is already a larger trade than the live export trade.

To come back to my key point, the onus is now on the federal minister and the federal government to take heed of the findings of the court in Western Australia which demonstrate that the export licensing process from the federal level enables—legalises, in effect—animal cruelty. It is only by virtue of the issue of these licences that acts that would otherwise be in breach of the Animal Welfare Act of Western Australia are allowed to occur and are allowed to be legal. I draw attention also to another section from the magistrate’s finding, paragraph 192, which said:

There is no evidence that the Commonwealth intends to regulate animal welfare issues per se, or do so exclusively or exhaustively. Certainly it covers issues relevant to animal welfare but that is within the context of export of live cargo ...

So, again, the magistrate has found that there is no evidence that the Commonwealth intend to regulate animal welfare issues. In the past they may have felt that there was no need to, but clearly, by virtue of their operations, they are enabling the circumvention of animal welfare laws, obviously in Western Australia and, by virtue of the legal principle, I would assume everywhere around the country where there is a conflict between the state law and the operational effect of the Commonwealth issuing of a licence.

The Commonwealth may not have regulated animal welfare issues per se in the past but there is now a clear obligation on them to do so. I call on the new minister to examine this issue and to act, and not just be part of a very long line of covering up on this issue and of dismissing and, indeed, denying the cruelty that exists despite the insurmountable evidence. The new Prime Minister, Mr Rudd, said when he was opposition leader, answering a question about this issue back in February last year, that he cannot abide cruelty. He should ensure that his new government is not facilitating and licensing it, because that is what is happening. I am not saying that that is the intent, but that is the effect of what is happening. Clearly, now there is an immediate obligation on the federal government to act to remedy this situation and put in place processes that ensure that unnecessary animal suffering does not occur via the live export trade. The obvious way to do that, frankly, is to phase out the trade, because an alternative exists. The alternative, I might say, would also provide more employment opportunities in Australia.