Dear me, we have struck a nerve. I have never been likened to George W before. Should it bother me if you remind me that I said that farmers who are cruel to animals should be in gaol? Cutting a sheep's throat without first stunning it is cruelty. It is that simple, and made more so by the fact that that is not how you destroy your dogs (or is it?)

The way Nicky has set out the argument above from (Note) a WA journo doesn't seem particuarly "equal"; is is protectionist policy, nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't require any great depth of understanding. Let me make it more so from the Heilbron Report (in two parts):

• The live export trade could be costing Australia around $1.5 billion in lost GDP, around $270 million in household income and around 10,500 lost jobs.

• The primary factor driving the profitability of the live export trade is market distortions in favour of live animals. If it were not for these factors, the rising demand for meat in importing countries would have been met by exports of chilled and frozen meat.

• These distortions occur in both export markets (tariff and non tariff barriers) and the domestic market (incentives biased towards live trade rather than processing.)

• Live animal export is not a complimentary trade to the chilled meat trade but instead directly competes for the same export market. Government bias towards the live trade has ensured that the meat export trade is not competing on a level playing field.

• The report notes that when the live export trade to Saudi Arabia was first suspended (from 1991 2000) there was a 3 fold increase in exports of chilled and frozen mutton and lamb to that market clear evidence of the substitutability of meat exports for live exports.

• The report cautions that live export "profits" are illusory in terms of economic benefits to the nation, as they are simply the consequence of market distortions, subsidies and interventions by governments abroad and in Australia.

Heilbron Summary part 2

The traditional demand for live animals that in the past was fuelled by a lack of refrigeration, has been overtaken by the westernization of food consumption patterns and modernisation of food handling and distribution systems in many Middle East countries there y negating this industry claim that live animals are 'necessary'.

• The report concludes that New Zealand's strategic decision to severely curtail its live sheep trade to prevent animal welfare concerns affecting its more valuable, value added sheepmeat trade, points to important conclusions that are relevant to Australia:

• Improved processing productivity and efficiency can counteract and potentially more than offset the adverse impacts of ending live exports.

• The decision to end live exports can legitimately be made on strategic grounds.

• The decision can be made on the basis of potential cross sectoral impacts of the live trade on a much larger and more economically significant processing sector.

This report also states that the market incentives/distortions that support the profitability of live export at the expense of the chilled meat trade, are not intrinsic, but rather are created by governments or industry. The report concludes that the responsibility for correcting them or otherwise rests with governments or industry.

A significant aspect the Heilbron Report touches upon is the impact of the live export trade on the rural community. Whilst there may be benefits for the producers themselves as a result of live export – the negative aspect of animals being processed overseas has not ever fully been acknowledged in this debate. Abattoir closures and the associated departure of rural community members to seek employment elsewhere affect a range of local businesses and the very sustainability of rural townships.

There you have it. And don't forget the cruelty. HOW many "experts" did you say? (looking after animal welfare in the Middle East)

Penny, you clearly did not bother to read the Jewish Shechita document that
I referenced for you. What is cruel or not cruel is still open to scientific debate.
They provide evidence that its not and have studied it in a lot more detail then
you have. There is in fact a scientific study going on in Australia about this
very topic, to clarify things.

The Heilbron Report has more holes then Swiss cheese, we can debate them
point for point if you wish. Posts per day are the only limit.

Murray, a bit like you, knew nothing about the industry he was writing about,
just read something. I will explain it once, for all your benefit, as I was an
AQIS client at the time and knew how the system worked and paid my share
of fees.

AQIS funding is based on user pay, fee for service. So much per document
stamped, so much per hour of an inspector’s time, so much for establishment
fees. Their costs come from 2 main areas. One is the inspectors out in
the field, the other is head office in Canberra. Much of what goes on in
head office, incl their man stationed in Brussels, are political issues that
arise through trade. The Govt acknowledged that and agreed to pay
40% of the total cost of the service. Users pay the rest, still on a fee for
service basis, so much an hour etc.

