❓ A parliamentary question regarding live export of ewes, focusing on animal welfare concerns and the Minister's actions to address them. The Minister's response outlines previous efforts, challenges faced, and future intentions.
AnsweredQoN 1123Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Has the minister seen the 60 Minutes feature on Australia’s live exports that sparked this week’s rally on the steps of Parliament House? (2) In 2001 did the minister undertake to lobby fellow agriculture ministers to stop the export of ewes in an effort to reduce cruelty to export animals? (3) Why was this effort unsuccessful? (4) Since the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand meeting in 2001, what else has the minister done to try to deliver on his promise of banning the export of ewes? (5) On Tuesday, 12 August 2003, what undertakings did the minister make to the representatives of People Against Cruelty in Animal Transport and the meatworkers union in the heat of the rally on the steps of Parliament House to stop live exports? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(2) In 2001 did the minister undertake to lobby fellow agriculture ministers to stop the export of ewes in an effort to reduce cruelty to export animals? (3) Why was this effort unsuccessful? (4) Since the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand meeting in 2001, what else has the minister done to try to deliver on his promise of banning the export of ewes? (5) On Tuesday, 12 August 2003, what undertakings did the minister make to the representatives of People Against Cruelty in Animal Transport and the meatworkers union in the heat of the rally on the steps of Parliament House to stop live exports? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(3) Why was this effort unsuccessful? (4) Since the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand meeting in 2001, what else has the minister done to try to deliver on his promise of banning the export of ewes? (5) On Tuesday, 12 August 2003, what undertakings did the minister make to the representatives of People Against Cruelty in Animal Transport and the meatworkers union in the heat of the rally on the steps of Parliament House to stop live exports? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(4) Since the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand meeting in 2001, what else has the minister done to try to deliver on his promise of banning the export of ewes? (5) On Tuesday, 12 August 2003, what undertakings did the minister make to the representatives of People Against Cruelty in Animal Transport and the meatworkers union in the heat of the rally on the steps of Parliament House to stop live exports? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(5) On Tuesday, 12 August 2003, what undertakings did the minister make to the representatives of People Against Cruelty in Animal Transport and the meatworkers union in the heat of the rally on the steps of Parliament House to stop live exports? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(2) In 2001 did the minister undertake to lobby fellow agriculture ministers to stop the export of ewes in an effort to reduce cruelty to export animals? (3) Why was this effort unsuccessful? (4) Since the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand meeting in 2001, what else has the minister done to try to deliver on his promise of banning the export of ewes? (5) On Tuesday, 12 August 2003, what undertakings did the minister make to the representatives of People Against Cruelty in Animal Transport and the meatworkers union in the heat of the rally on the steps of Parliament House to stop live exports? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(3) Why was this effort unsuccessful? (4) Since the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand meeting in 2001, what else has the minister done to try to deliver on his promise of banning the export of ewes? (5) On Tuesday, 12 August 2003, what undertakings did the minister make to the representatives of People Against Cruelty in Animal Transport and the meatworkers union in the heat of the rally on the steps of Parliament House to stop live exports? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(4) Since the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand meeting in 2001, what else has the minister done to try to deliver on his promise of banning the export of ewes? (5) On Tuesday, 12 August 2003, what undertakings did the minister make to the representatives of People Against Cruelty in Animal Transport and the meatworkers union in the heat of the rally on the steps of Parliament House to stop live exports? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(5) On Tuesday, 12 August 2003, what undertakings did the minister make to the representatives of People Against Cruelty in Animal Transport and the meatworkers union in the heat of the rally on the steps of Parliament House to stop live exports? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
I thank Hon Jim Scott for some notice of the question. (1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(1)-(2) Yes (3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(3) This effort was unsuccessful because it was not supported by other members of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council - formerly the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. (4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
(4) The council considered the issues surrounding the export of ewes and noted that if the relevant federal government order is followed correctly, the export of ewes raises no additional animal welfare concerns. I state very clearly that that was the view of the council. It is specifically not the Western Australian Government’s view and it is specifically not my view. The export of livestock from Australia operates under the authority of the federal Government, which has not seen fit to stop the export of ewes. Under these circumstances and in the absence of additional evidence against the export of ewes, it has been difficult to pursue this matter further. However, the member should not take that as a refusal by me to pursue the matter further; I intend to pursue it further. (5) In the first instance I reiterated my standing offer to both organisations to discuss how to progress this issue in the light of their ongoing concerns. I also stated that I was prepared to take up these issues - again - at Primary Industries Ministerial Council level. Although it was a lively exchange between members of the community and me, I also tried to make the point that I was not entirely comfortable with the position of Livecorp as an industry body and quasi-regulator of the live export trade. Members will understand that animal welfare within Western Australia is the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development, who is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002. I tried to make the point at the time that animal welfare is treated very seriously in Western Australia, and cruelty within our jurisdiction will not be tolerated. I have already made the point today on another occasion that, unless Australia is involved in the live export industry, we can play no real part in improving animal welfare standards in third-party markets. I am happy to make that point again. My recollection is that I referred to two other issues, one of which was that I would like to see Australian vets accompanying animals on all voyages. I also indicated that I would work towards increasing the level of transparency in reporting morbidity and mortality of animals en voyage. The opportunity to raise the second of those two issues will coincide with the commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s examination of the allegations made on the 60 Minutes program. An analysis of the mortality report that was provided for that voyage by the ship’s master obviously shows that the numbers provided as mortalities were six times higher than those of the veterinarian who was said to have blown the whistle. Someone in this situation is not telling the truth, frankly. A number of quite ugly allegations have been made about the way the evidence was falsely constructed to put together the 60 Minutes report. I will not build on those rumours. I certainly hope someone is seeking the facts of the matter. Clearly, serious questions have already been raised about the veracity of the figures in the mortality report used in the 60 Minutes program.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.