Live Export - Andrew Wilkie heads north

A long heralded fault of Andrew Wilkie was long held lack of desire to actually head north to meet people in the industry, rather stay between Canberra and Hobart firing shots into the Live Export industry.

Now he's headed north.

What does this mean? Depends on your view. I'm not sure what Anti Live Export people think and so far they're pretty quiet on the idea, or rather the very strongly potentially obsessed anti trade brigade. Very silent.

What did Wilkie think or say?
(Well taken from the ABC Country Hour he's made a coupla of comments worth deeper look see.

"I've agreed to go on a vessel into Indonesia, not because I'm about to roll over and end my opposition to the live trade, but because I think it's important to look for ways to improve animal welfare practices with the system we've got,"

So his boat trip is not a back down or a roll over...its one simple thing to "look for ways to improve animal welfare practices with the system we've got" - I cannot wait til he reports back on possible improvements to practices with the system we've got. If its important, its only got important very recently. It was important for the last few years, only NOW is he going up there to do what he now claims is important. Odd...but then odd comments aren't new to the Member for Denison.

In the interview Mr Wilkie made a couple of odd comments. No surprise is his mention of his views on Live Export being "outspoken"...outspoken he is, but only now he heads north to do some important things? Odd.

He also oddly said "I believe and I think a great many Australians believe that its an inherently cruel" I don't doubt he does feel that way (whether its true or not) but how many is a great many? What that comment says is nothing more than what he thinks, a "kinda truth claim" which says & proves nothing.

He went onto say " that its not in Australia's economic self interest"
What is an isn't? It makes a profit for players involved, they pay taxes and duties where legally bound, employ people, employ businesses and underpin the economic stability in a number of communities with demonstrable flow on effects. If these things are not in the economic self interest, they must have no effect or bearing whatsoever or they are a drain on the national economy, best we can see, neither is the case. Its a legal and lawful industry and as such it is a wealth creator, a large employer and uses the goods and services of a number of suppliers and contractors. All GST heavy or Income Tax heavy. I call rubbish on that comment of Mr Wilkie.


"...and also it doesn't have majority public support around the country."
Well is that correct? No really there's another truth claim and lets just test it to see if its valid or if its fertiliser.
1) Who tested the majority of the public around the country to get a result either way? (Answer no one but he'd like you to think there was a survey or some other data that's says the majority are against it)
2) He unsuccessfully submitted a bill to stop Live Animal Export and it failed. The level of people in the streets, the public disobedience, the demonstrations...well they didn't actually amount to over 50% of the people, not even 10% of the people...how do we know, well...we don't there are no numbers or data to draw on but if what he says were even remotely true, then the majority of the successful electorate representatives ALL went against their constituents. This would be Russia crossed with North Korea and force fed steroids...It just isn't a proven truth. He says odd things.
3) What actually is this support he speaks of? The import trade that brings in plastic combs can't be pointed to as having 'majority public support'  - Actually it would be more accurately said to have an unknown level of support or maybe arguably a level of staggering indifference amongst the public. (which might lend understanding why we see footage of cruelty, some of it years old and no longer relevant, popping up to help maintain the rage)
4) If he's in the right, if the Majority of Australians are against Live Export but the majority of the Members of Parliament did not support his bill/s, then the majority of the MPs & Senators are either ignorant, corrupt or utterly inept. Now he hasn't made that claim, quite wisely. Some suggest it was a matter of bolstering his political position, ala political re-electiveness that caused the bill to be put, not the likelihood of it ever being support let alone passed. He wisely didn't declare them to be corrupt or inept. He was going through the motions and largely was left untackled by fellow members.

He also mentioned he has unsuccessfully tried to introduce a private members bill to introduce stunning to all animals prior to slaughter overseas where those animals are of Australian origin.
He went onto say that these bills represent his interest in finding solutions or rather improvements because some reform is better than none.

Again odder than $3 bill. No mention is made of the bill failing to get reasonable support, the bills failed and that's it. How one can legislate the standard operating procedures of a foreign slaughter house is a question that goes begging. Clearly we have no sovereign authority to force overseas workers to do anything that resembles Australian best Practices. Indeed we cannot halt the export of any raw material that will end up in overseas factories where workers paid less than Australian workers would here. Nor can we dictate the workplace agreements, the practices, terms & conditions of employment. Trade Unions here are trade unions HERE. They don't go on strike to get better conditions for workers in India, China or Korea.

The bill failed because not many MPs thought it was any good as a piece of legislation. It was a dud presentation, with dud potential of outcomes and had sovereign border issues. With that in mind we either have a completely inept parliament, a completely corrupt parliament on the take OR (and most likely) we have a parliamentarian who puts forward a dud bill that had no hope in hell...but would sound most delicious to the parts of his electorate that are very Anti Live Animal Export or perhaps more accurate, the Anti Animal for Food set.

On the cost of processing in the north of the country he finally trips over into cost of production. The single biggest, most salient point that's been made non stop. Finally he's got it, but on the point of, as he put it sensibly that the cost of fully processing a beast here is $350/head. He then said its half that in the US, half again in Brazil and he then said its "probably" half again in China. He didn't mention the cost in the Middle East or Indonesia, but said "Our cost of production is very high, I don't know what the government can do to bring it down but it needs to do something or more businesses will go to the wall" - Ahh telling comment, it wasn't what the Australian people can do, it was what the government can do. Or in other words 'I dunno what the Liberal party can do but they have to do something". A nation builder or a half decent legislator would have said, we need some bi-partisan meetings to get the nation right on the production costs" but nope, he's just laid onus on any solution at the cabinet and would good reason, he's not thinking of anything else but delegation of impending blame.

What can we do Mr Wilkie? Make it a income tax free and GST free industry across the board? The industry gets full 100% tax deduction for every cost minor or great? We force workers to work for casual rates of $17/hour with a minor performance bonus? Maybe cheap labour from overseas? Or lets just cut all wages ACROSS THE WHOLE COUNTRY, EVERY JOB by 87.5% so we're in line with the PROBABLE costs and wages in China???

No, best to leave the devil in the lack of detail, call the Government out and avoid any solutions to any problems. At least he was half honest and said he wasn't going to change his mind based on one trip. I'm thinking that is 100% correct and their won't be another trip.

Its sad that Andrew Wilkie is really looking like a snake oil salesman, suring up electoral chances by gathering a ground swell in pockets of highly motivated, highly emotionally charged people who fall for what the snakeoil salesman peddles, and if he doesn't change the world, if he fails there's enough reasons to let him off the hook and others to be patsy.
If you're gunna put a private members bill it ought to be legislation for Australian soil. Duped they were, duped they'll stay and this trip is so Andrew Wilkie supporters can say "See he has been up there and it still stinks".

I think he's worked a few voters over with a bunch of dreadful slight of hand tricks. They swallowed it hook, line, sinker and jetty. Look closely though at what he says and what each sentence really means.

* Source - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-22/andrew-wilkie-topend/5211902