Human and animal rights travel in the same boat

Michelle Grattan

IT SEEMS bizarre and even rather offensive to talk about asylum seekers and Australian cattle in the same sentence. But by a strange twist of events, Australia faces a similar problem with Asian neighbours in dealing with each of these issues The difficulty boils down to this: at the end of the day, it is extremely hard and probably impossible to control what happens on the ground in certain countries, whatever rules might be put in place.

The government is still negotiating its ''people swap'' with Malaysia. But documents last week show that a core question - protection of the human rights of those Australia sends there - is proving difficult to tie down.

On the cattle, the government has imposed a suspension on some Indonesian abattoirs after the horrific images shown on ABC's Four Corners. But critics say this halfway measure won't protect Australian animals.

The government has been prevaricating about when the Malaysia deal will be finalised. The leaked documents show why. Obviously the negotiations have been tough; the Malaysians want to call the shots and, it appears, have been reluctant to give adequate human rights guarantees.

At least that was the case late last month. The government and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, involved in the negotiating process, say things have moved on from the leaked draft, and that it is the final agreement (when it comes) by which the deal must be judged.

While that's true, the May 23 draft adds to the worries about the deal, because it gives an insight into the attitude of Malaysia, which has a known bad record on human rights. Also, even if the agreement contains protections and the UN authorities are involved, how can Australia be confident about what will happen to these people it sends to the back of the Malaysian queue, where they will stay for an unknown time? As Julia Gillard points out, it is a long queue - will we (and the UNHCR) still be following their fate in five years? If so, how?

Switching attention from human rights to animal rights, it is obvious the latter count for nothing in Indonesia's slaughter houses. To think there will be a quick change is fanciful.

The government has suspended exports to a dozen facilities and is requiring exporters to make declarations that animals won't be taken to them. Does anyone think this is some sort of foolproof system to prevent appalling cruelty to Australian cattle? Only if they are naive - or don't want to face reality. Clearly the partial suspension is inadequate. While these are the abattoirs that have come to attention, probably most of the more than 100 in that country will be bad. Further, Australian cattle go to Indonesian feedlots, and may stay there for a long time, before being sold around the country. How can their ultimate destinations be monitored?

The caucus, which engaged in its most passionate debate in years last week over the cattle cruelty, will discuss it again next week, with a motion on the table for a full ban of sales to Indonesia until it meets Australian standards. The RSPCA, Animals Australia and GetUp! are keeping the pressure on with an ad that started airing yesterday.

Unless the government does something extra, this issue will continue to be ugly for it in the party and in the community. As it should.


(2011-6-5/smh.com.au)