The Animal Welfare Amendment Bill passed its first reading on 19 October 2021 and was referred to the Primary Production Committee for further consideration and public feedback. The bill amends the Animal Welfare Act 1999 to ban the export of livestock (cattle, deer, sheep, and goats) by sea. The bill will ban live exports by sea from 30 April 2023. The explanatory note of the bill states that certainty around the commencement date of the ban will allow those involved in the export industry, including farmers, to plan and adjust their business models to account for the removal of the trade.
The Hon Meka Whaitiri, Associate Minister of Agriculture, spoke first in the debate, on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture, the Hon Damien O’Connor. She reported that the Government had commenced a review into the practice of live animal export in 2019. She added that the Government, having considered the independent Heron report into the sinking of the Gulf Livestock 1 in September 2020, decided to ban the export of cattle, deer, goats, and sheep by ship, with a transition period of up to two years. The Minister noted that, during the transition period, improvements would be made as per the recommendations of the Heron report, and longer-term improvements would be implemented as part of the livestock exports continuous improvements work programme.
Ms Whaitiri said, “The Government, like some in the farming sector, believes the livestock trade opens New Zealand and its farmers to long-term reputational damage no matter how high we set animal welfare standards for the voyages and everyone's best efforts. We acknowledge the economic benefits some farmers get from the trade, but support for it is not universal.” She said that, although those involved in the trade had made improvements over the years, “voyage times to the Northern Hemisphere markets will always impose animal welfare challenges” but that animals such as chickens would continue to be exported by plane as the travelling times were much shorter. The Minister explained that implementing the ban through primary legislation would enable people in the industry to give their views through the select committee process.
National Party members opposed the bill. Ms Barbara Kuriger, party spokesperson on agriculture, said it was “a knee-jerk reaction” to one incident and pointed out that live export can be done well. Ms Kuriger explained that, according to the regulatory impact statement, there are two approaches that the Government could have taken in response to the loss of the Gulf Livestock 1. The first would have been to “allow trade to continue, but with stronger regulations through maintaining strong animal welfare standards and enhancing New Zealand's long-term trade relationships”, with which, she said, the National Party agreed. She referred to the General Live Animal Export Official Assurance Programme of the Ministry for Primary Industries, stating, “I just want people to know tonight that the Ministry for Primary Industries have put some extra conditions on exporting livestock.” National’s Ian McKelvie spoke in opposition to the bill, too, saying that the live export trade meant New Zealand was able to benefit other food-producing nations by exporting a better class of livestock. He argued, “The other thing we could have done—and I know that people think this is too hard, but we most certainly could have had a significant influence on the treatment of those animals when they got to their destination.”
Green Party member Mr Teanau Tuiono spoke in favour of the bill. He said that live export subjected animals to cruel conditions, with few safeguards for their welfare. He cited recent analysis undertaken by The Guardian newspaper that revealed live export ships are at greater risk of sinking or grounding than standard cargo vessels. He explained, “Arriving alive doesn't mean animals don't suffer, and it's important that they are not suffering in pain as well. The journey also doesn't end once they are there; we don't know what's going to happen to them once they get off the boat, and so that's important to actually keep that in scope as well.”
Ms Brooke van Velden, representing the ACT Party, spoke in opposition to the bill. Citing the Ministry for Primary Industries’ analysis of the impact of the legislation, she noted that the economic losses would be significant. She stated that, while New Zealand can do better in terms of animal welfare, the bill takes a “heavy-handed approach”. She acknowledged the role that New Zealand plays in ensuring better standards are upheld around the world. She commented, “If it's not us that are providing livestock to other countries for their breeding programmes, somebody else will very quickly fill that void. Trade will simply go offshore. The problem won't go away.”
Labour member for Wairarapa, Mr Kieran McAnulty spoke in favour of the bill, however. He started by acknowledging the tragedy of the sinking of the Gulf Livestock 1 but said he believed it “disingenuous” to suggest the legislation was introduced solely in response to it. He said, “This legislation is much more far-reaching and much more looking into the future.” He argued that Opposition members do not represent all farmers, saying, “They may believe they do, but many farmers from my electorate have contacted me and said this is the right move.”
Thirteen members spoke in the debate. A party vote was held on the first reading, with the bill receiving 77 votes in favour (New Zealand Labour Party, Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand, Te Paati Māori) and 43 opposed (New Zealand National Party, ACT New Zealand). The bill was referred to the Primary Production Committee, which has opened the bill to public submissions until 2 December 2021.