‘Biosecurity isn't a bargaining chip': Farmers push back on using beef to butter up Trump
Farmers insist that the nation's strict biosecurity regime must not be watered down to appease Donald Trump, following news that the Albanese government will make moves to enable US beef exports into Australia as part of a plan to gain an exemption from the US president's tariffs.
This masthead revealed on Friday that changes to controls on US beef imports would be made via an ongoing biosecurity rule review, as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese prepares to meet Trump later this month.
National Farmers Federation president David Jochinke said Australia's disease-free status was crucial for Australia's $20 billion red meat sector, which depends on its clean reputation to export around 75 per cent of its product to countries around the world.
'Let's be abundantly clear, our biosecurity isn't a bargaining chip. We have the world's best standards, backed by science, and that's how it needs to stay,' Jochinke said.
Australia is seeking exemptions to the US's sweeping tariff regime. The Trump administration has imposed 50 per cent tariffs on Australian steel and aluminium imports and a 10 per cent impost on all other goods.
Loading
US beef was banned from Australia in 2003, following an outbreak in cattle of mad cow disease – an illness that can cause a fatal brain disorder in humans. The ban was lifted in 2019, as the mad cow outbreak subsided, but a key sticking point remains.
The US beef industry wants export access for cattle that has been raised in Mexico and Canada but slaughtered in the US – a common practice for the nation's vast number of beef abattoirs.
However, Australian biosecurity officials have not approved exports from these countries, and farmers are wary that their export access could be compromised if diseases like mad cow or foot and mouth get in. The federal government has estimated that a foot-and-mouth outbreak could cost the economy $80 billion.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
21 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
Albanese Government's accused of 'huge inconsistency' over ‘unprecedented' decision to impose sanctions on two Israeli government ministers
The Albanese Government is facing questions over its 'unprecedented' decision to impose sanctions on members of a democratically elected government. Foreign Minister Penny Wong revealed on Tuesday that Australia was one of five Western countries imposing sanctions on Israel's National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich. The Albanese Government is joining the governments of Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and Norway in using Magnitsky-style laws to freeze the assets of the two MPs, who are accused of encouraging settler violence towards Palestinians in the West Bank. Ben-Gvir and Smotrich represent hardline, pro-settler parties on the fringe of Israeli politics, but they have gained prominent positions in the current coalition government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Speaking to Sky News Australia on Wednesday, veteran press gallery journalist Chris Uhlmann said the use of the sanctions was 'unprecedented'. Uhlmann said support for Israel's right to defend itself did not mean people had to agree with everything the Netanyahu government does, particularly not the 'most extreme voices' in the government, but that Smotrich and Ben-Gvir were still part of a 'democratically elected government'. 'I don't think that we have ever imposed sanctions on a democratic government's ministers before,' Uhlmann said. 'And it does open this particular problem for our government, which is consistency. 'If this is to be the approach, where are the sanctions against the Chinese ministers who are responsible for the treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang province, where a UN committee decided that that constituted crimes against humanity… people working in slave labour.' 'If you're going to open this door and sanction governments for their treatment, particularly of Muslim populations, where's the consistency and where is the Australian Government's statement on Chinese ministers and sanctions against them? 'There's a huge inconsistency here.' The veteran journalist said the decision also raised questions about how the government could separate the actions of members of Netanyahu's government from Netanyahu himself. 'These ministers support his government - his government would be extremely fragile without them,' he said. 'So how can you separate the leader of the government from his ministers on this and just say, 'Well, no, we're just targeting this part and not the rest'. 'You're opening a very, very wide door now, and it does have consequences.' In announcing the sanctions, Foreign Minister Wong said the two Israeli ministers had 'incited extremist violence and serious abuses of Palestinian human rights'. 'Extremist rhetoric advocating the forced displacement of Palestinians and the creation of new Israeli settlements is appalling and dangerous. These actions are not acceptable,' Minister Wong said. The sanctions have been condemned by the United States, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio stating that the sanctions 'do not advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire, bring all hostages home, and end the war.' Magnitsky-style laws – which allow the government to target individual members of foreign governments – were introduced by the previous Coalition government in 2021.
Sky News AU
22 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
‘Will go through the courts': Immigration protests escalate further
Adoni Media Leisa Goddard discusses the recent immigration protests in Los Angeles. 'Now you've got the Governor and Trump fighting, and Trump saying he's out to liberate LA,' Ms Goddard told Sky News host Chris Kenny. 'This will go through the courts, no doubt there'll be a fight there because the Democrats will want to push it that way.'
Sydney Morning Herald
36 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
People spent hours queueing, but In-N-Out's Aussie pop-up is more about business than burgers
It's not often you'll see people queue up to enter a pub before 9am on a weekday, but on Wednesday, Sydney's Coogee Bay Hotel was no ordinary pub. It was, for those who had at least $8 and time to spare, perhaps their only chance to taste American chain In-N-Out Burger for themselves. Should the fast food franchise decide to bolster its fleet of 418 United States stores with a permanent outpost on Australian shores, it's clear that decision would be warmly received by foodies. But the suits behind the cult brand have been sitting on that knowledge, without acting on it, for more than a decade. Last year, hundreds of Canberrans waited more than two hours in the blazing February sun for a chance to taste the signature 'Animal Style' burger. A week later, the same thing happened in Brisbane; the year before, all menu items sold out in Melbourne within half an hour, and in 2016, Sydneysiders were turned away 30 minutes before a Surry Hills pop-up even opened because it had already sold out. In-N-Out Burger − which has held various trademarks in Australia since 1993 − has known demand is present Down Under since its first Australian pop-up in 2012. Unlike compatriots Five Guys, Wahlburgers, Hungry Jack's (FKA Burger King) and Wendy's, however, a bricks-and-mortar store lasting more than six hours has yet to materialise on our boundless plains.
