1. Australian Farm Institute is not independent. For all the criticism of previous studies financed by welfare groups - they have been performed by independent "auditors". Getting a publicly pro LE group to analyse LE is analogous to getting the tobacco industry to investigate lung cancer.
2. These seem to be the same old figures re jobs and value in live export. There is an urgent need for a new assessment of the impact of live export vs processing in the current state of low animal numbers. Abattoirs around the country are closing and jobs are disappearing. As for that old 10000 job number that appeared with not a skerrick of evidence but is now regarded as fact.....
3. The claim that live export and processing are separate markets is a very old chestnut and even the industry acknowledges that live export is directly competing for animals with processors in Australia and with Australian meat in overseas markets. (see Ross Ainsworth SE Asian reports on Beef Central).
4. The inflated, unsubstantiated claims about animal welfare are just the usual propaganda.
5. The real question is why did Keogh feel the need to write this in the first place? Why does the whole farming lobby defend live export so vigorously? And when is the productivity commission going to look at this so we can all get independent analysis as to the economic benefit (or otherwise) to Australia.