Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor will be supporting the Primary Industries (Customs) Charges Amendment (Dairy Cattle Export Charge) Bill 2020. The purpose of the bill is to make the current voluntary $6 live dairy cattle export levy mandatory. This levy will fund the dairy cattle export program, which aims to improve research and development focusing on animal welfare, supply-chain efficiency, regulatory performance and market access. In 2018-19, Australia exported 92,456 dairy cows, valued at over $180 million. The countries that dairy cows were exported to include China, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Oman, Philippines, Taiwan, Thailand, United Arab Emirates and Vietnam. China received by far the highest number of Australian dairy cows, at 75,072. That saw an increase in trade of 164 per cent year on year.

Many Australians will be surprised to hear that Australia exports dairy cows to other countries and that levies are used to help exporters develop dairy herds in the importing countries. This is one of the reasons why the bill was referred to a Senate committee on 12 June this year.

The committee received six submissions, and submitters expressed strong support for the bill. The submitters included Australian Dairy Farmers and the National Farmers Federation, who were supportive of the legislation. It is important for the Senate to remind submitters to Senate inquiries that the committee system is there to ensure that legislation is properly scrutinised and that government is held to account. The Australian Livestock Exporters Council has proposed to direct only $1 of the $6 per head to research and development and the remaining $5 per head to marketing activities, which would be spent predominantly in foreign importing countries. The annual report of LiveCorp, which is the live export research and development corporation, states that the current voluntary levy is split so that $4.80 goes to marketing and $1.20 goes to research and development.

As it stands, the levy is voluntary. According to evidence provided by LiveCorp to the Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport, there are several problems with the voluntary component of the levy. These include the fluctuating and unreliable funding and cash flow, which limits effective budgeting and resource allocation; the limitations on long-term corporate engagements, such as recruitment and contracting; the efficiency losses through monitoring, identifying and chasing payments; the inability to enter into long-term, strategic or higher-cost projects; management of the risks of overservicing the program or the levy payers beyond the levy payments received; and management of the expectations from levy payers and stakeholders that exceed the capacity of the program. In addition, under a voluntary contribution arrangement it is more difficult to get consistent payment across a group of levy payers for industry good functions, as potential levy payers often have expectations linked to the service or benefits received by their individual business. This means that, according to LiveCorp, these challenges have constrained LiveCorp from successfully integrating the dairy program into its routine operations or meeting the expectations of stakeholders.

LiveCorp is not the only research and development corporation that is facing challenges in meeting the expectation of stakeholders. There are 15 research and development corporations, and many Australians will have little knowledge about the work they do. The structure of the RDCs is quite different today from when they were initially established by the Hon. John Kerin 30 years ago. John Kerin, the former Labor agriculture minister, believed—as did Labor generally—that government involvement in research and development is justified on the grounds of market failure, external benefits to society, research that supports the government's role in resource management and national interest consideration. They also believed that R&D is a form of investment and that there cannot be efficient resource allocation unless R&D administration is as efficient and effective as possible.

I won't go through the entire history of the various changes that have occurred since John Kerin established the RDCs, but the Senate should note that over the past 30 years they have morphed into hybrid industry-owned RDCs, such as LiveCorp, who collect levies from their stakeholder—who in this case would be the live animal exporters. Today the RDCs are funded primarily by statutory R&D levies or charges on various commodities, with matching funding from the Australian government. To expand Australia's rural R&D efforts, the government matches expenditure on eligible R&D, generally up to 0.5 per cent of the determined industry gross value of production. RDCs are accountable to both industry and government.

Levies for R&D and marketing are initiated at the request of industry and are collected and administered by the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. These funds are distributed to the RDCs to undertake R&D and industry services. The live animal exporters are strong supporters of this bill, because currently the voluntary levy is undercollected. In 2019 only $15,000 was collected from the voluntary dairy levy. However, if the levy were compulsory, over $550,000 would have been collected. That is quite a difference in revenue for the RDC.

However, more funding does not necessarily equate to better routine operations nor to meeting the expectations of stakeholders. Many levy payers are concerned that their levies are not being used efficiently or effectively with regard to R&D and marketing. This is not just the view of Labor; Minister Littleproud commissioned Ernst & Young in 2018 to undertake a review into the R&D funding. It was a comprehensive review which was undertaken by the minister's current departmental secretary, Mr Andrew Metcalfe.

