In February this year, Perth Magistrate Catherine Crawford found leading live export company Emanuel Exports Pty Ltd and two of its Directors, Michael Stanton and Graham Daws, guilty of breaching the WA Animal Welfare Act, effectively determining by law that a key part of the live export industry is cruel. Despite this, the Magistrate acquitted the live export company on a technicality between Commonwealth and State law. This decision was considered by the WA State Solicitor to have been in error. The State Solicitor subsequently lodged an appeal in the WA Supreme Court.

Now, in a remarkable development, the Minister for Local Government Ljiljanna Ravlich has issued instructions that the appeal be withdrawn. It is highly improper for a government Minister to interfere in judicial proceedings, particuarly once they have commenced.

The live export company and its two directors were on trial for unnecessarily causing suffering and death to thousands of animals. Their guilt or innocence, and any consequences of their actions, should only be determined in a court of law, not by the vested interests of a Government and its Minister, who has now hopelessly compromised herself and potentially the whole Carpenter government. Is this corrupt conduct? Minister Ravlich also demonstrates contempt for the expertise of her own Department and that of the WA Attorney General, which has said that the defendants should not have been "acquitted". Premier Carpenter should intervene without delay, sack Minister Ravlich, and let due process take its course.

The Australian Constitution clearly provides for the separation of powers between Governments, their Executives, and the Judiciary, and Minister Ravlich much be sacked.

Nicky,
Magistrates are not judicial officers they are administrative officers adjudicating on disputes that involve Govt policy and not the rule of law. They are simply highly paid public servants operating the Govt cash register and doing their bit to collect the state's revenue, thats the business of the so called court, nothing else.
The magistrates should not exercise judicial power and effect your substantive rights without your consent and when they do and you don't object and are ignorant of the the next step to protect your self from this exercise of judicial power, you then become a victim of the system. ( Kable)
The Minister has not interfered in the Judicial proceeding as they had never commenced it was simply an administrative process dressed up to look like a valid judicial proceedings.
All of our statutory courts in the States and Commonwealth conduct this scamm but you will never be able to identify this fictitious procedure unless you know exactly what to look for.
I have noticed that you say that an appeal was lodged, so what, its just sitting on the counter at the Registry of the Court waiting to be signed by the authorized officer, sealed with the SEAL of the Court, filed and then issued from the Court. The legal industry in Australia is very technical and it has all of these little quirks with the meaning of words, as Kirby in the High Court said in one of his administrative hearings, it all in the words.
Now do you believe that the Appeal was withdrawn ? I will suggest that it only lodged in the Office of the Registry and given a file number for the OFFICE file and was never FILED and ISSUED from the court in the first place, nothing to withdraw is there. Courts of Law have not existed in this country for a very long time and one has only to read the Cth Judicial-Review-Act to realize that nothing actually gets FILED, only LODGED and we know where that end up. There is more available if interested.

Nicky

I have already appealed to Mr Carpenter over Minister Ravlich's interference with the judicial processes.

It is unbelievable that Mr Carpenter has yet to respond to community complaints over the Emanuel outcome, particularly given Ravlich's continuing poor performance on the front bench.

The WA State School Union passed a motion of non-confidence in this woman during her appalling management of the Education portfolio and the media had this to say about this less than credible politician:

"There have also been ongoing perceptions of political interference, such as when mates of former education minister Ljiljana Ravlich won contracts worth $300,000 from the Education Department."

Then on ABC Country Hour regarding Emanuel Exports:

"A spokesperson for Local Government Minister Ljiljanna Ravlich says the Minister would rather work on improving policy to address the discrepancy rather than committing taxpayers' money to pursue the matter through the courts.

And what policy would that be?

"The State Animal Welfare Act is due to be reviewed this year, but Agriculture Minister Kim Chance told the Country Hour back in February he saw no need to alter the legislation."

I understand regulation of the live export industry comes under the Federal government legislation and as a result, Emanuel Exports escaped penalty in WA. Why then hasn't the Federal government seen fit to prosecute Emanuel for breaching the Commonwealth Animal Welfare Act - assuming there is one?

I fully agree, this woman should be sacked forthwith, however, this outrage is yet another display of arrogance by this incompetent Minister who is clearly a sycophant to the ethics-free live export industry.

Ah there we have it. The same little band of animal activists,
who one minute preach about the evils of farming and eating meat,
now complain when a court decision went against them.

I'm sure that the WA Govt is fully aware that they make up only
a tiny % of the overall population. Enough money has been wasted
on this case. Its time that they accepted the court decision,
not just act like a bunch of sore losers.

Hi all

Young Dan, I'll have to revisit the Kable case and few others to confirm what you're saying, but I'd like to know the perspective you are coming from, since it is everyone's understanding that the WA Solicitor General had commenced appeal proceedings. Magistrates are Officers of the Court though, and are supposed to be free of interference from Government like the judicial process itself. That is the principal issue here; that Ravlich intervened AFTER appeal proceedings had commenced.

Dickie, thanks for that background; I had heard quite a bit about Ravlich but not that much. The problem is that there isn't a National Animal Welfare Act, although the Australian Standards for the Export of Livestock are in theory mandatory and administered (lethargically) by AQIS (Federal Government). I don't think we can expect any action by the Federal Government though, given Tony Burke's slavish pandering to these people. Ravlich needs to be sacked, however. Is there an anti-corruption watchdog in WA?

Yabby, once again (how tedious this gets!) - read the judgment. The cruelty charges under the WA legislation were proven beyond a reasonable doubt (sigh!). There were several days of hearing - then absolutely nothing for an interminable period while Crawford considered how best she could "pass the buck". So in terms of costs, as court cases go, it really didn't cost that much, and nothing like the amount the taxpayer is forced to throw at the live export trade to support it (generally unknowingly, and I suspect mostly against their will)

Cheers
Nicky

Nicky I agree with your stance on this issue and Yabby you don't have to be a seasoned animal activist to acknowledge that live-animal exports are cruel and unnecessary nor to question the interference in the judicial process.

If the findings by Magistrate Catherine Crawford are to be tested then why not an appeal. One has to ask why a politician would even involve themselves to this extent and whatever happened to separation of powers?

