As reported, the federal Agriculture Minister had the awkward task of confirming that the government intended to phase out sheep exports, but would do so in an orderly way “after consulting the industry”, although no action would be taken during the current term of government.

The government has appointed a panel, which is part of the “phasing out”.  The result so far of its “consulting the industry” is that the industry, backed up by the 3,000 people and their families dependent on the export, is against the ban.

Governments have a tendency to claim that winning an election gives a party a mandate to do anything and everything in its publicised policy.  To make that claim is unrealistic, and makes no allowance for priorities and for legislative action, both domestic and international.

Spokespeople for the government are saying that the banning of the export sheep trade is a part of ALP policy, and the party has, therefore, a mandate to act.  That is, they won an election, with that in Labor’s policy.

But the chairman of the Australian Livestock Exporters Council (ALEC) points out that the ALP had this commitment in its policy before the 2019 election and they lost that election.

Since 2019, the industry representatives make the point, they have tightened the conditions so that animals are treated more humanely.

While animal activist bodies claim that a survey they commissioned showed that Western Australians were against the trade, surveys commissioned by the industry tell a different story of Australians recognising the value of live export to the community.  They found that live exports were seen as an important part of agriculture, and there is strong public confidence in the enforcement of standards in this industry.

The Agriculture Minister has confirmed that Labor’s action in banning the live export trade in cattle was found by the Federal Court to be illegal.  The ALEC submission to the Phasing-in Panel points to the possibility of legal action, in part on the basis that the banning of sheep export would be in breach of Australian law and also the World Trade Organisation (WTO) provisions which Australia had signed up to.  Thus, there is the threat of a class action, and challenge through WTO.

The ALEC submission says that there is no publicly-available analysis undertaken by the Australian government quantifying society’s willingness to pay to cease live sheep exports.  On the contrary, the research conducted on a platform developed by CSIRO found the public confidence spoken of above.

An interesting point is made in the ALEC submission.  Legal sections of the government are seeking to negotiate a compensation amount, which will have to be paid by the taxpayer in the end, following the Gillard government’s ban on the live cattle export in 2011. At present, the government’s figure indicating willingness to compensate is vastly inferior to the industry’s figure.

Any prospect of a free trade agreement or similar with the Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC) will be affected adversely.  The current situation is that Australian livestock imports enter member states of the GCC without customs duties, whereas frozen and chilled meat have to meet significant tariff duties.  This could also affect other agricultural and non-agricultural industries.

Industry sources do not deny that the figures for Australian export of sheep have gone down appreciably, but say there is a chance of the Middle East markets increasing over time, e.g. Saudi Arabia is contemplating a return to the trade.

The conclusion of the submission, verbatim, is: “It would be highly concerning if the Australian Government decided to prioritise activist agendas over the overwhelming evidence of reform and improvement”.

This article appeared in The Buloke Times, 30 June 2023.