Before the 2019 election, as the then Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources, Mr Littleproud, claimed, that the report would look at how to get the most out of Australia's rural innovation system through spurring cooperation and collaboration, attracting capital from around the globe and developing our research ideas into cutting-edge technology. Fast forward to today, and what has the minister done to ensure that Australia has a world-class, modern and dynamic rural innovation system? Absolutely nothing. Indeed, post the 2019 election, the agriculture minister was reported as telling the Farm Institute's annual conference that the RDCs could expect a shake-up:

"One focus I had before the election was around our research and development organisations, to make sure they are fit for future," Minister Littleproud said.

He went on:

"We are ranked number 20 in the world, we have just as many researchers as the US and the Netherlands who are number 4 and 6 in the world.

"As I went into South America, I remember hearing the Argentinians say you actually have the best research development people in the world, but they are bone lazy when it comes to commercialising their product."

The minister also talked about a culture change needed in the RDCs, and questioned:

"Are they fit for future? and how do we actually put a rocket under it and really drive it into a new pillar of agriculture," he said.

I would suggest that the minister stop talking about the problem and do something to fix it. We know that the minister's departmental secretary is an expert on the subject, as he was working for Ernst & Young when they spent over $2 million developing a report for the minister. Mr Metcalfe's consultation was extensive and included both international and domestic engagement with stakeholders, a number of regional roadshows and 23 workshops held in various locations around Australia. There can be no doubt that Mr Metcalfe is well aware of both the issues facing these programs and also the solutions.

In March 2019, the minister received the report titled Agricultural innovationa national approach to grow Australia's future. The report made a number of recommendations aimed at benefiting all participants in Australia's agricultural innovation system. There are five recommendations in the report, including: strengthening leadership for strategic direction but also improving connections, collaboration and culture; balancing funding and investment to solve short-term challenges, as well as targeting transformational and cross-commodity outcomes; establishing world-class innovation practices, including disruptive thinking, ambition and entrepreneurship to maximise opportunities from our investments; strengthening the regions to maximise innovation uptake and to provide regions with a greater role in national priority setting; and establishing the next generation innovation platform for our data, physical infrastructure and regulatory environment.

Sadly, the minister has not acted on the problem and not acted on the report. He just continues to talk about the problem without having the courage to do the hard work of true reform to ensure that our research and development corporations are fit for purpose and that other countries are not calling our researchers 'bone lazy'. Ultimately, while Labor is supportive of the bill, we have real concerns about whether stakeholder expectations will be met, and we urge the government to work a hell of a lot harder to make that happen.

Mehreen Faruqi (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Primary Industries (Customs) Charges Amendment (Dairy Cattle Export Chart) Bill 2020 as the Greens senator responsible for animal welfare.

This bill introduces a mandatory export charge per head of dairy cattle. It will provide for the imposition of an export charge on the export of dairy cattle and will amend the rate provision to provide for two different rates of charges, which differentiate dairy cattle from other cattle. A voluntary export charge of $3 per head was introduced in 2006 and raised to $6 in 2014. But over time exporters have stopped paying it. It is estimated that if a mandatory charge were in place during 2019 over $550,000 would have been raised.

It will come as no surprise to anyone inside this parliament, and outside for that matter, that the Greens and I strongly oppose the inherent cruelty of live exports. This opposition extends to the export of dairy cattle. We will not be supporting the bill that perpetuates misery for animals used in this trade. The Greens will be opposing this bill.

The funds currently raised for the voluntary charge go to the Australian Livestock Export Corporation, also known as LiveCorp, to fund its dairy cattle export program. This bill would ensure that $6 per head is paid to LiveCorp for that program. As described in the bill digest for this bill:

The Dairy Cattle Export Program provides advice and support for market access, conduct research and development for dairy cattle exports and participates on and provides funding to the National Arbovirus Monitoring Program to underpin market access opportunities.

