John Alexander (Bennelong, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'd like to thank the member for Farrer for bringing forward the Live Sheep Long Haul Export Prohibition Bill 2018 and this important debate. Astute listeners will note that the area of Bennelong is quite ovinely challenged. In fact, to my knowledge, there is not one sheep domiciled in the corner of Sydney that I represent, but that doesn't mean people in my electorate don't care deeply about this issue. In the last few years, I've had hundreds of locals contact me to express their concerns with this ongoing trade. They demand their concerns be addressed. On the other side of this argument are the farmers who depend on live sheep exports for their ongoing livelihood. To stop the exports tonight would bring devastation to their families. Maintaining this policy may hurt some sheep but will save farmers. Stopping it helps sheep but hurts farmers. We need to move to a policy where both are safe, but, in this matter, as in many, the art of transition is key.

Politics is often a battle of heads against hearts. It's easy and tempting to take an emotive line on many issues, but government must always be led by facts. Governing should involve an information led, rational compromise that allows everybody to get ahead. For this reason, I am opposed to the policy put forward by the Labor Party. Stopping exports without a clear, thought-through time frame would devastate the industry and leave farmers destitute. This is a bad policy that will hurt families across our regions. At the same time, this is why I feel, if properly implemented, a policy like the member for Farrer's is sensible. A five-year transition period would allow time for the market to prepare for the impact of this policy while alleviating the most extreme of the shipboard conditions. The last Labor government almost destroyed the cattle industry with its overnight shutdown, and we can't make the same mistakes they did. I'll defer to the member for Farrer on the finer points of agricultural policy, but I would hope that five years would be enough time to make the relevant changes for farmers across the country. If this time is not economically viable, it can be amended, but it would seem a fair period of time.

This phasing-out process would need to echo many of the policies already implemented by the government, and it is pleasing to note that the government has accepted all recommendations from the McCarthy review of sheep exports to the Middle East during the northern summer, which was released on 17 May 2018. Facts show us that live sheep exports are now safer than they have ever been before. More sheep actually die on road transports than at sea. The government can be congratulated for the great improvements made to the trade by making it safer.

We also know that the value of live sheep exports has decreased dramatically over the past few years, which has been confirmed by the department of agriculture. Live exports are now only six per cent of the total sheep turn-off. The other 94 per cent is processed, packaged and frozen domestically before being exported. The extra processing employs more Australians and makes economic sense. In 2016-17, the total global value of Australian lamb was $1.9 billion, and mutton was worth $719 million. Both lamb and mutton value have increased dramatically from 2010-11 figures, reflecting growing demand and the opening up of new markets such as China. Most of this growth is in the frozen product. So there is a market here that we can expand into and capitalise on.

The art of transition is the most important skill in politics and one we need to get much better at. Knee-jerk responses to crises are never sustainable and usually hurt more people than they help. This seems like a sensible policy of transition and, so long as it stacks up economically, the government should consider it further. The countering views have been expressed. It is now time to settle on common sense.

See this speech in context