Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

At the outset, I commend the member for Farrer for having the courage to introduce this bill, and those of her colleagues who have supported her. In my understanding of my community, I would summarise the community attitude to this as being: 'enough is enough'. After all the outrage, the numerous reviews, the years of hand-wringing, and the stalling, it's time that the parliament acted decisively and passed this private member's bill, to end the live sheep export trade once and for all. It is an issue that crosses the political divide. It matters in the cities, it matters in the towns, it matters in the bush. No Australian who has seen the latest footage could be anything but appalled and horrified. We cannot unsee this. We cannot just turn away. We should not be cramming live sheep into boiling metal ships and casting them out in the Indian Ocean for weeks on end, in the hopes of propping up an already failing industry. The reality is that there is no way to regulate this trade that will prevent animals dying cruelly at sea. As the member for Farrer said when she introduced this bill: 'Regulations written on paper in Australia cease to mean anything once the ship departs.'

The government's weak response just makes things a little bit less awful. At best, the government's policy will give the sheep a bit more space: an extra A3 sheet of paper—a better class of cruelty, if you like. It's a tacit admission by the government that they're going to keep letting sheep be slowly cooked alive. That may sound shocking. It's appalling language, if you think about the reality of what that means. But, listening to those opposite, who continue in tortuous bits of flawed logic to defend the indefensible, it wouldn't surprise me if one of them jumped up and said: 'Look, I think we need to innovate this industry. We'll export the missing tomatoes and rosemary and garlic, and they can be pre-cooked meals on arrival.' The state of those sheep is nothing short of disgusting when they arrive.

Should this bill pass, it will end the live-export trade in the hot Northern Hemisphere summer months and phase out the trade altogether over the subsequent five years. For years now, the government has used the issue of live sheep exports as an electoral wedge, so that anyone speaking up on this and expressing a view somehow means they are antifarmers or antitrade. The tenure of the former Deputy Prime Minister, the honourable member for New England and minister for agriculture, was disgraceful. He didn't just do nothing—he actually took pride in weakening and undermining the existing protections for animal welfare. The initial reaction from the current minister to the latest footage was positive and strong, but it was a short-lived breath of fresh air, in my opinion. Sadly, he has gone back to normal programming. The government's lack of moral compass is seen in its crab walk away from any real action.

The review was headed by a veterinarian who works for the industry, and it is a profound disappointment. With respect to my colleague the member for Bennelong, the government haven't adopted all of the review's weak recommendations. They've said they accept them, but they won't implement them. It's tricky words. You say you accept, but won't do. Nothing changes. This is particularly so with recommendation 4, which would have practically ended the live sheep export trade in the sweltering Northern Hemisphere summer. So it's unclear to anyone outside the cabinet whether the minister has caved to the industry, was rolled in cabinet or just lost his spine, which seems to be a fairly common thing for those opposite when they enter the Turnbull cabinet. But, whatever happened, he has precious little to be proud of—he's certainly no misnomer.

The overwhelming scientific and economic evidence supports ending this trade. The Australian Veterinary Association, the RSPCA and countless animal welfare groups have told us that there is simply no way that the northern summer sheep trade can continue if animal welfare considerations are to be adequately met. And the economists have told us there's simply no long-term future for this failing industry. It's been in decline for over two decades. So, as legislators, we should act now to ensure the welfare of Australian animals and to provide transitional support, in a timetable, for farmers who currently rely on the industry for their livelihood. There've been some people in animal welfare groups who've said five years is too long; others have said it's long enough. In reality, the five-year period probably strikes a reasonable and correct balance in allowing farmers and exporters time to transition.

So, in summary, we can stop this cruel trade. We must stop this cruel trade. The moral, scientific and economic case is clear. The evidence requires us as legislators to act. The community have had enough, and Australia's international reputation will be damaged if we don't act. Allowing this to continue is not who we are as a people.

See this speech in context