It is wise to be cautious about any support from the Commonwealth Government given the former Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Senator the Hon Kerry O'Brien's relegation to Government Whip after airing his views on live-animal exports.

Shades of Humphrey Appleby!

Hi Nicky

The Corruption and Crime Commission in WA handles complaints against politicians and government officials.

I believe the Commission, despite criticisms from a few shonky characters named by the CCC in the lobbyist affair, is now the only ethical institute in WA, sufficiently trustworthy for citizens to appeal over alleged official corruption.

The Commission advises whether there is a case to be answered and I believe they are civilised and receptive.

http://www.ccc.wa.gov.au/

Enquiries are strictly confidential where complainants also pledge secrecy over any submissions they make.

On reflection, I should mention that Minister Ravlich is also the live-in companion of the treasurer, Eric Ripper, which could be perceived as another "conflict of interest."

Her "networking" skills are quite impressive, wouldn't you agree?

*Crawford considered how best she could "pass the buck". *

So now you are accusing Crawford too! Ravlich clearly used
some common sense, something which seems missing amongst the
farmer hating lobby. But then as we know and you have admitted,
even if these sheep were to go on the Queen Victoria, that would
still not be good enough. Nicky, you are a fanatic, that is
the real problem.

This case is now how many years old? I remind you that new
standards have been introduced, the live exporter was compliant
with all 11 pieces of Commonwealth legislation.

What happens on a boat is Commonwealth law, not State law.
It is bleeding obvious.

The live export trade is worth 470 million $ to WA. It is
incredibly valuable to the States farmers, something which is
perhaps over your head, Pelican, as you don't fully understand
the topic.

Those sheep are for sale to anyone, including local processors,
but they clearly don't want them. We have dug pits and shot
them before, we don't want to do it again.

Whoa Yabby.

I am not disputing that the trade in live meat earns us millions of dollars just that you can ship it to the Middle East frozen (after killing it here under Halal guidelines) hence my comment that live exports are unecessary.

PALE has already made some comments on this issue regards their consulation with the Muslim community. You can pack a lot more frozen meat on a ship than live animals some of which die on the journey. More efficient delivery = more money for Australian farmers. I would think that was bleeding obvious.

You don't know me nor do you have any personal knowledge of my credentials or experience. Stooping to insults does not make your argument any stronger. It is bully tactics and I think you are better than that.

I have not heard of the farmer hating lobby - do you have a link?

*More efficient delivery = more money for Australian farmers. I would think that was
bleeding obvious.*

One would think so Pelican, but that is not the case. The argument
is quite complex, hence my comment. Don't you think that farmers
would sell locally for a better price, if it was available? I thought
that would be bleeding obvious.

Fact is that if the live trade ended, farmers would obtain 70-80%
less for their livestock then they do now, due to the nature of the
captive market in WA. Now if somebody was about to cut your income
by 70-80%, because of their wierd ideology, what would you say?

If a company wanted to dictate to you, what you should or should not
buy, what would you say? That is what these people want to do to our
customers, which I assure you, is not good business practise. They
will simply go elsewhere and they have the money to do it.

As to the farmer hating lobby, people like Nicky and Dickie are
part of it. They have both posted many times as to the evils of
farming, that we should all give the game away and that farming has
no value for Australia.

Its basically part of the vegan-veggie philosophy, which dictates that
it is evil to farm livestock or use their meat and milk, eggs etc,
for food. Nearly all the people screaming loudest about the live
trade are part of it. Pale, (or Gertrude :) ) are about the only
oddbods in the movement who accept that eating meat is not about
to go away and reality has to be faced, even though I gather that
she is a closet veggie. So it seems that they are hated by the
rest of the animal liberation movement.

Nicky, Pelican

One needs to follow the outcome of this case in the NT where goats, bound for live export, also suffered a cruel death from human neglect.

I will be interested to see how or if the outcome differs from the Emanuel Export fiasco.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/26/2199669.htm

Hi all
Pelican, you may have noticed that insults are usually Yabby's primary forms of attack because he/she has no real defence beyond reiterating the industry's propaganda. And Yabby, Crawford's judgment was nothing if not predictable. Find any loophole in the law to let off the exporters, even if you are forced to conclude that they have breached the WA Animal Welfare Act (have you read the judgment yet?)

I really don't think that Dickie and I constitute a "farmer hating" community, that really does border on paranoia. Just because we hate cruelty it does not automatically follow that we hate farmers (much as some deserve it. Have a look at a website called www.stoptac.org - it's Tasmanian, and it has a few stories to tell.

But while you have your corrupt Minister Ravlich, not to mention Fat Chance, over there I'm sure they'll be just fine.

Dickie, that was an appalling case with the goats, who suffer particularly badly in the export process. The picture says it all really, doesn't it?

Cheers
Nicky

dickie

Thanks for the link (just awful to see neglect like that) and I will keep tabs on the outcome.

Yabbby

You obviously have a vested interest in this argument and as such have your own understandable bias. I hardly know where to begin.

1. Your belief that those who oppose live-animal exports are possessed of some sort of "weird ideology" just means that you don't agree with it. Not only vegans/veggies oppose this cruel trade but ordinary people (meat eaters even) with no particular barrow to push other than common decency.

2. I fully understand the issues and the impact on farmers but just because something has been allowed over a period of time does not mean that it is right nor that it should be continued. Agriculture unlike many other sectors has always been generously reimbursed for loss of income for various reasons ie.drought, equine infuenza etc. I am sure something like this would be organised in the short term.

3. Live exports are a drop in the ocean compared to total meat exports and our dominant markets are Japan and the US as shown here:

http://www.austrade.com/Overseas-Meat-capability-overview/default.aspx

To quote from this site:

"In 2005-06, Australian meat exports (excluding poultry) were worth $7.6 billion (Source: IbisWorld). Japan continues to be the dominant market, absorbing 47 per cent of Australian meat exports in 2005-06. The US follows, accounting for 28 per cent.

Major export markets:

Beef – USA, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Taiwan, South East Asia, Europe
Lamb – USA, North Asia, Pacific, European Union, Mexico, Middle East
Mutton – Middle East, North Asia, USA, South East Asia, Mexico, South Africa
Pork – Singapore, Japan, South East Asia
Poultry – South Africa, Hong Kong, Pacific region, China, Sri Lanka, Cameroon, Philippines, Indonesia, Singapore
Goat – USA, Canada, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, Japan, Korea".