Meatworks as part of their agreements with the EU, US etc, need to have
inspectors on hand, to check every carcass. That generates a lot of service,
so they pay high fees. The live trade does not require that kind of service,
so don’t generate the costs. They still pay fee for service, like everyone
else. The 40% Govt share is across all industries, none are favoured.

Nicky, your “true to say” is absolutaly false in WA. People leave meatworks
jobs as the mining industry can pay them 100k$ a year, the meat industry
cannot. Ask Rodger Fletcher.

Peta for honest information? Hehehehe

Yabby said

So Penny, Why are all the meat works screaming for workers

Pale
Still waiting to come.

Yabby
Penny, I purposefully leave the odd spelling mistake, because it shows up the
nature of my debating partners

Pale. Gee thanks Yabbs. And I purposely put them in at times in an attempt to distance myself from the higher moral ground of peta.
I am not saying they haven’t done good in all sorts of areas. I am just saying while ever people will only listen to veggie groups nothing is going to change. PETA BTW hates us. Much like some at AA>
Now don’t you find that a tad interesting. Wouldn’t you think AA the peak Animal welfare [self imposed] of this country and PETA would welcome all people who were concerned about animals?
The agenda has been since we joined OLO for certain people to target pale- not you Yabby.
You’re just the icing on the cake.

If peta were serious and those working with them that they wanted live replaced with carcass they would not have done all they could to block pale. They would have helped. That goes for WSPA also who rejected pale as a member.
All I can remember for years when I first started was complaints about Hugh Wirth RSPCA. = behind his back mostly. Just look up to see how the agreed petition we did was received.
Soon I will post the real background of Animal Welfare organization= Some. = No maybe all.
If they are arguing for live to stop then why refuse to help establish plants?

Yabby

Or shall I remind you farmers should be in jail.
Pale
Just the export agents
Yabby

How on earth do you expect Peta to do anything if they
same as George Bush
Pale= huh!Who do you think is behind the trade deal of live exports and the meat industry?

Yabby
Have you
never heard of people skills
Pale
Certainly not
Yabby said
The processing sector argument that Pale does not understand.
Yes pale does= two words= dirty deals

Yabby

Ah, the pre stunning

If, Public knew. They would have pink pussy cats upsetting Perciles

What’s ` really` behind the push to turn Australian into a Ritual Slaughter country.

Who. Is behind it and why.

BTW the argument is there 'is' no proof pre stunning is kinder.’

It wasn’t JAKIM who demanded this.

They are pretty reasonable if you sit and talk.

Yabby its all been a tad embarrassing for the Government with AQIS sending off the poor bloody live sacrifices to Saddam to support terrorists through AWB

.Mind you not enough for them to stop it.

Nor was it enough for Kevin Rudd to raise it at the AWB enquiry.

BTW some of your buddies were so upset to see the strippers protesting live exports outside the AWB enquiry they were stupid enough to stand there debating the issue- with the strippers! Hilarious

Pity AA didn’t even know and won’t be helped! Wont listen, won’t work together

.Mind you PeterMcGraunan was about to change things regarding peak groups black listing or targeting just one organization under parliament- pity

.

Yabby

FYI AFIC was never acknowledged by Saudi as a Halal accreditation Authority.

There are thirty two Islamic Councils in Australia and sixteen of those have Halal accreditation rights. Needless to say they fight like dogs and cats over it.

As you would know hundreds world wide. Then you have AQIS sitting on the phone issuing these licenses out to God knows who by electronic devise.
Lets face facts AQIS have shown the world they don’t know what they are doing with whom by the AWB.Enquiry [until it was shut down]

Now wouldn’t that have been good grounds to get at least a temporary ban by holding a Royal Commission into it= ‘If only AA had listened.

http://www.livexports.com/cowgun.html


So pale and HKM the useless @according to yourself, peta, AA etc [there are many] put a proposal to the Government working with AFIC under our MOU.

It was to protect Australia from funding terrorists, keep our economy safe and improve animal welfare, aboriginal lives etc.

TBC

Well here's one that bit the dust.

All together now girls - join the purulent cowpoke in his maniacal chortles of "Heheheh!"

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10485237

Yeeeeeeeee.... hey.......ride 'em cowboy............ooops!