The validity of animal welfare organisations being classed as charities has been called into question after incidents of members allegedly being complicit in illegal activities.
This issue was highlighted at the recent, live sheep export phase-out panel meeting in Perth, when a young activist stood up and said she had a sheep rescue sanctuary that housed more than "200 rescue sheep".
"Many of them were saved directly from live export," she said.
The woman claimed two of the sheep were saved after jumping off separate trucks on the dock in Fremantle.
During Senate Estimates hearings in Canberra in May, Australian Pork Limited (APL) chief executive officer Margo Andrae, shared some of the experiences producers, she and fellow APL staff had been subjected to by animal activists.
"I need to be really clear that people are allowed to have a voice," Ms Andrae said.
"People are allowed their opinions.
READ MORE:
"We don't even mind your food choice.
"It is your choice.
"But in no way do you have a right to violate people's private space and their personal reputations when they are doing the right things.
"Our businesses are family based businesses.
"These people have taken photos of my team celebrating International Women's Day, put it on separate social media and called them murderers.
"That is not acceptable."
One instance Ms Andrae recalled an activist entering their office pretending to be a plumber, to get access and hide in toilets, to lay in wait.
She said personal and social media threats were constant.
"These people need to be called out," she said.
"They represent very little in this country, probably less than four per cent.
"This behaviour is not acceptable."
At the time extra security was in place at Parliament House because of Ms Andrae's attendance and the heightened threat of activist activity.
LiveCorp chairman Troy Setter said while they hadn't received the level of concerning and threatening behaviour that Ms Andrae had recently, he has had death threats in the past.
"We've had security at our office in the past and things like that with people trying to break in and put graffiti on our office and those sorts of things," Mr Setter said.
"We've certainly had, and in recent times as well, activists breaking into live export facilities.
"I know that in my own company all the gates have to be locked.
"People have to lock their houses at night.
"There are certainly break-ins.
"People regularly fly drones over and do those sorts of things."
Mr Setter said it was his personal view that charity status of organisations that break and enter and harass and attack people or divert funds to those who do, should be stripped.
"They should not have that charity status," Mr Setter said.
"We should class proper animal welfare organisations separately to activist organisations and challenge those that get substantial amounts of money that do not go towards animal welfare but go to TV marketing or paying executives.
"Substantial amounts of money go to media and marketing campaigns.
"They should be called out for what they are and lose their charity status.
"They raise money on the perception that they spend that money on animal welfare.
"They don't spend a cent in country or in market on infrastructure or training."
The animal welfare bodies that currently operate as charities across Australia fall under the category of:
Preventing or relieving the suffering of animals.
Some examples of charities that prevent or relieve animal suffering include:
- Animal protection societies
- Animal refuges and shelters
- Organisations that protect endangered species
- Animal hospitals
- Scientific bodies studying animal behaviour.
The Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) gives a very thorough set of guidelines for charities to operate under in Australia.
It says charities should not mislead the public regarding the use or destination of funds raised, or about the need for donations.
"For example, a charity should not solicit donations with a statement that '100 per cent of contributions will benefit those in need' if, in fact, a portion of donations will go towards its administration costs," the ACNC website states.
"Charities should not mislead the public when referring to studies or statistics to support the need for donations.
"A charity should ensure there is a reasonable basis for any statistics quoted or research referred to for the purposes of soliciting donations.
"Charities should also be transparent in relation to their fundraising arrangements, particularly where this impacts where contributions end up."
Australian Livestock Exporters Council CEO Mark Harvey-Sutton said it was worth noting that the RSPCA had done nothing in regards to the extremist activity.
"The silence from the RSPCA has been deafening," Mr Harvey-Sutton said.
"They have not called it out.
"As a legitimate organisation they should be calling out this extremist behaviour especially since it is being displayed by activists claiming to share the same views."