To be continued...

Continued...

4. It is laughable that our governments have condoned live animal exports on the basis of export dollars and farm income but gave no thought to that principle when Riverland farmers were ploughing in their citrus trees, grape growers were having to diversify and pig farmers were faced with drop in incomes due to pork imports from Canada - thanks to spurious free trade agreements and the lifting of tariffs.

5. While Australia, under pressure, has slowly improved its live export standards it is still unacceptable and cruel. DAFF's own website totals live exports at $830M and of that $557M to Muslim countries. The website also outlines other live exports to countries like Israel (hardly Halal).

6. Australia could do more to promote the banning of live exports at the global level which would mean a rise in the sale of frozen meat even if the demand for freshly slaughtered halal is strong. Sometimes supply can influence demand not the other way around. Take one product out of the equation and the other will sell.

7. Some more links:

http://andrewbartlett.com/blog/?p=149
http://www.liveexport-indefensible.com/facts/halal.php
http://www.rspca.org.au/ecards/card.asp?x=006
http://liveexportshame.com/publications/barlett_31March2004.htm

You don't have to have a vested interest (ie. a farmer or a vegan) to put forward an informed opinion on this issue

*I really don't think that Dickie and I constitute a "farmer hating" community, that really does
border on paranoia.*

Hehe Nicky, do you even remember what you and Dickie have posted, about the evils
of farming livestock for a profit? Only yesterday on another thread, you told us
that farming was all but dead, irrelevant to the Australian economy. I remind you
that the archives are full of absolute gems from both of you, showing open hostility
to farmers and what they do.

*Find any loophole in the law to let off the exporters*

Nicky, if a law is full of loopholes then it is not good law and needs to be rewritten.
Is that kind of basic commonsense beyond you?

*Not only vegans/veggies oppose this cruel trade*

Pelican, it just so happens by sheer coincidence, that those who are constantly complaining are also veggies/vegans perchance. On their websites they tell us
about the evils of eating meat.

BTW, where did you get your information that the trade is cruel? I remind you that
conditions on most boats are far better then in most Qld cattle feedlots. Boats are
simply floating feedlots. So why is it ok to keep cattle in a feedlot, but not on
a boat, under better conditions?

*Agriculture unlike many other sectors has always been generously reimbursed for loss of income*

Not in WA it hasn’t. We are simply a cash cow for the rest of Australia.

Why should farmers in WA not be paid similar prices for their livestock, as in
the Eastern States? We haven’t for years, where is the compensation?

Fat chance Pelican, in your dreams maybe. That is why we paddle our own
canoe here, live exports being a valuable part of that.

*Live exports are a drop in the ocean compared to total meat exports*

That’s not much good to a farmer in WA, who has some wethers to sell,
the live trade is paying 60$, the local trade is paying 20$. You are confusing
beef and mutton, quite different animals dear :)

This weeks mutton price, NSW-184c, Vic-178c, WA-93c. Why?

*Australia could do more to promote the banning of live exports at the global level which would
mean a rise in the sale of frozen meat*

Hehe Pelican, Australia can’t even get more then a token quota of mutton and lamb
into the EU, or about 6-7% of New Zealand’s quota, so influencing others is not
what we are good at, judging by the results. Around 16 million animals are shipped
into the Middle East. How good is Australia’s influence on say Sudan, Ethiopia,
China, etc? The Saudis are earning 1 billion $ a day from oil, they will buy what
they want. Kim Chance inspected a new meatworks there and he says its equal to
or better then anything he has seen in Australia.

So you quote a heap of websites, who just happen to be run by people who
base their philosophies on Peter Singer, the founder of Animal Liberation and
I gather the founding president of what is now Animals Australia.

Yup, they are moving heaven and earth to end the trade and it’s a slick marketing
campaign to influence people. Clearly its working, with people like yourself.

Their ideology is anti livestock farming and for animal liberation, virtually all
veggies and vegans. I have major issues with their version of the claimed
truth, but that’s a long story. It certainly does not mean that you are informed,
you’ve just heard one side of a story, IMHO a very distorted version.

Fact is that 99% of sheep arrive in good condition, the majority gaining weight
along the way.

Fact is that companies like Siba are spending big bucks to upgrade ships and
have especially built ships made.

Fact is the animals are fed, watered and sheltered on their journey, with an
Australian vet overseeing their health and wellbeing.

Fact is they are not all suffering as claimed, sheep are herd animals and
happiest amongst other sheep, with plenty of food and water.

Fact is that if people want them killed locally, they are free to buy them
and slaughter here. Go right ahead, then the trade will-end-tomorrow.

Pelican

Last year over 40,000 dead and diseased animals for export were dumped overboard, unable to endure the journey.

The industry claims these animals are healthy and vet-checked prior to departure and that only 1% died on the journey but one percent equals over 40,000.

Your research will reveal that the largest shipment of Australian animals are despatched each year to coincide with the Muslim religious celebrations.

Minister Ravlich is well aware that many of our animals also "participate" in the Muslim street festivities as you will see by the following link:

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/the-eid-festival-around-the-world-graphic-photos

Dickie’s post kind of makes my point. No doubt Singer’s book has been on
her bookshelf :)

Dickie of course knows nothing about livestock, as is common amongst the veggie
brigade. Dickie focuses her little beady eyes on 40’000 sheep, forgetting that
4 million got there just fine, which people who know about livestock will tell her,
are extremely good figures. After all, around 4 million sheep die a year out in our
paddocks, a few million lambs die in NZ, when they have a cold snap at lambing.

People who have run livestock, know that there will be losses for all sorts of reasons.
Dicky, with no experience, still does not understand that. The other day the bloke
who is teaching low stress stock handling mentioned an Australian meatworks losing
100 lambs a week. That’s 5200 a year, in just one meatworks!

Dickie is correct, the Hajj festival in Saudi Arabia is a major market for Australian
lambs. Who buys the overwhelming majority of our lambs? The Saudi Govt does.
For they have around 2 million pilgrims turn up in Mecca, whose religious duty it is to sacrifice a lamb each.

