Matt Thistlethwaite (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Having heard the contributions that have been made by all sides on this debate I am supremely confident that the Gillard government has the balance right on this very important area of public policy. On one side we have the agrarian socialists in the form of the National Party saying that we have gone too far and that we have acted with too much haste, and on the other side we have the socialists in the Greens party saying that we have not gone far enough.

Coming back to the National Party—wonderful to see!—the agrarian socialists over there are now advocating that the government should be in the business of buying farms in Australia: agrarian socialism at its best. They are saying that the government acted with too much haste when it came to suspending the live animal export trade in the wake of the Four Corners debacle, that there was no need for new standards, that the new system is not working and that, in Senator Back's words, it is placing 'unreasonable demands' on exporters and farmers in this area. Then on the other side we have the contribution of the Greens, who are saying that the new system does not go far enough and that we should consider shutting down the live animal export trade and simply exporting processed beef and lamb. That says to me that the Labor Party is right in the middle, spot on. Between those two poles it is spot on, with a reasonable and sensible approach to what is at times a very emotive topic in Australian public discourse. The reality is that the Gillard government has got the balance right when it comes to a proactive, industry based approach to this scheme—one that is based on international standards, on consultation with industry and, importantly, on independent auditing of those standards through the supply chain.

Of course, the need for this policy came in the wake of the Four Corners episode on cattle exports to Indonesia which aired last year. In the wake of that, the Gillard government acted quickly and decisively, and we suspended the trade on the basis that warnings had been given to the industry over a number of years that self-regulation was not working and if it did not improve then the government would have to step in. Ultimately that is what occurred. So the industry was given adequate warning that the processes were not up to scratch or up to standard and that standards needed to improve.

In the wake of that, the government implemented the Farmer review. We asked an independent expert to review the trade, the policy and the processes, and the Gillard government accepted all of the recommendations of the Farmer review and its findings on this industry—and, indeed, much of the advice of the industry government working groups. Of course, the government consulted with industry about the process of developing guidelines and what was international best practice, and of course it consulted with buyers overseas. The process involves independent auditing through the supply chain, which can provide confidence to the Australian public regarding the new framework. The new framework was developed as a set of standards that provide checks and balances to meet community expectations regarding animal welfare and also, importantly, ensure the ongoing viability of this industry into the future. As I said earlier, the guidelines were developed in consultation with industry through those industry-government working groups.

So we have a new set of guidelines and standards that the people of Australia can have every confidence in, the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System, or ESCAS as it is known. Australian exporters under this scheme meet international animal welfare standards from start to finish. The new framework, developed on the basis of international best practice and in consultation with the industry, requires evidence that animals will be handled and processed in accordance with internationally accepted World Organisation for Animal Health animal welfare guidelines. Importantly, it enables the continuation of a highly valuable trade by placing it on a sustainable footing and by ensuring that the Australian live export industry meets the community's expectation.

The framework provides an increased level of transparency and accountability from the point of export to the point of processing. Exporters need to show that they have a supply chain assurance system that delivers internationally agreed animal welfare requirements along all points of the supply chain, from the beginning of export to processing at the abattoir; control throughout the supply chain; tracking and accountability of animals throughout the supply chain; and importantly, as I mentioned earlier, independent auditing and reporting together through the supply chain. The framework is being phased in, with 75 per cent of the trade covered on 1 March this year and 99 per cent of the trade covered on 1 September this year. All markets—100 per cent of the trade—will be covered by the end of this year. So over a period of nine months the government will be implementing full coverage of this new set of guidelines throughout the industry in Australia, and that will provide the level of confidence that Australians feel is appropriate when it comes to live animal exports in this country.

Importantly, there are sanctions so that exporters that do break the rules and breach the guidelines will face sanctions. Some of those sanctions, if the penalty proposes it, are quite strict. The sanctions can include placing conditions on future consignments, refusing to approve future consignments and cancelling an exporter's licence, and they go right up to criminal sanctions for the most serious of offences. So in all aspects of this policy there is a clear set of guidelines that is independently audited. Where breaches of standards are found to occur, there will be sanctions and possible criminal offences for the most serious breaches of the guidelines.

That is a sensible approach to this important issue. It ensures that exporters have a process which everyone understands and works to; it ensures, importantly, that they were consulted and had input into the development of this process; but ultimately it also ensures that the Australia people can have confidence that animals that are being exported to overseas markets from Australia are being treated humanely in accordance with best practice in terms of international standards. Much has been made of particular incidents and the highlighting of those incidents in the media. I think it is unrealistic for the people of Australia not to expect that there will be incidents of potential breaches of the guidelines. That is a fact of life. But overwhelmingly the statistics show that the incidence of breach is certainly a very minor occurrence in terms of the level of exports throughout the country.

Where there are potential breaches, there are powers for the department to investigate them, and that is what is occurring in respect of the complaint that has been made regarding a marketplace in Kuwait. The complaint was received on 30 August 2012 alleging that Australian sourced sheep were being offered for sale and slaughter outside the approved guidelines in Kuwait. That is being investigated in the proper course in accordance with the guidelines, and it will be reported in due course. Procedural fairness must apply in respect of adherence to and investigation with these guidelines, and that is occurring.