Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
A small percentage may be interested in what the CEO of Compassion In World Farming, has to say on the matter!
Factory farming and the cruelty that it entails is not restricted to any one continent, country, or culture. It is a global predicament, being both the biggest cause of animal cruelty and a major driver of environmental harm.
The concept of the European Union was born of a newfound hope for a prosperous future, free from war and poverty. Now, on the 23rd June, British citizens face a crucial decision on whether to remain in this union of diverse countries, or to break away and strive to be independent once again.
My organisation, Compassion in World Farming, is apolitical: our sole ambition is to change our broken food system that treats animals as commodities and trashes the environment while doing so. I have made it my life goal to improve the lives of animals worldwide, so when such complex political questions as these arise, I feel it is my duty to examine what the outcome might be for those who are unable to vote, yet will still be undoubtedly affected by the decision.
In the past, the UK has often taken a strong lead on implementing legislation to benefit farm animal welfare. Sadly, the UK government appears to have very little appetite for improving the welfare of farm animals recently, instead preferring to maximise production, productivity, and exports. It is clear from the government’s long-delayed 25-year plan for food and farming that animal welfare will not be a high priority when it comes to government policy going forward.
Other EU countries have started to overtake us. In December 2014, the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark produced a Joint Declaration to call for substantial animal welfare improvements at EU level. The UK did not sign. At the same time, the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark produced a Joint Declaration calling for a strengthening of EU law on animal welfare during transport, including an 8-hour limit on journeys to slaughter, which would greatly reduce animal suffering. The UK did not sign.
The EU is often a driver for advances in farm animal welfare. The ban on the barren battery cage for laying hens, and the Lisbon treaty recognising animals as sentient beings both come from European legislation. But when faced with 28 countries, each with their own internal problems and priorities, enforcing these laws can be a huge challenge. Thirteen years after the EU law requiring provision of enrichment and banning routine tail docking of pigs came into force, a proportion of pig farmers in many EU countries, including the UK, are still not complying.
In our fight against live exports, we have been told time and again that since animals are legally considered ‘goods’, it would be unlawful under EU regulations to ban the trade of live animals. And yet, if we left the EU, the trade would most likely continue. Indeed, trade between the UK and member states would then be governed by World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules, which, just like the EU regulations, prohibit trade restrictions on ‘goods’. Therefore, any attempt to ban live exports could face a challenge by the WTO, and without strong political will to see an end to the trade, any such move would be unlikely.
There are so many unknowns that it is impossible to say for certain whether animals would fare better inside or outside the EU. One thing I can say for sure, is that regardless of the outcome of the vote, Compassion in World Farming and myself will continue to do everything that we can to give the voteless a voice, and stand up for farm animals in the UK, the EU, and worldwide.
Factory farming and the cruelty that it entails is not restricted to any one continent, country, or culture. It is a global predicament, being both the biggest cause of animal cruelty and a major driver of environmental harm.
The concept of the European Union was born of a newfound hope for a prosperous future, free from war and poverty. Now, on the 23rd June, British citizens face a crucial decision on whether to remain in this union of diverse countries, or to break away and strive to be independent once again.
My organisation, Compassion in World Farming, is apolitical: our sole ambition is to change our broken food system that treats animals as commodities and trashes the environment while doing so. I have made it my life goal to improve the lives of animals worldwide, so when such complex political questions as these arise, I feel it is my duty to examine what the outcome might be for those who are unable to vote, yet will still be undoubtedly affected by the decision.
In the past, the UK has often taken a strong lead on implementing legislation to benefit farm animal welfare. Sadly, the UK government appears to have very little appetite for improving the welfare of farm animals recently, instead preferring to maximise production, productivity, and exports. It is clear from the government’s long-delayed 25-year plan for food and farming that animal welfare will not be a high priority when it comes to government policy going forward.
