FIVE years on from the suspension of the live cattle export trade to Indonesia, many in the livestock industry are still struggling to regain the ground lost the day their industry was cut off at the knees.
It was on this day in 2011 that then Minister for Agriculture, Joe Ludwig, made what has proven to be one of the most damaging miscalculations of policy process the Australian agricultural sector has been dealt – a decision which has left a legacy of financial and personal pain.
This month-long suspension, executed sharply in the midst of community concern about the treatment of Australian exported livestock in Indonesian abattoirs, struck at the heart of the farming community.
It was, in many respects, one of the first times farmers had been judged not by their own actions, but those of persons in a different country, whose behaviour was clearly unacceptable and out of step with our own understanding and expectations of animal care and welfare.
It was also one of the first occasions the industry was subjected to trial by the internet, whereby social media became a highly influential tool to influence public policy through ‘clicktivism’.
There are, of course, some who will point to the ban as the kick in the guts the industry and government needed to heighten focus on the welfare of animals once they leave Australian ports and move into our customers’ supply chains.
Exporters themselves acknowledge this and have embraced and invested in the responsibilities that have come with the development and implementation of the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (ESCAS).
However, still today there is clear evidence demonstrating why the knee-jerk reaction to shut-down an industry should have at all costs been avoided and replaced by a more sophisticated and considered solution.
I could list each of these reasons, from the perversity of the terrible animal welfare conditions it imposed on cattle caught in transit without shelter or adequate food and water to Australia being perceived on the global stage as too risk prone to trade with.
But as an industry, live export and, more broadly, the livestock sector has done its darnedest to rebuild and to further cement Australia’s reputation for being a global animal welfare leader.
Yet five years after ‘A Bloody Business’ remains a bloody mess.
There is no escaping the financial and personal pain that remains for families and businesses across Australia whose incomes were crudely, and without warning, cut off and whose integrity was publicly questioned.
The legal action launched seeking compensation for those affected continues to drag through the court system all the while costing industry millions of dollars in what should be a solid phase of recovery.
That’s also money that could be invested in even greater advancements in animal welfare.
Both major political parties have now publicly stated the ban was a poor decision.
Labor has labelled its actions ‘regrettable’, and the Coalition continues to attack Labor in the Federal Parliament for imposing the ban, all the while avoiding its own responsibility to settle the legal case.
Sledging in the Parliament and political point scoring is not enough.
A line needs to be drawn under the government’s mistake and the legal case brought to a resolution, so that the live export sector can have some closure and Australian agriculture can continue to build on its reputation as a global leader in animal welfare, undistracted by ongoing legal battles.
On this anniversary, we remind our politicians that poor government decisions cost jobs and cost lives.
Regardless of which corner of politics the decision came from, all have an obligation to make it right so that those affected can rebuild.
Five years is long enough.