 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Further implications
The Labor Opposition has promised that it would phase out live exports if it wins the next federal election.
Opposition agriculture spokesman Joel Fitzgibbon has claimed that once in government his party would phase out the live sheep trade by implementing a strategic industry plan which would create more meat processing jobs in Australia.
Mr Fitzgibbon has stated, 'I don't believe the live export of sheep has a future in Australia. 'By the industry's own admission..., mortality rates can't be controlled.'
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has rejected the Labor policy as economically irresponsible. Mr Turnbull stated, 'We are not going to be making emotional and reckless decisions that will put Australian farmers at risk. We should make decisions about our export industries with the benefit of science and information.'
The leader of the National Party, Michael McCormack, has warned that animals would be worse off if Australia were to ban live exports. He predicts that the market would become filled with nations that do not adhere to animal welfare practices.
McCormack has stated, 'Only Australia has an export supply chain assurance system so that animal welfare from paddock to plate is looked at, is observed, is monitored.'
The Greens have also announced a five-point plan which aims to end cruelty and expand jobs. Their plan has the support of the Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union (AMIEU).
The five points include the Government working with industry, farmers and meat works union which would ensure a smooth and successful transition away from exports to local processing and then trading boxed, chill meat.
The plan aims to boost skills and educate workers including Indigenous and other local meat processing workers to service a new and improved sheep meat processing industry in Western Australia's rural and regional areas.
Animal welfare organisations RSPCA and Animals Australia have both pledged to give the export industry $500,000 each, if they were to ban the exports, with the money being used to support farmers. It's believed that shutting down the practice would cost the Western Australian industry up to $150 million.
The live export trade has inflicted damage to Australia's reputation internationally. 3000 people rallied in Tel Aviv recently to call for a ban on animal exports from Australia to Israel.
It has been suggested that Australia's live animal export industry is likely to live or die in the arena of public opinion. Droughts in New South Wales and Queensland have increased Australia-wide support for stricken farmers; however, the animal welfare issue appears to be viewed separately.
An independent poll recently commissioned by the RSPCA found that some three in four Australians want to end live export, and more than nine in ten want to see long-haul live export standards improved so all animals can lie down and access food and water easily.
Interestingly, the poll also found almost seven out of every ten Australians in rural/country areas and towns also want to end live exports, and more people in rural and country towns than anywhere else (just under 95%) are concerned over the inadequacy of current standards.
These figures suggest that concern over live export is not, as Barnaby Joyce has suggested, an issue which divides rural and country Australia. Concern over the welfare of exported animals appears to extend across the country.
Further disasters of the type recently reported may erode support for the trade sufficiently that no major party will any longer support it.