Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026
Mr RICK WILSON (O'Connor) (13:13): I acknowledge the minister for being here today and I thank her for taking an interest. Not every minister has. My home state of Western Australia—and, in fact, my electorate of O'Connor—is the region most affected by the government's disastrous live sheep export ban.
With the end of the summer shipping moratorium, the Middle East market would normally be clamouring for livestock, but there is not one single export vessel in Gage Roads. There is not one single order for WA sheep prior to the end of the year. Labor will maintain that the ban does not come into effect until May 2028 and that there is adequate time to transition.
But, effectively, the ban has already started. Shearers are out of jobs, transporters are selling their crates and stockies and exporters are waiting for orders for shipments that may never come. WA sheep numbers have fallen from 12.5 million in 2023 to 9.4 million today and are forecast to hit 7.6 million by 30 June next year.
This will have a dramatic effect on the price of sheep and sheep meat for export as well as domestically and a collateral negative effect on wool production. If anyone thinks this is just a WA problem, think again. Where do you think the sheep to restock eastern states farms after the current drought will come from?
WA, that's where. With part of this phase-out package earmarked to investigate long-distance land transport, and with the government putting animal activists before producers and consumers, you may not have that option for much longer on the east coast. With respect to the dramatic decrease in confidence and sheep numbers as a result of this ban, can the minister outline what the impacts, implications and repercussions will be for our farmers and the whole supply chain if this deeply concerning trend continues?
Can the minister outline what contribution the policy ban on live exports has made to this significant drop in WA sheep numbers? The Albanese government's decision to forcibly shut down Australia's live export industry is blatantly ideological and not predicated on any available evidence or science. From the moment this government were elected more than three years ago to when Labor rammed through their disastrous legislation in July last year to ban the industry by May 2028 and announced their woefully inadequate 'transition package', not one minister has been able to cite any data which justifies the end of this lawful and sustainable industry.
Government decisions on agriculture need to be based on facts, not extreme animal-activist agendas which hurt innocent people. Will the minister stop treating WA sheep producers with cruelty and contempt and please explain any scientific or animal welfare data which supports this government's policy to end live sheep exports? Labor's legislation to shut down live sheep exports, which was rammed through the Senate in a guillotined debate in July 2024, was followed by an announcement of a $139.7 million live sheep exports transition package in October 2024.
It is now October 2025. The policy has inflicted a devastating human toll across impacted regional communities in WA. Shamefully, it has thrown many livelihoods into uncertainty and turmoil.
Minister, has even $1 been received by any farmer, transporter, shearer or exporter from this package? Why has it taken so long for any funding to go out the door into the pockets of impacted farmers? Why have we seen such a contemptible lack of urgency from this government?
Has the government done any investigation into the mental health impacts this live sheep exports ban has caused for farmers and families? The Labor government's transition package sets aside $30 million for the Farm Business Transition Program. These grants supposedly encourage sheep producers to increase on-farm adoption and uptake of alternative farming systems and practices.
They require a matching co-contribution for the grants, which are capped at $75,000. This grant program opened yesterday, 15 months after the government rammed through its bill to ban the industry and a year after announcing the $139.7 million package. Minister, in relation to these grants, can you answer the following questions?
How many impacted producers in WA is the government expecting to apply for these grants? Why are impacted farmers and applicants required to provide a co-contribution to access this funding? How is it fair to those who've lost their livelihoods to have to find up to $75,000 of their own money to receive some assistance from the federal government?
Where are they expected to find this sort of money? There is a glaring lack of detail in terms of the sorts of projects or proposals the Farm Business Transition Program grants would actually go towards. Can the minister please provide examples on the specific activities an impacted farmer could reasonably undertake in order to access these grants?