While Western Australian livestock producers remain hopeful, the Federal Government has shown no signs of backing down from its policy to phase-out live sheep exports by sea.
The Nationals leader David Littleproud said Agriculture Minister Murray Watt had committed to providing more certainty by the end of 2023, but instead had continued to treat WA farmers with contempt by hiding crucial reports in cabinet.
He said the government was keeping the live sheep export industry in the dark in 2024.
The comments come after a freedom of information (FOI) request for a 230-page independent panel report into the consequences of phasing out the live sheep trade was denied in 2023, citing cabinet-in-confidence.
Mr Littleproud said Mr Watt needed to be transparent about the report this year, after a live sheep export phase-out panel travelled around WA last year, but drew criciticism for having failed to properly consult with the industry.
"I am incredibly disappointed that Labor sees fit to remain secretive about phasing out the live sheep export trade in 2024," Mr Littleproud said.
"If Mr Watt is so confident in his decision to phase out the industry, why won't he release details of the report?
"Labor is destroying the livelihoods of more than 3000 people who work in the trade and an industry worth $85 million."
Brookton producer Ellen Walker said farmers were worried about what would come in 2024.
"We are still in limbo-land," Ms Walker said.
"We were lucky enough to get some lambs on a boat to Saudi (Arabia) in November, but we still have two-year-old wethers waiting for a boat and the price of everything - from mutton to lamb - has fallen," Ms Walker said.
"Two years ago it was $200 for ewes and lambs, now I'm lucky to get $100 a head for cross-bred lambs and $40 for ewes.
"There is no market for store sheep and to top it off feed prices are ridiculous - oats are more than $500 a tonne, hay is about $300/t and pellets are over $400."
Farm groups have also written to Mr Watt pleading for a reversal of the ban, saying the reopening of trade into Saudi Arabia and prevailing market conditions had increased the possibility for east coast exports.
Industry feels the affect of the policy on prices, farmer confidence and the future of the WA sheep industry has been ignored, and many directly affected are angry the independent panel report was not available to them.
They also question why an Episode 3 report had not been released, yet a report by Pegasus Economics, commissioned for the same reason and entity, was available.
Pegasus director Alistair Davey and managing director Roger Fisher were contracted by the government to review existing economic studies on the WA live sheep export industry.
In December, a FOI request gave public access to emails between Mr Davey and Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry representatives, along with the contract details and two completed documents assessing all previous economic reports on the WA live sheep export industry.
The emails show the instructions provided by DAFF to Pegasus.
Mr Davey said in emails that his understanding of the project was to provide insightful and helpful commentary on the reports, with a view to assisting the panel in its understanding of the economic issues associated with a timeframe for cessation of the live sheep export trade.
"We do not envisage that our task is to provide an alternative position on the reports, but instead to highlight key takeouts, signpost significant issues, explain methodologies and provide commentary on strengths, weaknesses and potential gaps in the reports," Mr Davey said.
"We will seek to address complex economic and policy issues in non-technical language and are cognisant of the fact that the project must be completed by June 30, 2023."
DAFF outlined the requirements of the analysis as an assessment and summation of existing studies in relation to live sheep exports and suggested a separate guide/index/reference list of the relevant data or parts of each report, judged as worthy of the panel's consideration - and particularly identifying where the underlying assumptions or findings/conclusions were inaccurate or should otherwise be treated with caution (such as facts or figures).
In addition, Mr Davey checked whether it would be accepted and they reviewed Pegasus' own previous work.
"We would seek your guidance as to whether you want us to review our own previous reports, although we do readily acknowledge they were far from perfect," Mr Davey said.
As part of the reports DAFF requested the inclusion of a section on key assumptions.
"This would identify time periods data is drawn from, the assumptions used for the analysis (such as price of sheep) that were utilised in the report," the DAFF emails said.
"This would just need the information presented as points of fact rather than needing to validate the information used.
"As you indicated, please omit the commentary, that way the content remains aligned with factually summarising the reports," Mr Davey said this commentary was only removed from one of the reports and was included in the other.
"My recollection is material we were asked to remove from the first report (because it delved into commentary), was subsequently incorporated into the second report where commentary was permitted," Mr Davey said.
"A case in point was the lack of overlap between the northern cattle market and the live sheep export trade in relation to the report by ACIL Allen that was excluded from the first report but subsequently included in the second report."
When asked what he thought the major takeaway from the assessment of the previous reports was, Mr Davey said the WA Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development report's quality stood out.
"The reports by the WA Department of Agriculture/Primary Industries were of very high quality and unbiased in their assessment," Mr Davey said.
"However, there were differing levels of transparency among the various reports."
When asked if the analysis of all the reports had given him a better perspective or ideas on how this kind of analysis should be approached in the future, to increase accuracy, he referred to the need for clear methods.
"It is important to ensure that methodologies are fully transparent and able to be replicated to ensure they can be appropriately scrutinised and have integrity," Mr Davey said.
It is not known how much, if any, of the information contained in the Pegasus Economics reports or the Episode 3 report was utilised in the final report compiled by the independent panel.
A DAFF spokesperson said the panel was asked to examine matters, including but not limited to, the economic impact of the phase out, agricultural production systems and onfarm management.
"The panel deliberately sought to consider all viewpoints by inviting input and contributions from a wide variety of sources and drawing on a range of research, analysis and data," the DAFF spokesperson said.
"The independent panel commissioned several reports to inform its deliberations, including from Episode 3.
"No single piece of analysis provided the panel - in its mind - with a definitive view.
"The results of any analysis will vary depending on the data used and modelling assumptions.
"The department notes, all reports commissioned by the panel should be seen as the work of the respective consultants and should not be seen as representing the views of the independent panel nor the Commonwealth."
