Division Description Changes — Regulations and Determinations — Export Control (Animals) Amendment (Northern Hemisphere Summer Prohibition) Rules 2022; Disallowance — 27th Oct 2022

Change	Division
representatives vote 2022-10-27#7 Edited by mackay staff on 2022-11-03 14:49:48	Title ~~Regulations and Determinations — Export Control (Animals) Amendment (Northern Hemisphere Summer Prohibition) Rules 2022; Disallowance~~ Regulations and Determinations - Export Control (Animals) Amendment (Northern Hemisphere Summer Prohibition) Rules 2022 - Don't disallow Description ~~<p class="speaker">Andrew Wilkie</p>~~ ~~<p>I move:</p>~~ <p class="italic">That the Export Control (Animals) Amendment (Northern Hemisphere Summer Prohibition) Rules 2022 made under the <i>Export Control Act 2020</i> on 5 April 2022 and presented to the House on 26 July 2022, be disallowed.</p> <p>The northern summer export ban for sheep was introduced in 2019, banning exports between the whole of June and the whole of September. This was a response to the 2018 McCarthy review into the conditions for the export of sheep to the Middle East during the Northern Hemisphere summer. That McCarthy review found that a ban should apply on all shipments between May and October due to the extreme heat stress suffered by the sheep on those vessels. That review was, in turn, a consequence of the 2017 <i>Awassi Express</i> scandal, when about 2½ sheep perished on the <i>Awassi Express</i> export vessel.</p> <p>I would remind all honourable members of the terrible conditions that were revealed on the <i>Awassi Express</i><i>,</i> which were made public in 2018. Who can forget the shocking—they are genuinely shocking—images that were revealed to the public after that voyage? Sheep and lambs were literally drowning in shit and urine—terrible conditions on that vessel. Sheep were panting uncontrollably, constantly, all day and all night. They were as graphic demonstrations of animal cruelty as anyone has ever seen in this country. It was entirely reasonable that the government of the time established the McCarthy review and that, as a result of the McCarthy review, a ban was put in place on the export of sheep to the Middle East during the Northern Hemisphere summer.</p> <p>I tell all that background because it's very, very important for honourable members to understand the ban was based on expert advice and science. It wasn't a knee-jerk reaction; it wasn't some sort of emotive response to the sight of an animal suffering. It was based on expert advice and science. How, then, do we explain that in April 2022—this year!—the then coalition government made regulations which effectively reduced the live-export prohibition period during the Northern Hemisphere summer? I remind members that those regulations made by the previous government allowed Australian exporters to take sheep through the Red Sea to Israel for that two-week period from 1 to 14 June, which had been previously banned. Moreover, in terms of the ban on exporting to some Persian Gulf destinations, including Qatar—although not the major live export ports of Oman and Kuwait—live exporting was allowed to begin a week earlier, on 22 May, this year. Effectively, this means there was an 11-day reduction in the prohibition on exporting sheep to Qatar and a 14-day reduction in the prohibition on exporting sheep to Red Sea destinations.</p> <p>This was such a blatant political fix in the lead-up to a federal election. In fact, the previous government implemented the changes to regulations not just before the May election this year but also before a review into the live export trade was finalised by the department. It was a political fix. The question now is: what will the new government do in response to this disallowance motion? The new government—the Labor government—of course went to the federal election with a promise—a policy—to, over time, wind up the live sheep trade to the Middle East. So you would think logically that the government will support this disallowance motion. For the government to have gone to an election with that promise and not to support this disallowance motion would be a remarkable turn of events, and it would suggest that the new government is happy to continue to walk both sides of the track when it comes to animal welfare.</p> <p>The choice today is really simple and really clear. Either the government will support this disallowance motion and be pro animal welfare or the government will come in here and not support this disallowance motion and be anti animal welfare. That is the challenge confronting this government. I say 'challenge'. I don't think it should be a challenge; it should be a straightforward matter. Will the government continue to kowtow to the live animal export industry—as was the case for the previous nine years by the previous LNP government—or will the new government come in here, show some backbone, show some humanity, show that it's prepared to deliver on its election commitment to, ultimately, wind up the live animal export trade and, in the interim, do everything it can to make it more humane until it is wound up?