Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My comments go to the Export Control Act 2020 report on livestock mortalities during export by sea for the period of 1 July 2023 to 31 December 2023. This report provides no encouragement for the Labor-Greens government, which seems to remain firm in its commitment to ban livestock export. In that campaign, much is made of the vessel MV Bahijah, which caused controversy around live exports and which has fuelled misinformation and disinformation ever since.

For context, the MV Bahijah was carrying live sheep towards the Middle East in January this year and was turned back halfway due to security concerns in the Red Sea. As a result, the vessel, with its livestock, was at sea for 25 days before arriving back in WA. Due to biosecurity concerns, the livestock could not be unloaded for over a week, yet veterinarians from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry were sent onboard to join the exporter's own veterinarian to check on the animals' condition and provide an independent opinion. Their report indicated no health or welfare concerns, and it was specified that, contrary to public reports, no livestock were required to be offloaded for health reasons. Supplies and replenishments were sent onboard to ensure the ongoing health and welfare of the livestock.

As part of this saga, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the RSPCA—an organisation I have called out repeatedly—described the allegedly horrific conditions these animals were subject to on the vessel. Yet the RSPCA had no evidence whatsoever since no-one from the RSPCA visited the MV Bahijah, and the animal activists' own drone footage showed clean animals sitting in fresh bedding. The truth of the matter is that, while docked in Western Australia, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry filed reports which were updated frequently. During the entire procedure, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, veterinarians and biosecurity officers were onboard, ensuring that requirements were met and that the animals were kept in good condition. The Australian Livestock Exporters Council's chief officer said that, on the MV Bahijah, animal welfare was in fact 'exemplary'—a remark which DAFF, the department, independently verified.

It's evident here that the misleading claims used to push for the ban on livestock export are based on nothing but deliberate misinformation. They want to capture people's love for animals. But don't be fooled. That's not what they care about. It should come as no surprise that activist organisations levy people's compassion, fuelled using false information and blatant lies in a marketing campaign to generate donations. This is their primary funding model—outrage for profit, if you will.

So let's talk about mortality. The shipboard mortality rate for livestock export for the first half of 2023 was found to be just 0.14 per cent—on par with the record lows of 2022—while it stood at an average of 0.17 for the second half. That amounts specifically to a loss of 378 sheep out of 155,776 sheep. These are fairly low numbers when compared to the 4.9 per cent annual average mortality on land, as pointed out in Meat & Livestock Australia's final report of 2018, page 2. On the MV Bahijah, the mortality rate was 0.45 per cent, which is 64 sheep, which is actually under—under—the reportable mortality levels. It must be remembered: the slightly higher mortality rate is attributable to the fact that the livestock were subject to a month at sea and then a week docked in WA in a heatwave. That set of conditions is not the norm; it's highly unusual.

Australia's current regulation of live exports is world's best practice. Supervision of those standards is world's best practice. More importantly, Australian standards are being extended to cover the countries to which these animals are being exported, to ensure end-to-end humane treatment. A tangible example can be found in our exports to Vietnam, where animal welfare practices have been brought in line with Australia's world-leading standards. Health certificate protocols are currently being negotiated with the livestock import industries in Morocco, in Iran and in Iraq.

There's no reason to destroy an entire industry and, with it, rural communities and hardworking and caring Australian farmers. Let's not repeat the mistake made under the previous Labor government, who, in 2011, shattered—

Hollie Hughes (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Roberts, your time has expired.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted.

Slade Brockman (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the same matter, and I thank Senator Roberts for taking notice of this document. It is very clear that Australia has the highest standards of animal welfare in the transportation of animals, and in other areas, in the world. It's very clearly demonstrated by the MV Bahijah incident that those animal welfare standards can be maintained even in the face of the decision, in this case, to turn around a boat and bring it back to the port of Fremantle. In fact, this is an exemplary example of the industry actually dealing with a serious issue in a way that takes into account the highest standards of animal welfare, and I congratulate those in the industry involved.

The statistics that are revealed in this particular document show that Australia's animal welfare standards are the highest in the world and that the live export industry in fact delivers outcomes that are quite extraordinarily positive and continuing to get better—and not just over a short period of time. You can take these statistics back to the 1980s, and you can see that animal welfare standards have been improving throughout that period of time.

Now, some people—in particular, the minister—want to claim that the industry is in decline, and certainly the industry did shrink on the back of successive government regulatory decisions, but that is actually not an industry in decline. In fact, we have at the moment a live export industry in sheep, predominantly from my home state of WA, which is actually growing. We've seen renewed interest from Saudi Arabia, which has now joined the ESCAS, and therefore has improved its own animal welfare system as a result.

As I've said in this place on many occasions, Australia does not merely export live animals; we export animal welfare standards. By exporting those animal welfare standards we actually improve conditions for animals that weren't just raised in Australia but raised around the world. When an abattoir improves its animal welfare handling practices, it doesn't just do it for Australian sheep and cattle; it does it for all sheep and cattle that are handled through that facility. By exporting animals, we're actually exporting the highest standards in the world to other jurisdictions, and that's something that should never be forgotten.

In this country, we see an extreme amount of disinformation and misinformation coming from the radical animal welfare groups. I've talked in this place about Animals Australia before, and I've talked about the RSPCA before. It is with a very heavy heart that I have to label the RSPCA a radical animal activist group, but that is what they've become. Their business model is now like Animals Australia's business model. They produce donations off the back of footage of animal cruelty. There is ample evidence on the public record that animal cruelty is being paid for. Large sums of money were exchanged in relation to the footage procured from the Awassi Express. The Awassi Express has been cited by this minister, the minister in this Labor government, as one of the reasons for the banning of the live-export trade. We have a direct link between Animals Australia and the procurement through large amounts of money of footage of cruelty, which is then used to raise more money. This is a business model that should not be able to be practised in this country. It is a disgrace. The fact that Animals Australia still has a privileged relationship with the department of agriculture is also a disgrace, and it should be stopped at the earliest possible opportunity. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.