Serious questions need to be asked if allegations of ship workers being paid to deliver animal cruelty vision onboard live export vessels heading to the Middle East are proven true.
Last week a series of alleged emails were leaked on conversations between Animals Australia and a ship worker on the highly-publicised Awassi Express journeys, plotting a campaign about how to obtain the vision and even a suggestion from a ship worker to turn off the ship's ventilation to capture footage.
On face value, the allegations that have been presented in a series of emails between the ship worker and Animals Australia, are explosive and getting to the bottom of the finger pointing is going to be like a massive game of corporate hide-and-seek.
We are pleased that Federal Agricultural and Water Resources Minister David Littleproud confirmed on Monday that the Federal Department of Agriculture has started to formally investigate the conditions on how footage was obtained.
The minister said if animals were deliberately mistreated for even one piece of footage then those responsible must be brought to justice.
But why has it taken until now to formally investigate?
Allegations that a ship employee was paid were made in Federal Parliament late last year by former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce and many in the industry have suggested that should have been the catalyst to start the investigation.
The fallout from vision onboard the highly-publicised Awassi Express has been huge and has become the foundation for a massive anti-livestock campaign that has been peddled out to all and sundry.
It has brought a lot of people into the debate who up until that point, and still to this day, have absolutely no idea about how live export, animal welfare and farming works.
Media commentators, politicians and the uneducated have all been pushing the anti-live export message based on the vision they had seen from the Animals Australia marketing machine.
Granted, there were pockets of the industry that needed to lift its game and since then they have done so.
Animals Australia has previously said it did not pay anyone for onboard ship vision of heat stressed sheep.
Similar claims about payments to people to film Australian cattle at Indonesian abattoirs in 2011 have also surfaced and that footage brought the live cattle export industry to its knees.
If it is proven that payments from any organisation incentivised people to deliberately misrepresent the live export industry, then everyone who is invested in the live export industry has the right to demand answers and seek compensation.
Maintaining a high standard of welfare is one thing, and is welcomed, but if it is proven that underhanded tactics have been employed in any animal welfare campaign, then the people responsible need to fall on their sword.
And if any organisation is found guilty on providing cash incentives and they currently enjoy charity group status, that privilege should also be stripped.
Farm Weekly revealed last week that Animals Australia spent $4.4 million in the 2017-18 financial year in its anti-live export campaign, driven largely on the back of this footage.
It's time for the national ag industry to fight back, protect its heavy investment and say enough is enough.
- Darren O'Dea, Farm Weekly editor