Other EU countries have started to overtake us. In December 2014, the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark produced a Joint Declaration to call for substantial animal welfare improvements at EU level. The UK did not sign. At the same time, the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark produced a Joint Declaration calling for a strengthening of EU law on animal welfare during transport, including an 8-hour limit on journeys to slaughter, which would greatly reduce animal suffering. The UK did not sign.
The EU is often a driver for advances in farm animal welfare. The ban on the barren battery cage for laying hens, and the Lisbon treaty recognising animals as sentient beings both come from European legislation. But when faced with 28 countries, each with their own internal problems and priorities, enforcing these laws can be a huge challenge. Thirteen years after the EU law requiring provision of enrichment and banning routine tail docking of pigs came into force, a proportion of pig farmers in many EU countries, including the UK, are still not complying.
In our fight against live exports, we have been told time and again that since animals are legally considered ‘goods’, it would be unlawful under EU regulations to ban the trade of live animals. And yet, if we left the EU, the trade would most likely continue. Indeed, trade between the UK and member states would then be governed by World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules, which, just like the EU regulations, prohibit trade restrictions on ‘goods’. Therefore, any attempt to ban live exports could face a challenge by the WTO, and without strong political will to see an end to the trade, any such move would be unlikely.
There are so many unknowns that it is impossible to say for certain whether animals would fare better inside or outside the EU. One thing I can say for sure, is that regardless of the outcome of the vote, Compassion in World Farming and myself will continue to do everything that we can to give the voteless a voice, and stand up for farm animals in the UK, the EU, and worldwide.
Show More
Another generation and half of us will be vegans and factory farming will be out of business. A shame I probably won't be around to see it.
Interesting read kenny.
That's like putting a call out for blackbarn Zen mentioning Halal!
reading all through it i was hoping there would be something on Halal, Nothing.
That's like putting a call out for blackbarn Zen mentioning Halal!
reading all through it i was hoping there would be something on Halal, Nothing.
How quick the mask slips. Around a week ago Nige was on tv telling the nation how he wanted to be able to allow immigrants from other countries into the UK but wasn't allowed because of EU rules which protected free movement of EU citizens to the detriment of non-EU citizens.
Doesn't take long though for cuddly Nige to disappear and normal Nige to come back with his posters of refugees and looking to stir up anti-refugee feelings.
Doesn't take long though for cuddly Nige to disappear and normal Nige to come back with his posters of refugees and looking to stir up anti-refugee feelings.
It's left me in a sticky situation, as sticky as when Sticky, the stick insect got stuck in sticky jam.
Only 2 things matter to me, Animal Welfare and free movement of people. Couldn't care about the economy.
The first would require a stay vote, the latter a leave.
Will ponder it over a few pints in Spoons this evening.
Only 2 things matter to me, Animal Welfare and free movement of people. Couldn't care about the economy.
The first would require a stay vote, the latter a leave.
Will ponder it over a few pints in Spoons this evening.
This countries to interested in bending over backwards for their barbarian friends
kenny.
Countries that impose stunning before slaughter comprise Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Denmark, and Sweden.
Good old UK
What is religious slaughter?
In the UK, the Jewish and Muslim communities
are exempt from a section of the law in ‘The
Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing)
Regulations 1995’ that requires all animals to
be stunned before they are slaughtered.
Stunning is a process that causes animals to
lose consciousness, making them insensible to
pain and suffering.
kenny.
Countries that impose stunning before slaughter comprise Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Denmark, and Sweden.
Good old UK
What is religious slaughter?
In the UK, the Jewish and Muslim communities
are exempt from a section of the law in ‘The
Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing)
Regulations 1995’ that requires all animals to
be stunned before they are slaughtered.
Stunning is a process that causes animals to
lose consciousness, making them insensible to
pain and suffering.
The last few minutes of your life. Imagine it. Your throat is slit, the pain is unbearable and you spend your last moments drowning in your own blood. I'd take a whack over the head any day.
Well done Denmark who recently imposed animal rights over religion.