To deal with this deluge, the Saudi Govt has built huge meatworks in Mecca. Pilgrims pay around 160$ a head for their lamb, at a payment centre. When the
lamb is slaughtered, the pilgrim is rung and the slaughter confirmed, with the
majority of the meat being given to the poor, as is their religious duty. That is where
by far the majority of our lambs land up, the details are to be read on Arab News,
available on line these days, as they happen.

Now Dickie is clearly either ignorant of the facts or is trying to distort the truth, with
her regular googling. So she posts a link to a website showing some ritual slaughter
in some place, not an Australian animal in sight anywhere! She does not claim
that this is what happens to most Australian animals, but certainly implies that.

As we can see, the truth is distorted yet once again, which is my-point-exactly.

Yabby

In your arrogant anthropocentric world view animals exist purely for humans to exploit and profit from. Some of us actually value the life of an animal and don't feel comfortable that it should suffer to improve the bottom line of someone's business, especially when there are other alternatives available.

None of your so-called facts regarding live export convince me that these animals are not suffering in cramped and inhumane conditions. Forty thousand dead and diseased animals thrown overboard sounds like a lot of suffering to me.

"RSPCA Scientific Officer Melina Tensen said the footage of appalling handling and slaughter of Australian sheep, filmed in 09/07 and aired on ABC’s The 7:30 Report, provided irrefutable proof the live export trade subjects Australian animals to cruel and barbaric treatment, and must be stopped.

“This is at least the third time such footage has been filmed in the ME - proving beyond doubt that this intolerable cruelty continues unabated despite the presence of Australian industry representatives in the region.

“These are absolutely not isolated incidents, they are the same locations and the same practices that have not improved at all despite assurances and huge investment from the industry and the Australian Government to justify their trade,

“This horrifying treatment of Australian animals has not changed and will not change as long as the Australian Government and live export industry effectively condone these practices by sending more and more animals to meet this fate,” said Ms Tensen.

"The footage shows extremely distressed Australian sheep panting and stumbling as they are crowded together in suffocating humidity where temperatures regularly exceed 40C. They are then dragged and thrown from the truck onto concrete before their final extended and painful slaughter by a primitive method that would be prosecutable in Australia.

"The scenes of deliberate mistreatment and horrific slaughter of a bull offer little hope for Australian cattle of which more than 100,000 are exported live to the Middle East each year. Local transporters, handlers and slaughtermen allowed these atrocious practices to be filmed openly, demonstrating an alarming lack of concern or awareness of the impact of their actions.

"Ms Tensen said the Australian Government’s commitment to animal welfare is merely a token gesture, evidenced by its continued support for those profiting from this miserable trade,

"The RSPCA opposes live export because it is inherently cruel. The live trade is unnecessary because all major export markets for live animals already accept chilled and frozen meat from Australia that has been humanely slaughtered according to religious and other requirements."

Fact: Permission to slaughter animals anywhere in Saudi Arabia and the ME is not required.

“RSPCA Australia scientific officer Melina Tensen said many birds died because of overstocking, poor
ventilation or poor shed design and little consideration was given to the welfare of individual
birds during collection, crating, transport and slaughtering.”

http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=54227

A question of the pot calling the kettle black eh Dickie. Right here under your
nose, eaten by Australian consumers every day.

Cruelty to animals happens in the ME, it happens in Australia. That is exactly
why Australian farmers are spending millions on animal welfare in the ME,
unlike so called welfare groups. We are not as defeatist as you are. That is
exactly what Peter Dundon highlights. AA only film bad stuff, they ignore
the good stuff happening there.

Bromwyn, you don’t know what my worldview is. I have been openly critical
of factory farming of pigs and chickens btw. There is no good reason why
livestock and humans cannot benefit from win-win situations, as many do.

If I worked in an office and knew as little as you and Dickie seem to know about
livestock, I too might say that 40’000 compared to 4 million is excessive. But
30 years of experience has taught me otherwise, agreed by many experts
in the field. Ruminants, in particular sheep, are affected by a host of diseases,
be that in the paddocks of Australia, or on a boat or floating feedlot. Ask a vet
qualified and experienced in the field of livestock production. Even PF has her
share of paddock deaths.

If sheep were suffering they would be stressed, their meat would cut dark and
you can measure that stress level. No evidence of that sorry. In stead they gain
weight.

I don’t need to convince you of anything Bromwyn, as livestock is clearly not
your field, so your opinion is really not important IMHO. Rather the opinions
of qualified vets are important. I certainly don’t believe a heap of ideologues,
whose objectivity I have not seen anywhere as yet.

Yes farming is a business, many things have to be weighed but we need to
deal with facts, based on information from qualified people.

Nicky and dickie

I agree with your comments and need no convincing about live animal exports. Nicky I see what you mean about insults - the last time someone called me 'dear' was my mother when I'd been naughty (quite some time ago now). :)

Yabby you said: "BTW, where did you get your information that the trade is cruel? I remind you that conditions on most boats are far better then in most Qld cattle feedlots. Boats are simply floating feedlots. So why is it ok to keep cattle in a feedlot, but not on a boat, under better conditions?"

Yabby are you for real? Blind freddy can see this trade is cruel. Comparing boats to intensive feedlots is like comparing Hitler with Atila the Hun. Both are bad. I never stated that it is ok to keep cattle in feedlots.

If you remember from another thread a while back I stated I don't eat a lot of meat and only buy organic meat that is pasture fed. If I happen to go to another butcher instead of my usual one I always ask if the meat is grain or grass fed. Just like I won't buy eggs unless they are free range (soon to have my own chooks btw) :).

Yabby this thread was primarily about political interference in the judicial process.

Out of interest Yabby what do you think about this sort of interference in the Courts? Do you think it is acceptable and what might be the constitutional implications?

*Yabby are you for real?*

Yup, here I am :)

*Blind freddy can see this trade is cruel.*

Blind freddy is blind, so he can’t see a bleeding thing, sadly. So where
is the evidence? Did they forget to teach you basic reasoning at school btw?

