David Pocock (ACT, Independent) | Hansard source

Given the controversy of the Export Control Amendment (Ending Live Sheep Exports by Sea) Bill 2024, it's disappointing that there has not been a Senate inquiry into this bill. This is something I have consistently supported as a good mark of process and as a way to hear from people who will be affected by this ban. I acknowledge consultation that occurred as part of an independent panel and that there was a short inquiry in the House committee. But the Senate is the house of review, and the committee process is absolutely fundamental to our ability as senators to consider important legislation.

In the absence of an inquiry I would like to thank the industry for their constructive engagement. In particular, I'm grateful for the attendance of representatives of impacted industries at a roundtable I held. While a Senate inquiry would have been more appropriate, your input has been valuable and the way you approached the conversation constructive.

Listening to the industries impacted, there is real concern. Farmers in Western Australia have told me they do not feel heard. They have told me they are concerned about their jobs, their livelihoods, their families and their communities. If this bill passes, the transition must be managed carefully. It must be managed in a way that minimises negative impacts on farmers and communities by providing adequate support and resources for farmers to adapt. Significant investment will be needed in infrastructure and processing facilities and to expand the boxed and sheepmeat export trade and, critically, to address some of the very valid concerns about the lack of competition.

We've seen this play out around the country with the supermarkets, and I implore the government to address the concerns raised by farmers in Western Australia about the lack of competition. I fear that the $107 million transitional package will not be sufficient to properly make the transition and that further commitments will be needed from the Labor government. Despite these concerns, I stand in support of this bill.

Ending live sheep exports resonates deeply with many people of the ACT—not all Canberrans but, from my engagement, the vast majority. I thank the many on both sides of this argument who have engaged with me on this issue. I want to thank them for reaching out, having conversations and putting forward their thoughts, concerns and passionate arguments for ending live sheep exports. It is this democratic engagement and advocacy that has been instrumental in shaping my stance on this issue. In particular, I would like to give a shout-out to Aidan, Madeleine and Ben, students from the ANU who I met with on this issue and who, using their own initiative, have galvanised thousands of Canberrans who support the passing of this bill.

The welfare of animals is a real and serious concern. Historically, there have been significant risks to live sheep exports. One particularly distressing event in 2017 saw 2,400 Australian sheep die from extreme heat stress while being live exported by sea. Such conditions are clearly unacceptable, and I do acknowledge the improvements in the industry to address these concerns. I understand there's been a huge amount of work put into that and the relative change in deaths on journeys. But the issues have not disappeared completely. Earlier this year the MV Bahijah, which had 15,000 sheep on board at the time, was ordered to return to Western Australia. This is a reminder that the trade continues to pose a risk to animal welfare.

I want to reiterate my gratitude to the people of the ACT for their advocacy on this issue. I acknowledge that not everyone agrees with this, but on the whole I believe that Canberrans' voices have been heard, and I'll be voting on their behalf in support of this bill.