The major problem with this initiative is that the industry wants the funds raised to principally go towards marketing for the dairy cattle live export industry—not animal health, not animal welfare but marketing. In fact, the live exporters proposed that $5 out of the $6 will be spent on marketing and only $1 out of the $6 will be spent on research and development. I can only describe this as galling and really disturbing. It is unconscionable that any additional money the live exporters were to receive would go towards making their cruel industry actually look good and making their cruel industry more profitable in overseas markets, rather than investing and trying to minimise the harm done that is done to animals that we know is so fundamental to this trade.

What about the $1 that will go towards research and development? What is it actually being spent on? Well, no-one really knows what this money is going to be spent on. It is time for some transparency and real accountability and oversight as to how this industry research is being conducted. Far too often it is done simply to protect the corporate interests of the industry and to undermine and distort genuine, independent evidence showing animal welfare concerns.

We need oversight of this research if it is to go ahead. This is particularly the case given that the federal government ordinarily matches industry research and development of this nature dollar for dollar. These are public funds that are going towards industry research that we know must have more scrutiny and more transparency. The live export industry has a shocking track record on animal welfare, that's a fact. It's an undeniable fact. This includes the welfare of dairy cattle.

In response to a Greens' question on notice in May this year, the government noted that Bos Taurus cattle were found to have suffered heat stress crossing the equator. I will quote the department's own response:

A total of 39 voyages accompanied by an Independent Observer (observer) carried Bos Taurus cattle from southern ports of Australia over the equator in 2019. Observers reported varying degrees of heat stress on 49 per cent of these voyages.

That's almost half of all voyages accompanied by an observer reporting the stress that the animals were put through. This is absolutely inhumane and it is cruel. Parliament should not be facilitating the collection of money so the live export industry can market its products overseas and can improve the marketing of cruelty, nor should it be facilitating research and development that often harms, rather than protects, animal welfare.

Over the last few months, we have seen more and more evidence of the fundamental cruelty of the live export trade. This is an industry that cannot be fixed or made humane. At the end of the day, it must be shut down. In June, when we were last in this chamber, I asked a question about the Al Kuwait live export ship, which had just been given an exemption to travel to the Middle East during the northern summer. In response, Senator Ruston, the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management said:

… this government has worked absolutely tirelessly with the industry, with the sector, with people who have an interest in the welfare of animals, to make sure our live export trade is done in a manner that is absolutely world's best practice.

She also said:

The Australian government is absolutely committed to upholding the absolutely very high standards of animal welfare while supporting a sustainable live export trade.

Now that that vessel has completed its trip to the Middle East, carrying a consignment of more than 33,000 sheep, and we have the government observer's report back, what did it find? It found clear evidence of serious animal welfare violations. About 1,000 sheep were identified as being subject to heat stress at score 4, which, according to the department's own heat stress score, indicates severe heat stress. Some people here may not care about the stress animals are put through, but they are living beings and we ought to care. This severe heat stress involves open-mouth panting with the tongue protruding, an appearance of being distressed and an extremely laboured respiratory character. A further 4,000 sheep were observed at score 3, which is the onset of heat stress, involving open-mouth panting, a laboured respiratory character and an appearance of extreme discomfort. Twenty-eight sheep also died on board and many more were hospitalised.

But we knew that this was going to happen. We knew that this was inevitable. That's why the rules were put in place in the first place. The risk to the animals travelling to that location at that time was incredibly high. It was the middle of summer. That's why, in fact, the department initially refused to grant the exemption—the risk was just too great. RSPCA Australia commented this month, saying:

Describing this voyage as a 'success' because relatively fewer sheep than usual actually died on board shows the industry is still clinging to outdated and inaccurate measures of animal welfare, something the 2018 McCarthy Review strongly warned against.

Mortality rates don't account for the tens of thousands of sheep that suffer terribly but survive. And these reports confirm that's exactly what's happened here.

I could not agree more.

We've also seen some shocking footage emerge from Animals Australia over the last few weeks, looking at the treatment of animals upon arrival in various countries. The live export industry continues to perpetuate this lie, this fiction, that animal cruelty is exceptional within their trade. Nothing could be further from the truth. The business model of the industry is based on animal cruelty, and that's why it has to be shut down. But I know that you, all sitting there across the chamber, don't give a damn. You don't care about animals. All you care about is the profits that they can make. Really, you should hang your heads in shame.

