Australia’s peak body for sheep producers has criticised a parliamentary committee decision to give the green light to Labor’s proposed ban on live sheep exports.
In a joint statement, Sheep Producers Australia and Wool Producers Australia said the June 21 decision was “rushed, unprofessional, and thoughtless.”
It comes as the issue of livestock welfare came to the fore during parliamentary debate on June 24.
Sheep Producers Australia CEO Bonnie Skinner said the Inquiry into Export Control Amendment (Ending Live Sheep Exports by Sea) Bill 2024 would phase out an important supply chain link that provided jobs and support families, small businesses, and country towns.
“This committee-led green light to let the Albanese government enforce the live export ban of sheep by sea is both flabbergasting and insulting,” she said in a statement.
“The people on this committee have not listened to the impact this decision will have on communities or small towns.
Arguments For and Against Sheep Export Heard in Parliament
Debate during the parliamentary sitting period the next week focused on the welfare of sheep and the impact on communities.Labor MP Melissa Price spoke in support of the bill, saying Australians did not believe live export was in the best interest of animals.
“Australians expect Australia to have the world’s best animal welfare practices,” she said.
The member for Durack in Western Australia said she had received thousands of emails from constituents calling for an end to the practice.
Ms. Price referenced an incident earlier this year when the sheep ship MV Bahijah was turned back two weeks into its journey to Jordan, as a result of concerns about Houthi rebels attacking cargo ships in the Red Sea.
“With sheep still on board, the ship remained moored off the coast of Perth while the exporters sought permission to re-export the sheep to Jordan,” she said.
“The sheep suffered for five weeks in filthy, hot conditions leading to acute stress high respiratory rates and death before eventually being taken off the ship.”
Ms. Price said suffering was a frequent element of live export—saying there were reports some animals had drowned in their own waste.
She said the transition, set to take place on May 1, 2028, was being done carefully to give producers time, support, and the opportunity to look into processing meat locally for export.
The Western Australian MP says the industry is valued at 58 times the live export trade, and would trigger a boost in Australian jobs and profit from local slaughter.
In response, Nationals MP for the New South Wales electorate of Parkes, Mark Coulton, said pro-ban advocates focused on worse case scenarios.
“These ships now are world class, better than anywhere else,” he said of transport vessels.
Mr. Coulton argued Australia had ramped up its measures to ensure the wellbeing of sheep on ships, and that leaving a gap in the market would see it filled with livestock from nations without the same welfare standards.
“So, if we’re looking for welfare outcomes, don’t a sheep from Africa require the same amount of welfare as ones from here? Because there’s a big difference,” he told Parliament.
Mr. Coulton said he believed decisions such as the live sheep export ban were often made without regard for the wellbeing of those in the industry.
It is a sentiment shared by those in the business, including Sheep Producers Australia, who say government measures to help with the transition out of the industry are inadequate.
“The transition package, contingent with the passage of the bill, is inadequate and does not meet the stated objectives of the Albanese government to grow onshore processing or increase the value of production for Western Australian sheep producers, or protect the industry in any way,” Ms. Skinner said.
The Australian government has designated $107 million towards transitioning away from live sheep exports.
The motion was adjourned to be discussed again at the next sitting of parliament.
