Motions

Livestock Industry

Mr MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Leader of the Opposition) (11:02): I move:

That this house establish a select committee to inquire into and report on strategies to ensure a strong and robust South Australian livestock industry should live exports of sheep be either banned or restricted with particular reference to—

(a) the development of a plan to assist sheep farmers and transporters who currently gain income from the live export trade in the event that the trade ceases or is restricted;

(b) explore the capacity of the local meat processing industry to expand and create jobs in a changing industry;

(c) develop and strengthen overseas markets for Australian chilled and frozen sheep products;

(d) explore the quantum and scope of the assistance package required for South Australian sheep farmers to make a positive transition should the trade cease or be restricted;

(e) ensure that the South Australian livestock industry is best placed to capitalise on opportunities should live sheep exports be banned; and

(f) any other related matters.

The time for the end of the live sheep export trade is very near. This is not a question of if: it is a matter of when. As legislators, we can no longer remain idle while we see those horrific images of animal cruelty and animals in distress being loaded onto ships and enduring long journeys across the seas to the Middle East. We know the conditions on live-export ships are not conducive to animal welfare. We know that sheep suffer from significant heat stress exacerbated by shipments during Australian winters to summers in the Middle East.

We know that South Australian sheep are largely exported to the Middle East, and we know that the trade has a long and well-documented history of animal welfare issues. The most recent example was that awful footage on 8 April 2018 on the Nine Network of sheep aboard a live-export vessel bound for the Middle East. It was clear those sheep were in significant distress. That footage was so shocking, so distressing, that it even resulted in some action undertaken by the commonwealth Liberal government, which commissioned a review by Dr Michael McCarthy titled 'The independent review of conditions for the export of sheep to the Middle East during the Northern Hemisphere summer'.

That report identified that the industry has a chequered history. There are many tales of high-mortality heat stress events incurred on voyages to the Middle East. It is no surprise that this report confirmed what we had all witnessed on our television sets in April this year: 2,800 sheep were suffering significant heat stress because they were overcrowded on a ship bound for the Middle East during the hottest time of the year.

It is unfortunate that federal National Party minister David Littleproud narrowed the terms of reference for this review so that the reviewer was not given the option to call on the federal parliament to end this trade. We know that ending this trade is an inevitability. The live sheep export trade no longer meets the standards for animal welfare in South Australia, and when you look at the economics, the financial case for this industry no longer justifies the continuation of the trade.

In a report undertaken by Pegasus Economics, titled 'Economic issues associated with the South Australian live sheep export trade', it is also clear that the industry does not have long-term strategic value for South Australia. This report identified that the live sheep export trade has been in decline since the 1980s and that South Australia only makes up approximately 10 per cent of the trade nationally. That decline has been even more significant since the early 2000s. The report identified that loadings from Port Adelaide peaked in 2001-02 at approximately 1.3 million sheep, but by 2017 numbers had dropped to approximately 260,000.

We know that the demand for live sheep is in decline. We also know that our South Australian meat processing industry has the capacity to take this share of the market. I am advised that the industry has the capacity to process these sheep. In fact, the report identified that it would have the capacity to process another 1.2 million sheep per annum. This means that, by banning the live sheep export trade, we could create new jobs for South Australians, who have the expertise, infrastructure, capacity, capability and skills to process meat locally.

We know that South Australia has a green and clean primary produce industry that is envied around the world. The Labor opposition wants to explore and expand our local industries and not simply trade on the suffering of these animals for little value. That is why the Pegasus report concludes that the 'cessation of the live sheep export trade will have a positive material impact on SA sheep meat processors'. That is because in 2017 South Australia exported 10 times the volume of sheep carcass equivalent meat than we do through live exports, and the value of that processed meat exported from South Australia is around half a billion dollars, which I understand is approximately 20 times the value of the live sheep export industry.

It is clear that the growth in this industry and the opportunities for our state are in local processing opportunities, not in subjecting these animals to significant suffering by packing them on ships for weeks and weeks in the most unbearable conditions for slaughter. That is why South Australia Labor is backing federal Labor's measures to amend legislation to ban live sheep exports with many amendments offered up and, indeed, initiated by federal Liberal member Sussan Ley.

We would like to have bipartisan support for this call. We believe the time has come. There can no longer be justification for these sheep being packed on these ships and sent across the seas on these long voyages in significant heat stress. Their suffering cannot be ignored anymore but, as I have outlined, this is not just an animal welfare issue. There will be new economic growth opportunities created for our state by banning this archaic practice.

