Agribuzz with David Leyonhjelm
How dare people object to animal cruelty or that they're ingesting HGH or antibiotics via the animal products they consume (sarcasm). Keeping hens crammed in small, wire cages for their entire lives, never to see the sun or feel the earth under their feet is cruel & immoral. It may be OK in the eyes of farmers, but it is definitely NOT OK as far as the majority of consumers are concerned. If you think it's only "animal rights and environmental radicals" who are becoming informed and objecting to caged hens and other standard farming practices, you're sadly mistaken.
Live export is Australia's shame. And if those involved think it's just crazed, "leftie" animal activists who object to it, they're sadly mistaken.
I'll go with the vast majority of CLIMATE SCIENTISTS and the avalanche of actual evidence that says otherwise. Why any decent human being would advocate for the human race to continue polluting this planet they way we are now is beyond my understanding. What's the worst that can happen if we significantly cut pollution? Cleaner air, cleaner water, cleaner soil and cleaner oceans for us, our children, our grandchildren and for the other species with which we share this earth?
He's right. The only comment I ever get when discussing potential ag-gag laws is, "What do they have to hide?"
The suspension in 2011 was warranted, and the entire live export industry knows it. I'm only sorry that the suspension was temporary. The brutal cruelty on display in those Indonesian abattoirs could not, and never should have been, tolerated. That suspension was a result of the LE industry's own negligence and the bottom line is that they knew what conditions were like over there, but never thought they'd be exposed. How any decent, moral human being could continue to send animals to such a fate is beyond my understanding. Live export: Australia's shame.
It's been over 40 years now Waratah, and the "education of the third world" is obviously not happening. They don't WANT to be educated, because they see nothing wrong with the way they treat animals. Not to mention that I've often heard live export farmers say that what the purchaser does with their "goods" is none of their concern. Once the money is in the bank accounts, these poor animals are just thrown to the wolves and no one in animal agricultural really gives a toss.
I agree with Tony. If politicians want environmental groups to be held accountable for their campaign and media claims, then politicians must also be held accountable for their campaign and media claims. Industry and business should also be held accountable for any false or misleading claims they make about their products or their activities. What's good for the goose, after all.
Throw the doors open wide to the Chinese at your peril. As Percy says, until our government, or any citizen, can buy Chinese land and assets, any free trade agreement is a joke.
What ISN'T the problem with live export is a better question to ask. As for claiming that animal activists have no integrity and "...repeatedly show themselves to have no integrity and are prepared to do and say whatever is required to advance their goals." If that isn't the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.
The live export industry has been exposed for what it truly is and the light shone on its dark underbelly will only grow brighter. Get used to it.
My entire family refuse to support cage egg farmers. RSPCA Australia is right. Keeping hens in small, wire cages for their entire lives is cruel. If given a choice between cage eggs or no eggs at all, I'd choose no eggs at all every single time.
I applaud those who risk life and limb to show us what those who profit from animals fight so hard to hide. Only people like Chris Back and Barnaby could look at video of the most barbaric animal cruelty and seek to punish those who exposed it, not those who perpetrate it. I'm disgusted.
Just because "we've always done it", doesn't make it right. As Katrina Love said, debeaking, declawing, dehorning, debudding, teeth cutting, ear notching, tail docking, castrating, mulesing, branding, etc is ALL done without pain relief and for the convenience of the farmer. If I did any of those things to my dog, particularly if I did them without pain relief both during and after, I'd be brought up on animal cruelty charges. Why is it considered cruel for one and not the other? It makes no sense.
The thought of Barnaby Joyce as Deputy PM makes my blood run cold.
I don't agree with you often, Bushie Bill, but I agree with you 100% that Abbott is an international embarrassment.
I certainly hope Paul Brown, or anyone else for that matter, is suggesting that we should ignore barbaric animal cruelty and abuse because of "different traditions" and the risk of causing offense. What happens in so many overseas slaughterhouses should not happen. Anywhere. End of story.
I am 100% in favour of an IGAW. The key word being INDEPENDENT. If we have, as so many farmers continue to claim, world's best animal welfare, surely they have nothing to fear? Bring it on.
Livestock farmers must realise sooner or later that the internet, smart phones and social media have changed the game. They refuse to change cruel and archaic farming practices at their peril.
It seems the live export industry just don't care where their animals go or what happens to them when they get there, as long as the money keeps flowing. China's record when it comes to humane treatment of animals is completely appalling and the live export industry knows it. Shame on all involved in this vile industry.
I'd say you're the one twisting the issue, Inverell. This has NOTHING to do with installing surveillance devices in farmer's homes or filming them in their private moments & posting it on youtube. Who would be even slightly interested in that? This is about exposing cruelty to animals behind closed shed doors. If there's nothing to hide, if there's no animal abuse or cruelty, there'd be nothing to film and nothing to fear. It's that simple.
John from Tamworth, where did I say that farmers are an inherently cruel, sadistic bunch who get their jollies from torturing "dumb" animals?
Why is it that farmers always, always want to shoot the messenger? If there's no cruelty to animals happening, there's nothing to "expose", and I'd wager that farmers would have no idea that anyone had even been on their property.
It's time the cruelty issues were addressed and solved, not that those exposing them are prevented from doing so.
Qlander, that's an absurd comparison, and you know it. If I was a farmer & I believed there was absolutely nothing wrong with the way my animals were treated, I wouldn't care who saw inside my sheds or observed their day-to-day treatment. It's not like people are installing cameras in farmers' homes to see what they get up to in private (who would care, seriously). This isn't about PRIVACY, this is about exposing well-entrenched, normalised and systemic cruelty to animals. it seems farmers are more concerned with preventing the truth reaching the eyes and ears of their customers though.
I'm in awe of the people who put their own lives and liberty at risk to document and expose animal cruelty. As Katrina Love so rightly states, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. I'm disgusted by the "Shoot the Messenger" attitude. Surely it could never be a bad thing to expose cruelty and abuse? Seems as far as the agriculture industry is concerned, they'd rather fight tooth and nail to keep the cruelty hidden from their customers instead of changing their ways. Big mistake.
"A pack of sadists" about sums up the live export industry and the woefully immoral government that is fighting so hard to save it. Anyone who continues to put their wallet so far ahead of the welfare of the animals they "love" so very much needs to take a long, hard look at themselves.