</p> <p>It begs the question: why are we continuing this trade at all? We have an abundance of evidence that the live animal export trade, including the export of beef cattle to countries throughout South-East and North Asia, that it is systemically cruel. It goes back decades. There were a number of episodes in the 1990s. I can remember clearly in 2003 the <i>Cormo Express </i>scandal. That vessel called the <i>Cormo Express </i>bobbed around like a cork around the Middle East for a total of 80 days at sea and almost 6,000 sheep perished, not to mention all of the terrible suffering experienced by the tens of thousands of sheep that fortunately did survive. Turning from sheep to beef cattle for a moment, who can forget those images on <i>Four Corners </i>in 2011 of the barbaric mistreatment of Australian beef cattle in Indonesian slaughterhouses and the way those unfortunate cattle were treated? Thank heavens for the Animals Australia investigators. Thank heavens for the <i>Four Corners </i>ABC show that shone a light on the conditions being experienced by the beef cattle in Indonesia. Who can forget, in 2012, those images on the TV of Australian sheep in Pakistan being buried alive? Australian sheep were buried alive in Pakistan because we were happy to send our sheep off to these countries—all care, no responsibility.</p> <p>Then of course, there was the 2020 episode with the <i>Al Kuwait</i>. I remind honourable members that the situation with the <i>Al Kuwait</i> was that in June 2020, the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment—and this is particularly relevant to this disallowance motion—granted an exemption to the northern summer live export ban which allowed approximately 35,000 sheep to be shipped into the scorching Middle East summer on the vessel <i>Al Kuwait</i>. The government's after-voyage report on that voyage stated that a thousand sheep were exposed to score 4 on the heat stress scale, which is the highest level on the scale. This means that those thousand sheep were panting with open mouths and tongues protruding. Score 4 had never before been recorded in one of the reports of those voyages. The reason that's relevant is that there was an exemption made to the Northern Hemisphere summer ban, and the report came back top of the scale, almost off the scale, when it came to the scientific measurements of the suffering being experienced by those Australian sheep on the <i>Al </i><i>Kuwait </i>vessel.</p> <p>How much more evidence do we need to know that the live animal export trade is cruel, systemically cruel, and the only way to end the cruelty is to end the trade? Moreover, the live export industry is simply not in Australia's economic best interests. We are shipping thousands of processing jobs overseas, even though we know there is the capacity in existing Australian abattoirs to process those sheep in our country. We just need to recruit and train more workers, providing more jobs.</p> <p>The trade does not have public support. Sure, it's got the support of the National Party and the Liberal Party. Sure, it's got the support of a relatively small number of sheep and cattle producers. Sure, it's got the support of a couple of shipping companies running ships manned by foreign crews. A small number of people depend on this industry. But the opposite side of the coin is that many millions of Australians are appalled by the trade and look to the government, any government, to show some leadership, show some humanity, show some interest in animal welfare and shut it down.</p> <p>We've got to stop peddling these myths that come out of the proponents for the trade. They say the animals are treated humanely. Garbage. They say that the trade is in Australia's economic self-interest. Garbage. They say that customers in the Middle East won't buy processed meat. But I remind members that, in 2019, 57 million kilograms of boxed Australian lamb and mutton was sold into the Middle East. I'll repeat that, because it's very, very telling: in 2019, 57 million kilograms of boxed lamb and mutton—processed meat—was sold into the Middle East. They love the stuff. They can't get enough of the stuff. Why don't we keep sending them more of the stuff, instead of live sheep? Because some advocates for live exports say, 'But these poor people in the Middle East don't have refrigeration.' That's racist nonsense. It's complete and utter nonsense. As long ago as 2011—11 years ago now—a survey found that almost all households in the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain had refrigeration. They live like us—probably better, many of them. They've got fridges. They're not all out in the back with a dirty big knife wanting a live sheep, to slit its throat.</p> <p>There is the argument that there are religious considerations and that, due to religious beliefs, people in these countries will only buy a live animal, so that they can kill it and process it in accordance with their religious beliefs. Again, that is complete and utter nonsense. There are numerous Australian abattoirs that are halal certified. That helps to explain why, in 2019, we sent 57 million kilograms of boxed lamb and mutton into the Middle East.