Honourable Senator:

An honourable senator interjecting—

Mehreen Faruqi (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Through you, Madam Acting Deputy Chair Walsh, if it's rubbish, why does it keep happening again and again? Why don't you stop the trade?

An honourable senator interjecting—

Yes, exactly. You don't even have any shame. You have no shame. With this bill, you're going ahead and putting more money into marketing a cruel industry, and all that that will end up doing is having more animals suffering, more animals dying and more animals on these ships of misery.

This parliament should not be endorsing any further moves to make the live export industry and the live export lobby better resourced than they already are. I will be moving a second reading amendment to note the inherent cruelty of the live export trade and to call on the government to ensure that all funds raised by the Dairy Cattle Export Charge be allocated directly to transparently undertaking animal health and welfare initiatives. The amendment also calls on the government to bring an end to the live export industry in Australia. It's time, it's way beyond time, that this cruel industry ended. I move:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:

(a) notes with concern:

(i) the inherent cruelty of the live export trade, including the well documented impacts of heat stress on sheep and cattle during voyages departing Australia, and

(ii) that thousands of animals die from heat stress and overcrowding on live export ships; and

(b) calls on the Government to:

(i) bring an end to the live export industry in Australia,

(ii) ensure that all funds raised by the dairy export cattle charge, including co-contributions from the Australian Government, be allocated directly to animal health and welfare initiatives, and

(iii) ensure that all animal health and welfare initiatives, including research, is undertaken transparently with regular public reporting and appropriate oversight."

Sam McMahon (NT, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the Primary Industries (Customs) Charges Amendment (Dairy Cattle Export Charge) Bill 2020. Live animal exports are an important part of our agricultural sector, contributing an average of $1.7 billion in export earnings annually and employing more than 13,000 people—that is, more than 13,000 Australians rely on the live animal export industry for their jobs and their livelihoods, particularly across rural and regional Australia. This is certainly the case in the Northern Territory, northern Queensland, and over in Western Australia, where our producers and live-export supply chains support South-East Asian and Middle Eastern market exports. Approximately 80 per cent of live cattle exports are sent from the north.

To reiterate the significance of this industry to rural, regional and remote northern Australia: when former Minister Joe Ludwig suspended the live cattle export trade overnight in mid-2011, our producers were in the middle of their annual muster. About 40,000 head of cattle were on trucks, in holding yards or already on their way to Indonesia. Overnight, producers suddenly couldn't sell their cattle. They kept them on, on their properties. To compound the pain of no income, many of the producers didn't even get a wet season that year. Pasture declined, and the condition of the cattle declined. They were put down or producers had to pay to ship them south to domestic abattoirs, when and if they could. In the Northern Territory alone, tens of thousands of head were shot in the paddock or died before they could be. People took their own lives. There was severe distress. That is what Labor and the Greens did, and they have no shame. They have no remorse. Although the former minister did realise the impact of his kneejerk reaction, the damage to Australian producers and their families, our regional communities and our Indonesian trading partners, was well and truly done.

I have many friends in Indonesia: I have friends that are cattle producers, I have friends that are veterinarians and I have friends that are ordinary Indonesians. Madam Deputy President Walsh, I can't stress to you enough how this impacted them. They would say to me: 'Why has Australia done this to us? What have we done to you that you are taking away our food supply? Why do you hate us?' I commend our government for not appealing the Brett Cattle Company case that came out of that decision to suspend the trade. We've chosen not to put these families through any more hurt and turmoil. They have suffered enough.

I am proud to be part of a government committed to supporting an economically and socially sustainable live-export sector which will always make decisions based on robust science, not fantasy and emotion. This government condemns cruelty to animals, as do I. We have world-class animal welfare standards in Australia, absolutely world-class. We're committed to growing the value of Australian agriculture by facilitating trade and increasing market access, including supporting a strong and sustainable livestock export industry that underpins the livelihoods of farm families—again, particularly in our rural, regional and remote areas. At the same time, this government remains strongly committed to ensuring exceptional welfare standards are maintained in this trade and across all aspects of farming and animal production in this country. The overwhelming majority of livestock export voyages are undertaken without incident; however—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator McMahon, you'll be in continuation when debate resumes.