Comment on ABC 2025 Election Watch Party
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks agoAh, sorry… the “negative effects of the ban” are the deleterious effects on graziers. There are many farmers who had a flock worth $500k which is now worth $100k. Some large graziers are not breeding more sheep because they can’t sell the ones they have.
A lot of these operations are big businesses and in some cases the existing format just isn’t viable any more.
As I said I’m not very sympathetic because that’s just how things go if you want to run a business, but it’s definitely a big deal for some people.
For example, a farmer might be in their late 60s and saying “I’ve been working with sheep for 50 years and it’s all I know” and for their farm to continue they need to transition to cropping or some such.
One silly argument against live export that I heard some people parroting is that if Australia doesn’t do it some other country will and the standards of care for the sheep will be much lower than ours. That’s just bullshit IMO.
The requirement for live export is, as in all things, a money thing. It’s cheaper to ship them live because you don’t need refrigeration, and you don’t need Australian-Standards-Compliant abattoirs paying Australian wages.
Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
Yeah, there’s definitely a risk premium that can come into proceedings where decisions and their implementations are rolling through quickly, can’t think of a specific international example… oh wait, yes i can :)…, but the policy for the live export ban is super slow, predictable and with plenty of finacial supports.
Even if that did happen, big if, thats happening all over the world in all kinds of areas. We can only control what we do, and attempt to set a better example where we can. It is such a bullshit, and cynical argument. As soon as i hear that, i generally start thinking the other person is debating in bad faith.
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
I actually just had a read of some of the submissions from farmers.
I’ll be honest in that they do raise some compelling points. Notably, as a major exporter Australia presently sets the standard of care for all nations, so I think there is some truth to the idea that animals will suffer more after we withdraw.
However, I hadn’t realised that a phase out is in place. 3 years doesn’t seem an unreasonable period in which to transition.
Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
That is an interesting perspective. A kind of standard setter position can be hard to quantify. Is it better to be in the tent or outside.
But thats really been the heart of the issue for over a decade, its a key decision that i wish the emotional barbs would give more space to, because its omportant to get right.
I’ll say the industry was put on notice during the Gillard Government over live sheep export that thjbgs needed to change, and a lot of changes seemed to be made from Austraoia’s end.
But the underlying issues after hand over i can’t see have changed much. So isuppose you could take that as a point against that case that Australias influence lifts the standards of all in this area. But thats a circumstantial point at best.