Senator STERLE (3:48 PM) —I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate, but I have to take Senator Colbeck’s claims to task. I cannot let them slip through. It is just not true that it has been an absolute debacle. It was a very emotive couple of weeks of hearings—I would not argue with that. A massive scare campaign has been put out by the opposition, but everyone out there has to understand that the government consulted with industry. With my background in representing transport workers for all those years, I do not see anything more credible than the government’s consulting with industry. The industry came and worked hand in hand with government to see how the heck we could improve the situation.

In defence of the previous government, they were right to put the blanket bans on in whichever year they did that—you would remember the year better than me, Mr Acting Deputy President. They were correct to do that, but since then the science has changed. The science has improved. The science showed that we could import meat from these countries. There is no argument about that.

I would like to spend a minute defending the standing of Mr Greg Brown from the Cattle Council of Australia, who came before us on a number of occasions. Mr Brown took a lot of heat from senators opposite. Some of the questioning from some of the opposition senators was very good, but some of the attacks on Mr Brown’s persona were nothing short of disgraceful. I know that it is an emotive issue, but Mr Brown’s being called a fool or being accused of not knowing what he was talking about and having his credibility carved up in a Senate hearing was nothing short of disgraceful.

Senator Heffernan —He called me an effing c!

Senator STERLE —Through you, Mr Acting Deputy President, I did not want to mention anyone’s names, but seeing that Senator Heffernan is going to lead with his jaw, let us call it as it is: Senator Heffernan was really very rude to Mr Brown. I shook Mr Brown’s hand, but if that hand had been around Senator Heffernan’s throat he would not have been so smart or so forward in attacking the man.

Senator Nash interjecting—

Senator STERLE —The chair of the committee, the Nationals Senator for New South Wales, Senator Nash, can come across as though butter would not melt in her mouth, but, my goodness, she was just a little better behaved than Senator Heffernan—I will give you that, Senator Nash. But I spoke to Mr Brown the other day. I do not think he would mind me saying that he rang me, very upset, on the Friday after the hearing, to tell me that he wished he could have the opportunity to turn the attack back onto those National and Liberal senators, given the way they conducted themselves in the hearing. He also said that he had had phone calls from Senator Boswell and from Mr Cobb, the shadow minister for agriculture and food security, and another person—I think it might have been the member for Maranoa, Mr Scott, and if not I will apologise to him—who were very concerned that industry had worked closely with the government and yet come under such a virulent attack from certain National and Liberal senators.

Once again, the government, in all fairness—and I take my hat off to congratulate Minister Crean—negotiated with industry. There are some senators on that side who are very badly suffering relevance deprivation syndrome. They just could not handle it that the beef industry had spoken. They did not like what was being said, so they ran the scare campaign. With the greatest of respect, I would also like to congratulate Minister Burke. Minister Burke has listened, and we as a government have listened, to concerns raised.

Opposition senators interjecting—

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT —Order! I remind senators on my left that they are all on the speakers list, so I suggest they make their comments in their allocated time.

Senator STERLE —Thank you, Mr Deputy President. I am used to the shouting and screaming from the other side. Thankfully, I do not lower myself to that standard. I have my chance to have my say—and I will—and they will have their chance.

We really have to understand what this means. Under the previous policy, it would have been a sin had we not revisited this blanket ban because, regardless of what will be said on that side of the chamber, if there was an outbreak in a country that had BSE then all meat would have to come off the shelf. There is no argument about that; the Hansard will show that.

Senator Heffernan interjecting—

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT —Order! Senator Heffernan, wait your turn. Senator Sterle has the call and you will have your chance later.

Senator STERLE —Quite simply, it is the truth: all meat would have had to have come off the shelf. The policy has not changed. I think it is very important that, while we congratulate Minister Burke for implementing an IRA, the government have made it quite clear that they will do whatever they can to expedite the time. Quite simply, let us not be fooled by those opposite: so far there have been no applications to import beef—none at all; not one. I know that upsets that lot over there but, anyway, that is the truth of the matter.

As I say once again, this is all about looking after our beef industry. To quote Mr Greg Brown from the Australian Cattle Council—and it is on the Hansard record—when I asked him whether he has been a producer for long: ‘Four generations’ was his answer. I find it disingenuous that a couple of farmers on the other side could think that someone with four generations of history in the beef industry would do anything to jeopardise a $7.1 billion industry. Sixty per cent of that $7.1 billion is export. As I have said, it has been a major scare campaign from those opposite.

Senator Heffernan —Why did you change your mind then, you dope?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT —Order! Senator Heffernan, you know the rules of this chamber; withdraw that.

Senator Heffernan —Sorry, Senator Sterle: I withdraw for saying ‘you are a dope’.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT —You are only compounding it, Senator Heffernan.

Senator STERLE —In between me shaking in my boots, thank you Mr Deputy President, I do appreciate the opportunity to continue what I was saying. As I was saying, the import risk analysis will now be part of the assessment. The IRA will provide further opportunities for public consultation. We know the game: those on the other side have made it very clear that whatever they can do to keep this alive, whatever they can do to stall the process, whatever they can do to put out a greater scare campaign, whatever they can do to mislead the beef industry and have them believe that the world is going to come crashing down, they will continue to do. They are continuing to do that. We will play the silly game. I will attend the hearings, no worries, and make up their numbers for them while they play to their constituents. Their dwindling importance in the bush has just been highlighted more and more. That is for them to sort out, not me.

In that time the government will also amend the current labelling regime for beef. I think that is a major concession. Let me take this opportunity to talk a little bit about the labelling. It can be a political football; it can be a hot potato. Some members of parliament can use it for their own vested interests and a grab on the six o’clock news. But this country should not be fooled into thinking for one minute that our biosecurity all lies on what the label says on the shelf. Let us get this very clear. I challenge those opposite to correct me if I am wrong. Our biosecurity, in the interests of this country, lies at the border—with the protocols, with the IRA and with all those systems in place—and not what it says on the shelf. What it says on the shelf should be a choice issue for consumers. That was another scare campaign being run in tandem here.

It is also imperative to take this opportunity to mention that we asked—and Hansard can be checked—everyone who came before us how many producers they represented. There was one group that kept coming back time and time again—it was like Groundhog Day—because it suited those on the committee from the other side of the chamber to keep rehashing the same scare campaign and the same vested interests who did not represent many growers at all compared to the Australian Cattle Council, the Australian Lot Feeders Association or AMIC, the major industry body. And when they did come to us, there was always a barrage of assault put on them. They could not help themselves. Even Senator McGauran could not help himself from lowering his standards and personally attacking a witness.

On that, I am glad to say that Senator O’Brien and I were part of the hearing. It was very interesting to have that hearing. It was good to hear from the industry. It was good to hear that the majority of industry had the opportunity to work closely with government. Regardless of what they say over that side, it was an industry decision and it was the right decision. Science has moved on. This is clearly a science argument. There are no ifs or buts about that. You cannot argue against science, although you like to. (Time expired)