Lee Rhiannon (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, upon notice, on 12 December 2012:

(1) With reference to the independent inquiry conducted by the Pakistan Ministry of National Food Security and Research on 11 October 2012, which questioned the authenticity of the Certificate of Health No. 612-000891, issued by the Australian veterinary authorities and signed by the authorised Australian veterinary officer 27 days after the ship had left Australia:

(a) how could an Australian veterinarian in Perth sign documents on 1 September 2012, given that the ship and sheep in question left Perth on 4 August 2012;

(b) how did Pakistan obtain overnight Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (ESCAS) approval, given that it takes months for other countries to follow the same process; and

(c) was this documentation rushed in order to obtain the ESCAS approval to land the sheep in Pakistan.

(2) Given that these sheep were then taken to the PK Livestock and Meat Company, jointly owned and operated by Australian exporter the Wellard Group, which is a slaughter house and not a quarantine station, that Pakistan Animal Quarantine Rules (1980) did not authorise the director of the Animal Quarantine Department (AQD) to act as quarantine officer, and that rules established under the Pakistan Animal Quarantine Act (1979) were violated, why has Wellard's export licence not been revoked.

(3) Can the Minister advise exactly how the Memorandum of Understanding or ESCAS are working to protect animals rather than commercial interests and institutionalised corporate cruelty.

(4) With reference to public claims made by Wellard (http://www.pkmeat.com/pdf/PK%20Meat%20Company%20Profile%20(English).pdf), including that '[o]nly animals that pass the health screening test are brought for slaughtering, under strict veterinary supervision' and that 'PK Livestock has become one of the largest exporters of chilled [and frozen] mutton and beef, supplying ... meat across the Gulf region':

(a) what sanctions will be brought against Wellard; and

(b) why would Wellard deny work to its own abattoirs in Australia to have the animals slaughtered overseas after they have been forced to endure suffering.

(5) Can the Minister confirm reports that the sheep that were buried alive were subsequently dug-up and sold.

(6) Why does the Minister not accept the findings of the independent report by economic consultants ACIL Tasman, including that 1 300 full-time jobs would be created if livestock were slaughtered in Australia rather than enduring the inhumane treatment they receive offshore.

(7) What further evidence does the Minister require to acknowledge that acceptable standards of animal welfare cannot be enforced after animals are exported from Australia.

(8) With reference to the announcement by the Australian Chief Veterinary Officer (CVO), that he will conduct a review into whether the Mark IV restraint box meets World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) guidelines and ESCAS requirements:

(a) can the Minister advise when this review will be completed and whether it involves a direct assessment of cattle being slaughtered using this restraint box; and

(b) given that the CVO has stated that 'proper use of the Mark IV restraint box is consistent with the requirements of the OIE Code', what steps has the Minister taken to ensure that the CVO's statement cannot be exploited as an endorsement of this product.