Well done Denmark who recently imposed animal rights over religion.
most British companies will only act when forced to do so - horrible coonts the lot of them .
and then you get companies (after legistation) boasting about their animal welfare improvements - sickening
and then you get companies (after legistation) boasting about their animal welfare improvements - sickening
Our government is in thrall to big business. You need more mainstream tv programmes covering it to grab the wider public's attention otherwise they're always going to choose the cheapest option, and balls to the cruelty.
As for halal, absolutely fking ridiculous and no need for it at all. If you're that worried about it being unclean eat some bread.
As for halal, absolutely fking ridiculous and no need for it at all. If you're that worried about it being unclean eat some bread.
Well done Denmark. Giving animals the right to be murdered to go onto some animal lovers plate.
Agreed Pineapple - surely you meant barbaric though & not ridiculous
The EU champion Islam are importing them by the hundreds of thousands.
Halal is barbaric but becoming mainstream in Europe.
Islams treatment of animals is the cruellest of the cruel.
Halal is barbaric but becoming mainstream in Europe.
Islams treatment of animals is the cruellest of the cruel.
Well it is barbaric. Absolutely. Just ridiculous that you have to have a silly ritual before you can have a steak. I'm a meat eater but I do have a pang of guilt and wish I could have a more healthy diet and give up meat but I'm not ready yet.
At least if you've got to slaughter the animal then doing it in the most humane, least painful way possible should be top of your list.
At least if you've got to slaughter the animal then doing it in the most humane, least painful way possible should be top of your list.
Meat is on the menu for the majority of the world's population.
That's a fact and a further fact is that we will never correct that.
But what we can do is campaign for a better life for the animals and a death with dignity.
That would be a step in the right direction.
I don't eat meat myself btw.
That's a fact and a further fact is that we will never correct that.
But what we can do is campaign for a better life for the animals and a death with dignity.
That would be a step in the right direction.
I don't eat meat myself btw.
That's the type of argument pants that wins no arguments or more importantly makes people think twice about eating meat.
Nothing you or I do or say is going to stop the world eating meat so whilst demand exists it will be catered for.
Wishing animals a humane death in this context is not something to ridicule.
Nothing you or I do or say is going to stop the world eating meat so whilst demand exists it will be catered for.
Wishing animals a humane death in this context is not something to ridicule.
The number one item in the EU budget is farm subsidies - the compulsory transfer of public funds to owners of agricultural land. Some part of that land could be habitat for wildlife because in a world of polywrap, mechanisation, new strains and fertilisers it shouldn't be productive agricultural land, but the subsidies mean it remains agricultural land.
It's quite possible that when the UK is out of the EU we will design our own bad subsidy system - but by remaining in the EU this loss of habitat is compulsory.
It's quite possible that when the UK is out of the EU we will design our own bad subsidy system - but by remaining in the EU this loss of habitat is compulsory.
I thought EU farm subsidies had disappeared, replaced by land subsidies. If you own land, then as long as you comply with rules on environmental stewardship, you receive money, with agricultural production or otherwise irrelevant.
At least that was the system up to 2010 when I owned a couple of fields. You filled in some ridiculously long forms, certified that you're analysing the soil composition, not allowing nitrate run-off from muck heaps etc, then a few years too late DEFRA eventually distributes to you a few hundred quid from Brussels.
FWIW my fields were pasture and hedgerow and a bit of woodland where I kept a pony and a racehorse recovering from torn tendons. Used to let neighbouring farmers graze cattle or sheep to clear the worms, but the EU didn't care about that. If I'd just let it grow to docks and ragwort, which is what happens without agricultural use, I still would have got the cash.
At least that was the system up to 2010 when I owned a couple of fields. You filled in some ridiculously long forms, certified that you're analysing the soil composition, not allowing nitrate run-off from muck heaps etc, then a few years too late DEFRA eventually distributes to you a few hundred quid from Brussels.