</p> <p>I've tried many times to shut this trade down. In fact, I think at last count I've moved five private member's bills with the aim of shutting down the live animal export industry. Each and every time, my private member's bills have failed to gain the support of the Liberal Party, the National Party or the Labor Party. So imagine my delight when, before the most recent election, the Labor Party were quite clear that they support a wind-up of at least the live sheep trade to the Middle East. Well, in a matter of minutes, maybe half an hour, we'll get to see whether the Labor Party took a fair dinkum promise to that election, or whether it was hollow. We'll get to find out very, very soon whether the Labor Party genuinely cares about animal welfare and wants to eventually shut down the live trade, or whether the Labor Party does not care about animal welfare and, in fact, wants to line itself up with a couple of shipping companies and their mates, as far as this policy goes, on the opposition benches.</p> <p>That'll be the measure of the new government. I know that there are a lot of very good people in the new government. There are a lot of very good people on both sides of the chamber. There are an awful lot of people who support me and support my colleagues who are overtly calling for an end to this trade. Here's your chance to make amends. I say to anyone and everyone in this place: if you care about live animal exports, if you care about the terrible cruelty being experienced by Australian sheep on stinking hot ships, going to stinking hot countries at the height of the northern summer in the Middle East, when it's 50 degrees outside, what is it on the decks of these miserable hulks? Who knows? Something well north of 50 degrees. If you care about that, I say to my colleagues on both sides of the chamber: maybe even think of this as a conscience vote and vote to disallow the reduced ban on the export of sheep to the Middle East during the northern summer.</p> ~~<p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>~~ *The majority voted in favour of disagreeing* with a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2022-10-27.156.2):** > That the [Export Control (Animals) Amendment (Northern Hemisphere Summer Prohibition) Rules 2022](https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2022L00537) made under the Export Control Act 2020 on 5 April 2022 and presented to the House on 26 July 2022, be disallowed. To disallow with a motion is to stop it from having legal force. Because this motion failed, the rules will continue. ### Why was this motion introduced? Clark MP [Andrew Wilkie](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/clark/andrew_wilkie) (Independent), who introduced the motion, [explained his reasoning](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2022-10-27.156.2): > in April 2022—this year!—the then coalition government made regulations which effectively reduced the live-export prohibition period during the Northern Hemisphere summer? I remind members that those regulations made by the previous government allowed Australian exporters to take sheep through the Red Sea to Israel for that two-week period from 1 to 14 June, which had been previously banned. Moreover, in terms of the ban on exporting to some Persian Gulf destinations, including Qatar—although not the major live export ports of Oman and Kuwait—live exporting was allowed to begin a week earlier, on 22 May, this year. Effectively, this means there was an 11-day reduction in the prohibition on exporting sheep to Qatar and a 14-day reduction in the prohibition on exporting sheep to Red Sea destinations.

~~Andrew Wilkie~~
~~I move:~~
That the Export Control (Animals) Amendment (Northern Hemisphere Summer Prohibition) Rules 2022 made under the Export Control Act 2020 on 5 April 2022 and presented to the House on 26 July 2022, be disallowed.
The northern summer export ban for sheep was introduced in 2019, banning exports between the whole of June and the whole of September. This was a response to the 2018 McCarthy review into the conditions for the export of sheep to the Middle East during the Northern Hemisphere summer. That McCarthy review found that a ban should apply on all shipments between May and October due to the extreme heat stress suffered by the sheep on those vessels. That review was, in turn, a consequence of the 2017 Awassi Express scandal, when about 2½ sheep perished on the Awassi Express export vessel.
I would remind all honourable members of the terrible conditions that were revealed on the Awassi Express, which were made public in 2018. Who can forget the shocking—they are genuinely shocking—images that were revealed to the public after that voyage? Sheep and lambs were literally drowning in shit and urine—terrible conditions on that vessel. Sheep were panting uncontrollably, constantly, all day and all night. They were as graphic demonstrations of animal cruelty as anyone has ever seen in this country. It was entirely reasonable that the government of the time established the McCarthy review and that, as a result of the McCarthy review, a ban was put in place on the export of sheep to the Middle East during the Northern Hemisphere summer.