*Both are bad. I never stated that it is ok to
keep cattle in feedlots.*

So why discriminate against WA sheep farmers? Where is the ongoing
campaign against feedlots? Our animals do in fact live mostly free range lives,
unlike the chicken and pork which most consumers buy, when they go shopping.

*Nicky I see what you
mean about insults - the last time someone called me 'dear' was my mother when I'd been naughty*

What a typically female response! Far more concerned with how things are said then the substance of the arguments. I could have predicted that.

*Out of interest Yabby what do you think about this sort of interference in the Courts?*

Why should the courts be used by AA, as a vehicle to have the live sheep trade banned, at huge expense to farmers and taxpayers? Will AA now pay compensation
to the Farmers Fighting Fund for their legal costs, given that they have lost the case?

I repeat, anyone is free to buy those sheep and slaughter them right here in Australia.

Just don’t tell farmers that they are meant to operate as businesses and make market
based decisions, then when they do, you want to deny them access to global markets,
based on your particular weird philosophies. If you think that farming should operate
as a charity, then say so, we will put in for our claims, accordingly. Singer’s philosophy states that sentient beings should not suffer. Yet here is a clear case
of ideologues ignoring that farmers too are sentient beings

Yabby

Yep and those insults keep coming. :)

My only interest in how something might be said is that in my experience, when someone stoops to patronising it usually means there is not much in the substance. The arguments should speak for themselves.

You still have not answered my question about political interference in the Courts.

Do you think the separation of powers important? The good thing about the legal system is that it exists for all Australians not just one section. Do we approve of political intervention when it suits us and then disagree with it when it doesn't?

A slippery slope.

Yabby you may not think live exports cruel but others do, and I can tell you they come from all walks of life.

Pelican, what you call “insults”, I call “being blunt” What Bromwyn calls “arrogant”
I call “self assured”. If you had followed the animal welfare threads on OLO for
long enough, you would know that the language that I use is extremely mild
compared to language used by animals rights fanatics such as Dickie and others,
when attacking me. So far I am little more then bemused, for I focus on content
and fact, rather then the emotionally gulfed, who seem to have trouble separating
the two.

I do admit to becoming slightly intolerant of those who have read a few slick webpages
and then claim to know all about the live export trade debate. It is far
more complex then that. There are good reasons why both State and Federal Govts
support the trade. For they have all the facts on hand, not just the hysteria promoted
by one side of the debate.

To better understand the present Govt decision, you need to understand
the background. When the Govt drafted the new animal welfare laws, it was pointed
out to them that some of the wording was ambiguous and could be used by those
with an agenda to shut down the live trade, to do exactly that. The Govt decided to
proceed anyhow and test the legislation in the courts, to see what legal interpretations
would come out of it. That has now happened and the Govt now agrees that there
are loopholes and things which are not clear, so is proceeding with changing those
laws accordingly. It was certainly never the intention of the Govt to shut down
the live trade.

This case has little to do with the separation of the powers, more to do with changing
new animal welfare legislation, that is clearly flawed. Courts may give legal
interpretations of laws, but Govts make and change laws, as is their right and that
is what they are elected to do.

As to the slippery slope argument, the Catholic Church uses that all the time, to
defend their opposition to women’s right to an abortion

Okay Yabby I have not been on OLO long enough to know the history of the various participants I can only go by the now.

I find it equally irksome when a person makes comments like: "I do admit to becoming slightly intolerant of those who have read a few slick webpages and then claim to know all about the live export trade debate". What makes you think this is the case - there is no grey area here. Cruelty is cruelty no matter how you dress it up.

(I just had a vision of sheep on a ClubMed cruise drinking cocktails while reclining on deckchairs). :D

Likewise you don't know anything about other poster's backgrounds and cannot assume anything just because their view is at odds with yours.

I for one believe the 'evidence' to be contrary to your view. There has been enough media commentary on this issue and information provided by the RSPA (hardly radical animal activists).

As for using the term 'slippery slope' - I don't have a patent on the word and unfortunately cannot legally stop the Catholic Church from using it as they see fit. What has abortion got to do with this issue by the way other than you making a throw away comment to distract from the arguments?

*Cruelty is
cruelty no matter how you dress it up.*

Yes, but if depends on how you define as cruel and what you know about a particular
species and their behaviour. For instance I think its cruel that city people keep their
dogs on chains, or lock them up in their houses or apartments all day, so they can’t
even pee. Sheep are herd animals, ruminants etc. Their behaviour is quite different
to other species. To understand what could be called cruel to a sheep, you need to
know a bit about them.

I’ve been on OLO a fair old time now and nearly always somebody starts a live trade
debate, so there have been many, and many comments from all sorts of people.
So far a great deal of the comments about sheep have been due to pure ignorance about the species. Most of these people have never even worked in a set of yards with a few hundred sheep, apart from PF. They simply don’t understand the world
from a sheep’s perspective, which is quite different, then the world from a dog’s
perspective.

Nicky even gets upset when I call them “livestock”

*(I just had a vision of sheep on a ClubMed cruise drinking cocktails while reclining on deckchairs). *

Well its been made quite clear by the ideologues that even the Queen Mary would not
be good enough to transport sheep! They are against people farming animals period.
It seems that we are barbarians and don’t understand these things :)

*and information provided by the RSPA (hardly radical animal activists).*

Officially that is the claim. Interestingly much of the RSPCA material is from AA :)
So you are telling me that there are no vegetarians or vegans who are part of the
RSPCA hierarchy? No Peter Singer fans there?

*What has abortion got to do with
this issue by the way*

I ran of words last time. If the slippery slope argument applies in this case as you
propose, why should it not apply in the abortion debate, as proposed by the Catholics?

Hi all

Still away from home with limited access. But a few observations about Yabby's always predictable views...

Firstly, there is rarely if ever anything "humble" about any of Yabby's opinions. Secondly, have you noticed that when he has nowehere to go and the arguments are well and truly stacked against him, he resorts to gender-based, patronising insults? And one could wish that farmers (with exceptions where due) were in fact as sentient as the animals they exploit.