I recognise that there should be a transition period for the South Australian sheep industry. I want to ensure that graziers are supported as a ban on the live sheep export industry is legislated. That is why we are calling for a parliamentary inquiry to explore the best way to support this industry and to explore the new opportunities for the expansion of our meat-processing industry. We want to strike the right balance for all on this issue, and I look forward to bipartisan support for our call for a parliamentary inquiry.

To be completely clear, this presents an opportunity for our state. If you accept that Sussan Ley or other federal Coalition MPs support a transition out of the live sheep export trade, if you accept that that is a political reality or inevitability, it makes perfect sense for South Australia to get ahead of that occurrence. It makes perfect sense for South Australia to capitalise on the opportunity that that presents. To simply sit back, wait for a legislated ban to take place and then respond is not good enough. We should see the live sheep export ban coming down the line and seek to act before that occurs.

We can work closely with the industry. We can work closely with graziers. The government has the capacity to develop a transition plan to work with them so that when the inevitable legislative ban takes effect we are best placed, best equipped, to be able to deal with that. More than that, more than just working with graziers to transition out of the trade, what we should be doing is working with abattoirs and other meat-processing facilities to ensure that we capitalise on the opportunity to expand the industry. If we sit back and wait for a ban to be instituted and do not act, we will have missed the boat—no pun intended. We would have missed the opportunity to capitalise on that ban.

Let's ensure that we do not sit idle and watch. Let's ensure that the government seeks to act pre-emptively, not reactively. That is an obligation upon a quality government functioning in the interests of our economy and in the interests of what the people who work in this industry will be doing. To sit back and simply wait for the tide to roll over would be not only a wasted opportunity, it would be an indictment on those people who rely upon the trade now.

I hope that the government takes up this opportunity that the opposition presents to it. We can put together a parliamentary inquiry and come up with cogent recommendations and thought-through strategies so that no-one ends up worse off and, more importantly, we grab every opportunity that can be made available to us as a result of the inevitable ban.

Mr TRELOAR (Flinders) (11:12): I move to amend the motion by the Leader of the Opposition as follows:

Delete the words after 'That this house' and replace them with:

refer to the Natural Resources Committee of the South Australian parliament to inquire into and report on strategies to ensure a strong and robust South Australian livestock industry, with particular reference to:

(a) the development of a plan to ensure that all livestock producers and transporters who currently gain income from the live export trade meet high animal welfare standards;

(b) explore the capacity of the local meat industry to expand and create jobs;

(c) further develop and strengthen overseas markets for Australian meat products;

(d) ensure that the South Australian livestock industry is best placed to further capitalise on new opportunities, and

(e) any other matter.

The Clerk has copies of the amended motion. I need to declare an interest in this debate. I am actually a sheep producer and have been for the last 40 years, and I am one who has exported sheep live in the past, although we have not done so for some time. Live animal trade has been an important part of the Australian livestock industry over the past six decades. The live export trade has had a chequered past, and recently we have seen disturbing footage of conditions on board the Awassi Express bound for the Middle East. These were scenes that were disturbing to the general public, livestock transporters and producers alike.

At least 10 government and parliamentary reviews since 1985 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 to which exporters must adhere and the level of oversight of the export process. It is fair to say that the current regulatory framework in place for livestock exports is complex. Nonetheless, reports of regulatory breaches continue to occur.

Live sheep were first exported from Australia to Middle Eastern countries in the 1960s. From an initial volume of 2,500 head in that year, numbers exported to the Middle East rose progressively to 800,000 head by 1973. Relatively minor quantities were also exported to other countries, including Singapore, Malaysia and Mauritius. The principal exporting state was Western Australia, with some exports from South Australia and other states becoming increasingly important from the mid-1970s.

The people of the Middle East are traditional sheep meat eaters. Moreover, and of vital importance in the current context, they prefer fresh meat to chilled meat, which is in turn preferred to frozen meat. This preference reflects both taste considerations and traditional customs as well as the practical matter of there being no refrigeration in many areas remote from the unloading ports. Live sheep are often simply walked from the port to more distant settlements where they are to be consumed. Storage is thus relatively easy in the form of live animals.