I tell all that background because it's very, very important for honourable members to understand the ban was based on expert advice and science. It wasn't a knee-jerk reaction; it wasn't some sort of emotive response to the sight of an animal suffering. It was based on expert advice and science. How, then, do we explain that in April 2022—this year!—the then coalition government made regulations which effectively reduced the live-export prohibition period during the Northern Hemisphere summer? I remind members that those regulations made by the previous government allowed Australian exporters to take sheep through the Red Sea to Israel for that two-week period from 1 to 14 June, which had been previously banned. Moreover, in terms of the ban on exporting to some Persian Gulf destinations, including Qatar—although not the major live export ports of Oman and Kuwait—live exporting was allowed to begin a week earlier, on 22 May, this year. Effectively, this means there was an 11-day reduction in the prohibition on exporting sheep to Qatar and a 14-day reduction in the prohibition on exporting sheep to Red Sea destinations.
This was such a blatant political fix in the lead-up to a federal election. In fact, the previous government implemented the changes to regulations not just before the May election this year but also before a review into the live export trade was finalised by the department. It was a political fix. The question now is: what will the new government do in response to this disallowance motion? The new government—the Labor government—of course went to the federal election with a promise—a policy—to, over time, wind up the live sheep trade to the Middle East. So you would think logically that the government will support this disallowance motion. For the government to have gone to an election with that promise and not to support this disallowance motion would be a remarkable turn of events, and it would suggest that the new government is happy to continue to walk both sides of the track when it comes to animal welfare.
The choice today is really simple and really clear. Either the government will support this disallowance motion and be pro animal welfare or the government will come in here and not support this disallowance motion and be anti animal welfare. That is the challenge confronting this government. I say 'challenge'. I don't think it should be a challenge; it should be a straightforward matter. Will the government continue to kowtow to the live animal export industry—as was the case for the previous nine years by the previous LNP government—or will the new government come in here, show some backbone, show some humanity, show that it's prepared to deliver on its election commitment to, ultimately, wind up the live animal export trade and, in the interim, do everything it can to make it more humane until it is wound up?
It begs the question: why are we continuing this trade at all? We have an abundance of evidence that the live animal export trade, including the export of beef cattle to countries throughout South-East and North Asia, that it is systemically cruel. It goes back decades. There were a number of episodes in the 1990s. I can remember clearly in 2003 the Cormo Express scandal. That vessel called the Cormo Express bobbed around like a cork around the Middle East for a total of 80 days at sea and almost 6,000 sheep perished, not to mention all of the terrible suffering experienced by the tens of thousands of sheep that fortunately did survive. Turning from sheep to beef cattle for a moment, who can forget those images on Four Corners in 2011 of the barbaric mistreatment of Australian beef cattle in Indonesian slaughterhouses and the way those unfortunate cattle were treated? Thank heavens for the Animals Australia investigators. Thank heavens for the Four Corners ABC show that shone a light on the conditions being experienced by the beef cattle in Indonesia. Who can forget, in 2012, those images on the TV of Australian sheep in Pakistan being buried alive? Australian sheep were buried alive in Pakistan because we were happy to send our sheep off to these countries—all care, no responsibility.
Then of course, there was the 2020 episode with the Al Kuwait. I remind honourable members that the situation with the Al Kuwait was that in June 2020, the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment—and this is particularly relevant to this disallowance motion—granted an exemption to the northern summer live export ban which allowed approximately 35,000 sheep to be shipped into the scorching Middle East summer on the vessel Al Kuwait. The government's after-voyage report on that voyage stated that a thousand sheep were exposed to score 4 on the heat stress scale, which is the highest level on the scale. This means that those thousand sheep were panting with open mouths and tongues protruding. Score 4 had never before been recorded in one of the reports of those voyages. The reason that's relevant is that there was an exemption made to the Northern Hemisphere summer ban, and the report came back top of the scale, almost off the scale, when it came to the scientific measurements of the suffering being experienced by those Australian sheep on the Al Kuwait vessel.
How much more evidence do we need to know that the live animal export trade is cruel, systemically cruel, and the only way to end the cruelty is to end the trade? Moreover, the live export industry is simply not in Australia's economic best interests. We are shipping thousands of processing jobs overseas, even though we know there is the capacity in existing Australian abattoirs to process those sheep in our country. We just need to recruit and train more workers, providing more jobs.
The trade does not have public support. Sure, it's got the support of the National Party and the Liberal Party. Sure, it's got the support of a relatively small number of sheep and cattle producers. Sure, it's got the support of a couple of shipping companies running ships manned by foreign crews. A small number of people depend on this industry. But the opposite side of the coin is that many millions of Australians are appalled by the trade and look to the government, any government, to show some leadership, show some humanity, show some interest in animal welfare and shut it down.