FWIW my fields were pasture and hedgerow and a bit of woodland where I kept a pony and a racehorse recovering from torn tendons. Used to let neighbouring farmers graze cattle or sheep to clear the worms, but the EU didn't care about that. If I'd just let it grow to docks and ragwort, which is what happens without agricultural use, I still would have got the cash.
Kenny I hope the EU legislation on animals is better than that of workers rights. After all under the EU rules you can have a zero hour contract and if you work for an agency ( millions of Brits do) then you can and will be stood down with one hours notice. Makes a mockery of all those who shamelessly claim the EU protects workers rights.
Those things are the result of the UK's very own neoliberal politics (English politians in particular have a much more neoliberal outlook than anywhere else in Europe), not so much the EU's. No other country in the EU is as deregulated, has as poor worker's protection, as the UK, with Germany and France both having significantly greater employee protection (Germany has the best worker's protection of all OECD countries according to a CIPD report from last year)
Contrary to popular rumour, the EU doesn't meddle with everything, and not as strictly and tyrannic as is often made out, which is why there is such a big gap between the quality of worker's protection between the UK and other EU members.
I can't actually tell you exactly where the EU puts its minimum standards, but I know there is a basic protection. A basic protection that seems to be a thorn in the eye of some Brexit politians since they like to promise further deregulation once they have been freed from the EU and its regulations. How effective such measures would turn out to be in an already hugely deregulated environment like the UK, and how happy people would be with them, remains to be seen.
Contrary to popular rumour, the EU doesn't meddle with everything, and not as strictly and tyrannic as is often made out, which is why there is such a big gap between the quality of worker's protection between the UK and other EU members.
I can't actually tell you exactly where the EU puts its minimum standards, but I know there is a basic protection. A basic protection that seems to be a thorn in the eye of some Brexit politians since they like to promise further deregulation once they have been freed from the EU and its regulations. How effective such measures would turn out to be in an already hugely deregulated environment like the UK, and how happy people would be with them, remains to be seen.
.
https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax-manual/ihtm24254
So if sfbtw lets his fields go wild for 5 years plus, and nature moves in, then it won't get the payment.
Land for grazing leisure horses doesn't get the payment either.
So we have a system of incentives which at the margins means less land gets used for leisure or allowed to go wild. And more land used actively or passively for agriculture.
https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax-manual/ihtm24254
So if sfbtw lets his fields go wild for 5 years plus, and nature moves in, then it won't get the payment.
Land for grazing leisure horses doesn't get the payment either.
So we have a system of incentives which at the margins means less land gets used for leisure or allowed to go wild. And more land used actively or passively for agriculture.
@edgy
your missing the point under the EU rules Britain has got away with it, yet some people choose to lie and claim the EU protects British workers rights, when quite clearly it does not.
your missing the point under the EU rules Britain has got away with it, yet some people choose to lie and claim the EU protects British workers rights, when quite clearly it does not.
@edy
I can't actually tell you exactly where the EU puts its minimum standards, but I know there is a basic protection. A basic protection that seems to be a thorn in the eye of some Brexit politians since they like to promise further deregulation once they have been freed from the EU and its regulations. How effective such measures would turn out to be in an already hugely deregulated environment like the UK, and how happy people would be with them, remains to be seen.
Yet you defend them to the hilt.
I can't actually tell you exactly where the EU puts its minimum standards, but I know there is a basic protection. A basic protection that seems to be a thorn in the eye of some Brexit politians since they like to promise further deregulation once they have been freed from the EU and its regulations. How effective such measures would turn out to be in an already hugely deregulated environment like the UK, and how happy people would be with them, remains to be seen.
Yet you defend them to the hilt.
Jun 19, 2016 -- 11:50AM, macarony wrote:
@edgy your missing the point under the EU rules Britain has got away with it, yet some people choose to lie and claim the EU protects British workers rights, when quite clearly it does not.
well, it does if you look at Brexit and their "promise" of further deregulation once the EU doesn't get in the way of their full blown neoliberalism anymore. Which doesn't sound too good a promise in practice if you realize that the UK's worker's protection and market regulations are already the worst in Europe, does it? Unless you're a huge fan of neoliberalism of course, which I can't believe anyone but the super rich are. So why would anyone want to go further down that path?