Furthermore, there is nothing acceptable about keeping animals in feedlots (clear denial of the "Five Freedoms" - remember them, Yabby?), particularly "floating" ones, upon which they starve, go blind, and die of trauma, septicaemia and trauma from brutal handling by third world crews. And Yabby, do us a favour and don't try to tell us otherqise, For every animal who dies, countless others noticeably sicken and suffer

Yabby, you haven't been able to provide yet any of the information I was looking for on peer-reviewed (as opposed to industry-generated and funded) studies into such elements as inanition, or the effects of ammonia; both manifestations of the stress of intensive confinement on long distance (especially sea) transport.

I keep suggesting, tedious as it gets, that you read the magistrate's judgment. Animals Australia did not "lose" the case, the cruelty charges under the WA Act were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The "acquittal", if you can call it that, occurred as a result of a constitutional inconsistency (Section 109) - that being that the Federal Government issues permits for this cruelty. In short, a cop-out by the Magistrate now compounded by the extreme impropriety of Minister Ravlich (according to a law professor with whom I discussed this). Politics supervenes the law where live exporters are concerned and one wonders who is getting "kickbacks" in this.

Dickie, that link, and the case of the goats in NT are awful. Pelican and Bronwen, thanks for your input and support (apologies if I've missed anyone!). Speaking of "blind Freddy", Yabby, take the blinkers off, and do try to be nice - there's a good lad.

Cheers
Nicky

Furthermore, Yabby - when were you actually in one of these countries to measure the cortisal levels of these animals when slaughtered? When did you see the resulting meat? Any weight gains I think can be reasonably attibuted to the bulk rubbish they are fed for just that purpose (those who can reach/eat it).

One does not need to be involved in "livestock production" (says it all, really, doesn't it?) to know gross animal abuse when they see it either. Office, hospitality and retail workers, as do all members of the wider Australian community, have the capacity to assess and make determinations about the material they have seen. It brings us back to the old argument - businesses have to survive in their environments within certain moral and ethical constraints, with reference to community expectations - unless they are involved in live exports, of course. Yabby, fix up the meat industry in WA instead of bitching about it if that's your REAL problem. I actually suspect a guilty conscience.

We also know that it goes on in Australia too - probably on a larger scale than in our worst nightmares - but there are organizations in this country who attempt to deal with it.

Cheers
Nicky

*Secondly, have you
noticed that when he has nowehere to go*

ROFL Nicky, I always have somewhere to go, as my philosophies are thought through and based on nature’s laws. You are trying to deny those laws, so
your philosophy is mistaken. Dickie has told us about the evils of David
Attenborough films, as they show what happens in nature. Has it ever occurred
to you girls that perhaps Singer got it wrong?

*And one could wish that farmers (with exceptions where
due) were in fact as sentient as the animals they exploit.*

As I pointed out, you hate farmers. As you know little about farming, you don’t
seem to understand the win-win situations that can exist between people and other
species. I remind you that the sheep on my farm lead far more natural lives and
have far more freedoms, then the dogs in your house. I practise what I preach.

*Furthermore, there is nothing acceptable about keeping animals in feedlots*

So why not be honest Nicky and admit that you would like to close the whole
feedlot industry down as well, not just live exports. Come clean on what you
believe, so that Govts and everyone else in the Australian community knows
exactly where we all stand. Should the farming of all livestock cease as well?

*Yabby, you haven't been able to provide yet any of the information I was looking for*

I haven’t bothered looking Nicky, for that is your job, not my job. You might be
used to bossing the boyfriend around, if he puts up with it, that is his problem. I am not that silly.

Yes AA lost the case, or they would not be so pissed off. Their aim to shut down the
industry, based on the new welfare laws, has failed. That is the bottom line.

*and one wonders who is getting "kickbacks" in this.*

So are you accusing people of corruption? Everyone with an ounce of common sense can see the reasoning going on, apart from the ideologues of course, where
ideology seems to outweigh any kind of common sense

Yabby

"I don’t need to convince you of anything Bromwyn, as livestock is clearly not your field, so your opinion is really not important IMHO."

In my humble opinion? Humble? What a joke! I’ve read enough of your posts now to know that they don’t contain much humility.

I mightn't deal in livestock, but like it or not Yabby boy my opinion on animal cruelty is every bit as valid as yours.

“So far a great deal of the comments about sheep have been due to pure ignorance about the species. Most of these people have never even worked in a set of yards with a few hundred sheep, apart from PF. They simply don’t understand the world from a sheep’s perspective, which is quite different, then the world from a dog’s perspective.”

I grew up on a sheep farm and am not at all ignorant of their behaviour. Even if I were it wouldn’t preclude me from empathizing with their pain and suffering.

“Sheep are herd animals, ruminants etc. Their behaviour is quite different to other species.”

They might be herd animals but that doesn’t mean they’re happy to be crammed into dark airless enclosures, unable to move for weeks on end, unable to escape their own waste, unable to regulate their own body temperature and to be force fed on food they’re not used to and which many refuse to eat.

Nothing I've read yet convinces me that this trade is humane. Perhaps you can tell me where I’ve got it wrong. No name-calling, no put downs, just a simple straight forward explanation of the decent and humane care you say these animals receive on these boat journeys.

”Yet here is a clear case of ideologues ignoring that farmers too are sentient beings.”

I come from a family of farmers and understand very clearly the difficulties they face in adapting to climate change and the vagaries of global markets. This doesn’t give them licence to ruthlessly exploit their livestock or their land for that matter but that’s another debate. Good farmers are careful to do neither.

*Any weight gains I think can
be reasonably attibuted to the bulk rubbish they are fed for just that purpose*

So Nicky, with your apparent wisdom, tell us where the animal nutritionists have
got it wrong. Sheep pellets are made under their guidelines including mj/kg of
energy, % protein, minerals and vitamin supplements. What is rubbish and where
do they have it wrong ?

*Office, hospitality and retail workers, as do all
members of the wider Australian community, have the capacity to assess and make determinations about
the material they have seen.*

They might form an opinion Nicky, that does not mean that it is informed. Would you let a surgeon operate on you, if he had no experience in his field? I doubt it.
Yet you want to pass judgement on things in which you have no experience. Double
standards of course. Part of wisdom is knowing that there are things that you don’t know, not just being engulfed by emotions. That is why we employ experts, much
like you would, for your surgery.