We've got to stop peddling these myths that come out of the proponents for the trade. They say the animals are treated humanely. Garbage. They say that the trade is in Australia's economic self-interest. Garbage. They say that customers in the Middle East won't buy processed meat. But I remind members that, in 2019, 57 million kilograms of boxed Australian lamb and mutton was sold into the Middle East. I'll repeat that, because it's very, very telling: in 2019, 57 million kilograms of boxed lamb and mutton—processed meat—was sold into the Middle East. They love the stuff. They can't get enough of the stuff. Why don't we keep sending them more of the stuff, instead of live sheep? Because some advocates for live exports say, 'But these poor people in the Middle East don't have refrigeration.' That's racist nonsense. It's complete and utter nonsense. As long ago as 2011—11 years ago now—a survey found that almost all households in the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain had refrigeration. They live like us—probably better, many of them. They've got fridges. They're not all out in the back with a dirty big knife wanting a live sheep, to slit its throat.
There is the argument that there are religious considerations and that, due to religious beliefs, people in these countries will only buy a live animal, so that they can kill it and process it in accordance with their religious beliefs. Again, that is complete and utter nonsense. There are numerous Australian abattoirs that are halal certified. That helps to explain why, in 2019, we sent 57 million kilograms of boxed lamb and mutton into the Middle East.
I've tried many times to shut this trade down. In fact, I think at last count I've moved five private member's bills with the aim of shutting down the live animal export industry. Each and every time, my private member's bills have failed to gain the support of the Liberal Party, the National Party or the Labor Party. So imagine my delight when, before the most recent election, the Labor Party were quite clear that they support a wind-up of at least the live sheep trade to the Middle East. Well, in a matter of minutes, maybe half an hour, we'll get to see whether the Labor Party took a fair dinkum promise to that election, or whether it was hollow. We'll get to find out very, very soon whether the Labor Party genuinely cares about animal welfare and wants to eventually shut down the live trade, or whether the Labor Party does not care about animal welfare and, in fact, wants to line itself up with a couple of shipping companies and their mates, as far as this policy goes, on the opposition benches.
That'll be the measure of the new government. I know that there are a lot of very good people in the new government. There are a lot of very good people on both sides of the chamber. There are an awful lot of people who support me and support my colleagues who are overtly calling for an end to this trade. Here's your chance to make amends. I say to anyone and everyone in this place: if you care about live animal exports, if you care about the terrible cruelty being experienced by Australian sheep on stinking hot ships, going to stinking hot countries at the height of the northern summer in the Middle East, when it's 50 degrees outside, what is it on the decks of these miserable hulks? Who knows? Something well north of 50 degrees. If you care about that, I say to my colleagues on both sides of the chamber: maybe even think of this as a conscience vote and vote to disallow the reduced ban on the export of sheep to the Middle East during the northern summer.
~~Long debate text truncated.~~
The majority voted in favour of *disagreeing* with a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2022-10-27.156.2):
> *That the [Export Control (Animals) Amendment (Northern Hemisphere Summer Prohibition) Rules 2022](https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2022L00537) made under the Export Control Act 2020 on 5 April 2022 and presented to the House on 26 July 2022, be disallowed.*
To disallow with a motion is to stop it from having legal force. Because this motion failed, the rules will continue.
### Why was this motion introduced?
Clark MP [Andrew Wilkie](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/clark/andrew_wilkie) (Independent), who introduced the motion, [explained his reasoning](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2022-10-27.156.2):
> *in April 2022—this year!—the then coalition government made regulations which effectively reduced the live-export prohibition period during the Northern Hemisphere summer? I remind members that those regulations made by the previous government allowed Australian exporters to take sheep through the Red Sea to Israel for that two-week period from 1 to 14 June, which had been previously banned. Moreover, in terms of the ban on exporting to some Persian Gulf destinations, including Qatar—although not the major live export ports of Oman and Kuwait—live exporting was allowed to begin a week earlier, on 22 May, this year. Effectively, this means there was an 11-day reduction in the prohibition on exporting sheep to Qatar and a 14-day reduction in the prohibition on exporting sheep to Red Sea destinations.*