Maybe the EU is not meddling with its members affairs and labour laws to the extend you wish they'd do, but if they did set very high standards, something France keeps trying to make the EU do, the critics would in turn complain about the EU's tyranny and how their country isn't sovereign and can't make its own laws. How it's bound by super strict EU regulations and those are destroying the economy.
....something people actually even do now.
bongo 19 Jun 16 11:37 Joined: 12 May 01 | Topic/replies: 5,282 | Blogger: bongo's blog
.
https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax-manual/ihtm24254
So if sfbtw lets his fields go wild for 5 years plus, and nature moves in, then it won't get the payment.
Land for grazing leisure horses doesn't get the payment either.
So we have a system of incentives which at the margins means less land gets used for leisure or allowed to go wild. And more land used actively or passively for agriculture.
You're looking at the wrong description, bongo. That manual, and the passages to which you refer, are describing why entitlement to EU subsidies does not necessarily imply that the land for which the subsidies are claimed is agricultural for the purposes of avoiding inheritance tax. The whole point of the reference to grazing leisure horses is to illustrate how you can indeed claim under the EU Single Payment Scheme if you use a field just for horses, but that won't be sufficient evidence of agricultural use to avoid inheritance tax.
The purpose of that section is to illustrate how the EU subsidies do NOT need any farming to take place on the land, and hence why receiving the subsidies is not a test for agricultural use when it comes to tax avoidance.
Anyway. Who cares? The bird with whom I was sharing the house I owned with those fields cleaned me out six years ago after she convinced me to put the property in joint ownership. The land is for someone else to enjoy now. Like the bird presumably is as well.
.
https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax-manual/ihtm24254
So if sfbtw lets his fields go wild for 5 years plus, and nature moves in, then it won't get the payment.
Land for grazing leisure horses doesn't get the payment either.
So we have a system of incentives which at the margins means less land gets used for leisure or allowed to go wild. And more land used actively or passively for agriculture.
You're looking at the wrong description, bongo. That manual, and the passages to which you refer, are describing why entitlement to EU subsidies does not necessarily imply that the land for which the subsidies are claimed is agricultural for the purposes of avoiding inheritance tax. The whole point of the reference to grazing leisure horses is to illustrate how you can indeed claim under the EU Single Payment Scheme if you use a field just for horses, but that won't be sufficient evidence of agricultural use to avoid inheritance tax.
The purpose of that section is to illustrate how the EU subsidies do NOT need any farming to take place on the land, and hence why receiving the subsidies is not a test for agricultural use when it comes to tax avoidance.
Anyway. Who cares? The bird with whom I was sharing the house I owned with those fields cleaned me out six years ago after she convinced me to put the property in joint ownership. The land is for someone else to enjoy now. Like the bird presumably is as well.
By the way, kenny. Then problem with being a member of a single market for the welfare of farm animals is that you can legislate and monitor all you like for the animals in your own country, but have absolutely no way of banning imports from countries which ignore any EU rules on animal welfare.
Thus, UK pig farmers go out of business as they, quite rightly, are forced to offer their animals light and space etc. while imports from other parts of the EU, which don't bother with these costlier facilities, put them out of business. And as a member of the EU all we can do is protest but be ignored. We can't prevent the imports.
Thus, UK pig farmers go out of business as they, quite rightly, are forced to offer their animals light and space etc. while imports from other parts of the EU, which don't bother with these costlier facilities, put them out of business. And as a member of the EU all we can do is protest but be ignored. We can't prevent the imports.
Thanks,I know a lot of countries ignore the rules. It's gets more and more complicated the more you look into it.