The main group responsible for opening up the market for Australian live sheep was the Danish Clausen shipping line. It converted surplus oil tankers back in the day into specialist sheep carriers—enormous vessels, some of which are capable of carrying over 100,000 sheep per voyage. The requirements and husbandry skills for feeding, watering, ventilation and hygiene of large numbers of sheep on these ships are clearly not to be underestimated. That has been highlighted numerous times over the years. It is not, however, an impossible task.

My first memory of the live sheep trade stems from 1978. During that year, an industrial dispute took place involving live sheep exporters and the Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union. Interestingly, the debate at that time was more about an industrial relations issue than about animal welfare. Live exports ground to a halt for a time with large numbers of animals accumulating on the docks around the state.

Eventually, the nexus was broken after negotiations involving the ACTU, led by Bob Hawke, and the organisations that preceded the National Farmers' Federation, led by Ian McLachlan. The live sheep trade resumed, the growers were appeased and the markets were satisfied. Interestingly, the South Australian state premier at the time, Mr Don Dunstan, said:

I sympathize with the farmers about the export of live sheep. The Government of South Australia has always been in favour of the export of live sheep and we have been endeavouring to encourage the trade. But there are two sides to the question and they need to be settled by the reasonable people. It is the extremists that have been taking the decisions...

As the Leader of the Opposition rightly pointed out, the live sheep trade has declined over the past 30 years. Once, Australia was exporting around six million sheep. We are probably now down to fewer than two million, the majority leaving via Western Australia. Over the past five years, a relatively small number have left Port Adelaide—around 200,000 head—although some South Australian sheep certainly find their way out through Portland, primarily from the South-East. The conditions seen last year during a shipment of Australian sheep to the Middle East were clearly unacceptable and not in line with the standards of the South Australian government or our farmers.

The Australasian Department of Agriculture and Water Resources is responsible for regulating the export of livestock from Australia. Australian exporters are required to comply with the Australian Standards for the Export of Livestock and with the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System. Significant breaches under both standards can result in the Australian government taking actions against the exporter, ranging from placing conditions on export consignments to the loss of the export licence.

The Australian Livestock Exporters' Council has committed to a number of measures to deliver immediate industry changes as well as longer term reforms. These include an independent observer under the direction of the Australian government to travel on voyages to the Middle East during the 2018 Northern Hemisphere summer and reduced stocking density for summer voyages. Decisions on halting or placing further restrictions on the live export industry can be made only by the Australian government not individual states, given the relevant legislation is a commonwealth responsibility.

The Australian government recently instigated a review into the live export process for sheep bound for the Middle East during the Northern Hemisphere summer. The resulting McCarthy review has called for a major overhaul of the live sheep trade during the Middle Eastern summer, and the Australian government has accepted 22 of the 23 recommendations made by Dr Michael McCarthy. This is consulting on the final recommendation, with the view that these will significantly improve animal welfare on long-distance voyages.

The South Australian government supports the live industry export and is working closely with the Australian government on how it can assist with the implementation of the McCarthy review recommendations. The South Australian government is aware that further testing and consultation will need to occur to understand and implement the recommendations involving heat stress risk assessment.

The decision on whether the live export industry should be restricted or stopped is not one that can be made by individual states, as it is commonwealth legislation that governs the industry. Susan Close MP, Deputy Leader of the Opposition, said on ABC Country Hour on 31 May this year:

The regulation of the live animal export trade is absolutely a federal matter. There's a federal act that covers that and so it is not really possible legislatively to do anything at a state level.

The state government supports the 400 South Australian jobs that rely on the live export trade worth nearly $40 million a year to our economy. This government also supports the high standards of animal welfare, which is the priority. RSPCA (SA) inspectors have the authority to investigate breaches of the South Australian Animal Welfare Act 1985 and take action regarding unlawful handling and treatment of livestock within the state.

The value of the live sheep export industry to South Australia in 2016-17 was $23.2 million, and the value of live cattle to South Australia was $15.9 million. South Australian livestock industries contribute approximately $6.3 billion to state revenue, or around 30 per cent of total agriculture, food and wine industry revenue. The government does support an inquiry by the Natural Resources Committee of this parliament into strategies to ensure a strong and robust South Australian livestock industry. I commend the motion to the house and seek leave to amend paragraph (e) of the amendment.

Leave granted.

Mr TRELOAR: By leave, I move an amendment to the amendment:

That the word 'related' be inserted in paragraph (e) after 'any other', as follows:

(e) any other related matter.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Pederick.