*I grew up on a sheep farm and am not at all ignorant of their behaviour.*

Then you would know Bronwyn, that sheep spend their summer siestas camped on
sheep camps. They sit there chewing the cud, surrounded by their poop, which we
call smarties. Every healthy farm kid with a good immune system has eaten a few :)

*that doesn't mean they're happy to be crammed into dark airless
enclosures, unable to move for weeks on end,*

Where is your evidence that the sheep ships are dark, airless, or that they are unable
to move for weeks on end? Do you know about the ventilation systems on board?
How many days do you think it takes from here to the ME?

We have had various people travel on these ships and report back, reasonable and rational people, but of course the ideologues will always claim that they must be
biased, or paid off, or some other excuse. That conditions on ships could be
quite good, they refuse to accept

The following is a revealing account of how the livestock industry operates under stealth – they are indeed moral pygmies as is the resident crustacean (C.Destructor) who continues with his B rated propaganda on behalf of this cruel industry:

19. “ Lack of inspection at live exports wharfs results in increased mortality, morbidity and suffering of animals, both in the feedlots and in transit. Currently, the Australian Quarantine Inspection Service (‘AQIS’) is entrusted to inspect the animals on the wharf at loading. On 15 December 2003, however, AQIS advised that AQIS inspectors had not inspected animals at the wharf for the previous 6 years. The presence of inspectors at the loading and unloading of animals and during transport should be a strict requirement in the Standards.”

20. “Currently, the on-board management aboard live export shipments equates to intensive livestock production or less. By way of example, in November 2003, aboard the MV Al Kuwait, one experienced Australian stockperson was employed to supervise approximately 103,000 sheep. The supervision is clearly inadequate. Standard 5 should specify the minimum number of veterinarians and stockpersons required per animal.”

http://lawyersforanimals.org.au/2006/10/01/comments-on-version-2-of-the-australian-standards-for-the-export-of-livestock/

This industry does not know how hollow and miserable and full of glib talk it is, how crude it looks to those who follow it across the seas to witness what is being done there; and this industry will never earn the right to criticise those who defend the defenceless.

The International community is objecting and judging this nation on the manner in which it treats its animals.

One could not enumerate all the crimes perpetrated on these animals - crimes committed under the pretext of the economy. Economy for whom? Our sycophantic governments have let loose the dregs of mankind upon these hapless creatures.

Nicky, I've had a quick perusal of the judgement and the one charge that would have stuck under the WA Animal welfare act refered specifically to "fat sheep transported in November". Apparently this ruling is made because inanition and salmonellosis is higher for fat sheep travelling over summer, thus summer becomes an "unnecessary harm". No problem it seems to transport in winter though, and no problem for normal weighted sheep at anytime.

I would question why if live export is so blatantly cruel, why the case prosecutors refered only to an eighth of the sheep on that shipment(fat ones), and why no other charges were proven

Bronwyn, judging by how you described how you think that things look on a livestock ship,
I will admit that the live sheep industry and farming in general, are pretty hopeless
at informing the public as to what is really going on. Just about all that I read is
in MLA publications going to growers, some stuff in the rural press and similar.

So the general public don’t really have good access to more objective information,
to even try and form some kind of objective opinion. The ideologues run very
slick marketing campaigns, similar in style to that of the Catholic Church about abortion,
the aim is to push emotional buttons. Shame that they know so little
about livestock :)

Anyhow, after all the Peta claims, which farmers knew were wrong, Cameron
Morse, who was then editor of the Countryman, decided to hop on a live sheep
boat for himself, to find out a little more.

Cameron was a good editor. Unlike what many believe, there is regular discussion within
the farming community about all sorts of issues and he was always one to call
a spade a spade. Since then another couple of journalists have done the same,
one from the Eastern States, one from the ABC.

Wellards have put some of those original articles on their website, as it kind of
dawned on the industry that nobody was putting up a more factual account,
so animal liberation groups could claim whatever they liked.

Here is the link, if you are interested.

http://www.wellardgroup.com.au/media_centre/media_releases.phtml

Read them for yourself and form your own opinion if things are anything like you
had envisaged.

Yup, at the moment the Becrux is the best boat in the live trade, but Siba ships,
which own that ship, are a little different from previous owners. They are prepared
to invest in animal welfare and do things properly. They have two new purpose
built ships being built right now in Singapore. Even New Zealand use their ships
when they are moving breeding ewes around the world, to places like Mexico.

The contents of your articles are very selective Mr Cameron Morse and I would advise you to steer clear of our resident industry mouthpiece. He has just destroyed your credibility.

You wrote these articles at the beginning of July 2006. Between January and June 2006, some 18,000 animals were dumped overboard. Why did you not inform the reader of these numbers? Clearly, you regard them as insignificant.

Your articles are no more than a cover-up of the facts and your criticisms of those who are concerned for the welfare of these animals, are despicable.

In addition Mr Morse, despite the bleatings from you and the industry, that welfare standards have now improved, The 2007 year's mortalities at sea exceeded the 2006 year - he hem!

Your articles are a feeble attempt to mitigate the industry's disgraceful reputation.

1. Please view the statistics released to the "Reports to Parliament" section

2. View real farmer and livestock producer, Jenny Hume's professional account of the live export industry. She has a degree in Asian and Arabic/Islamic Studies; has been employed at the Federal Dept of Primary Industry and a management trainer for Vet. officers and meat inspectors in exports.

http://www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/welfare/export-trade/mortalities

http://webdiary.com.au/drupal-5.2/?q=node/1917

http://webdiary.com.au/drupal-5.2/?q=node/1367

Dickie, I am not a mouthpiece for any industry, I have no association with any
group. I simply express my opinions as a commentator on OLO. It happens
to be quite different to some of the hysteria and nonsense that is expressed by
some fanatics on OLO. A different perspective and some facts, have been
badly missing in some of these debates.

I thought that Cameron Morse expressed rather well, what he actually found
on a live sheep ship. Certainly quite different to what has been claimed by
various animal liberation groups on the internet. So we need to sort fact from
propaganda.

http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/monica/mm3.htm

That’s how the Catholics do it, to try to push peoples emotional buttons, when
it comes to the abortion debate. IMHO the tactics of both lobby groups are
amazingly similar and the philosophical flaws are amazingly similar.