Just an observation. I note that Compassion in World Farming is apolitical and therefore has not made a recommendation. I cannot be sure but I am pretty sure that virtually every UK based organisation with involvement in the management and protection of its countryside and its wildlife are pro-remain. CLA/NFU thru to RSPCA/RSPB. I stand to be corrected though.
It's a shame that animal lovers such as Kenny Mann vote for the EU that eats retired horses and defends halal slaughter. Still, you always get some who will put their money before their mouth.
Thus, UK pig farmers go out of business as they, quite rightly, are forced to offer their animals light and space etc. while imports from other parts of the EU, which don't bother with these costlier facilities, put them out of business. And as a member of the EU all we can do is protest but be ignored. We can't prevent the imports.
_____________
Then it's also the UK public that still want animals reared intensively because it saves them £££££ = we create a market in other words .
_____________
Then it's also the UK public that still want animals reared intensively because it saves them £££££ = we create a market in other words .
I'm an animal lover, a stock-raiser and I am happy to eat horse-meat. I have posted on here before that if we ate our Horseracing thoroughbred overproduction plus pests like rabbit and grey squirrel we would be virtually self sufficient in meat. Re Halal (and Shechita), my views on this are elsewhere, but suffice to say that the EU allows individual nations to determine its own policies on this.
On my travels around Suffolk /Essex i can see that pigs are given very good conditions to live ,shelter ,light ,rain and mud baths for sun protection .
Shame some of the 'Britain is great' bigoted types also don't support our UK farmers but who will buy foreign produced meat because its a bargain
Shame some of the 'Britain is great' bigoted types also don't support our UK farmers but who will buy foreign produced meat because its a bargain
In the UK public's defence, how many of its members are aware of the fact? Neither Brussels nor Whitehall is going to spend money publicizing an example of how the EU benefits so many of its other members at the UK's expense.
suffice to say that the EU allows individual nations to determine its own policies on this.
_
as with a lot of things - is there much point being in the EU if conditions aren't adhered to everywhere ?
_
as with a lot of things - is there much point being in the EU if conditions aren't adhered to everywhere ?
i remember during the export days seeing the calves taken to FRANCE just a spit across the channel and shoved into crates which was illegal here
Coachbuilder - Absolutely agree. I doubt that British Pork has ever been cheaper in real terms, and from a decent supplier and/or butcher it is seriously fantastic. Get yourself along to your local butcher and ask him for a local "spare rib joint" - he'll look at you and think.. this guy knows his stuff!!. It's effectively boned and rolled pork shoulder and can be cut to various lengths to serve 3/4 to 6/8 with no wastage - unless you don't have anyone who eats proper crackling. 
Coach - re Veal calves. Agreed, but that is easily remedied by the british public buying the excellent Rose Veal available nearly everywhere. Even Marks and Spencers sells it.
Protect British calves and the British milk industry, buy British Rose Veal now. You know it makes sense.
Protect British calves and the British milk industry, buy British Rose Veal now. You know it makes sense.
I like a bit of beef. However, I don't like the animal being tortured to death for up to three hours before it's slaughtered. Britain, via the EU, is forced to contribute money to the three bullfighting countries for "cultural" reasons.
A vote to stay in the EU is just like buying a ticket to watch a bullfight every day for the rest of your life.
It gets worse but I'll leave Bodil to tell you.
A vote to stay in the EU is just like buying a ticket to watch a bullfight every day for the rest of your life.
It gets worse but I'll leave Bodil to tell you.
Coachbuster - agreed but my rose veal comes from my friend who runs my local dairy herd. The veal could be better but the provenance, tracebility and food miles would be hard to beat.
Gallivanter - I understand your principles but what do you think your personal contribution via the EU to bullfighting might be? You'd reasonably say that any penny is too much, but a penny a year or less would probably be about it, wouldn't it?
Gallivanter - I understand your principles but what do you think your personal contribution via the EU to bullfighting might be? You'd reasonably say that any penny is too much, but a penny a year or less would probably be about it, wouldn't it?
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539