*I have not sought to address the economic fallout of the loss of the live export trade. As Animals
Australia says, "When something is wrong, no amount of profit will make it right". I have little
sympathy for any of the exporting companies*

Above is what Dickie’s blogger wrote. Who mentioned companies? What about the welfare of thousands of farming families? What about the welfare of millions of
sheep? What about the suffering avoided to livestock, in times of drought? What
about the money generated, which buys fodder for remaining livestock in times of drought? What about the suffering of sheep carted for days in trucks, for thousands
of km, to the East for slaughter?

Turning philosophical ponderings about right and wrong into active propaganda
that affects the lives of millions of others, can turn into an absolute nightmare
if it is not thought through properly, as we can see by the Catholic example.
Both these groups ignore nature and ignore the law of unintended consequences.

Catholic philosophy states that is wrong to take a human life at any stage, period.

So various family-planning is banned, boatloads of food and
vaccines are shipped to the third world. The result is a human population explosion
that threatens the future of-the-planet.-tbc

I have yet to note a single person within the animal liberation movement, who has
thought through the consequences of their actions, when it comes to trying to enforce
their philosophies on others. Much like the Catholic Church and we know exactly
what a disaster that has been.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2007/s2131379.htm

Given Dickie’s love of 18’000, a URL mentioning the accidental death of
18’000 Australians a year. Oops. I guess it’s not a perfect world after all.

So yup, 18’000 sheep is insignificant, when seen in context of the millions
of sheep involved. A glass being 99% full to me makes far more sense then
panic about a glass being 1% empty.

Fact is, sheep just like people, are made up of all kinds of genetic combinations.
We have strong ones, those with a weak constitution, some more susceptible to
diseases etc. Only in the sheep world it all happens within 5-6 years, rather then
80 years as with humans.

Yes, sheep die of diseases like pneumonia, pulpy kidney, rumen problems,
plus a whole host of diseases, every day on Australian farms. The difference is
that nobody counts them, as in the live trade, but 5% is pretty well accepted by
most Ag Departments as an average figure. They walk around paddocks blind
from pinkeye, most usually recover. Those that don’t die of thirst. That is the reality.

If I have one criticism of the Cameron’s report, it’s the huge amount of time spent
mollycoddling every sheep on these ships. Frankly they would be better off with
a pistol, accept that whilst some sheep will thrive, a small % won’t. Give them
a bullet, then grind them up into fish food, for their fate is to be eaten anyhow.

The shipping companies of course know that the Dickies and Nickys of this world
are hanging onto every statistic. If the figures increase ever so slightly, it’s a major
drama in the eyes of the animal liberation lobby. Is it the best decision for animal
welfare? I doubt it.

Hi all
Back from Melbourne at last, to find Yabby eulogizing Cameron Morse's fairytales., Mr Morse is a journo who writes propoganda for farmers who want to send sheep (and other animals) to this atrocity with a clear conscience. I note he travelled on the "Becrux", not the "Al Kuwait", or the "Bader III", for example. I did read his article/s at the time, and can't recall any detail of significance about handling and slaughter in destination countries, but I'm sure that, if he indeed saw anything, he only saw the minority of sanitized stuff as seen in MLA's one and only (so far as anyone can find) training video. I note that we are still lacking credible (note, credible) sources of information about the "improvements" in importing countries.

Rojo, the fact that animals KNOWN not to cope with these journeys are sent regardless signifies a clear intent of cruelty; a "so what?" attitude to those who suffer and die. Yabby admitted as much himself when he said that Merinos are highly stressed animals (so they continue to send them in their millions regardless). And what do you expect to read on Wellards website, for heavens sake?

If you people are losing 5% of your flocks through neglect and illness, you are careless to say the least. Nor can you use live exports as an argument or response to other appalling practices (trucking animals across the continent; one report speaks of sheep on a truck for 74 hours with no water or feed; some were shot by the SA Police in the end). Nor is the drought an excuse.

Anyone who disagrees with Yabby of course relies solely on emotion, not what they have seen to be fact. You must've eaten too many of those "smarties". I'm afraid, Yabby. Look into ALL the ships, don;t just cite the one that may be okay. As for the Catholic Church - what has that to do with it? Just a red herring, I suspect.

Nicky

*Yabby admitted as much
himself when he said that Merinos are highly stressed animals (so they continue to send them in
their millions regardless*

Yabby agrees that merinos are by nature more highly stressed then many other
breeds. But as the data shows, despite this fact, 99% of merinos get to their
destination just fine. Clearly they must be looked after far better then our Nicky
will admit !

*Mr Morse is a
journo who writes propoganda for farmers*

Actually no, at the time he was the editor of a paper, the idea being to inform.
Tell me what in those articles is a lie?

*If you people are losing 5% of your flocks through neglect and illness, you are careless to say the
least.*

Says Nicky about farmers, when she does not know the first thing about sheep,
farming, sheep diseases, or the West Australian situation in particular.

Are you always this ignorant Nicky?

*Nor can you use live exports as an argument or response to other appalling practices
(trucking animals across the continent;*

Well they have to go somewhere Nicky. Either its to a meatworks, or on a boat, or
on a truck, or in a hole in the ground. West Australian farmers are Australia’s most
efficient farmers. Their job is to run those farms to the best of their ability. We keep
hearing that we need more value adding in Australia. So pay us a price that is as good as is paid in the East, buy them and kill them locally, if you have the intelligence to do it. Clearly city people don’t. All they have done so far is screw the
farmer to make the numbers work. Sorry, its not on. Get rid of payroll tax for meatworks, if that is what you need to do. Are you city people really so useless that
you base your economy on trading houses with one another and then call that GDP?

As I have mentioned before, you ride on the back of farming and mining for your
well-being but it seems beyond you to process those primary-goods-efficiently.

Those interested in the state of our oceans, may know that they are in a particularly bad way. Mass fish deaths are occurring around the planet resulting in the mass deaths of starving sea birds and the oceans now have a record 200 “dead zones.”

These zones engulf thousands of square kilometres of ocean which are so badly polluted that nothing can survive. Nutrients are creating algal blooms which deplete oceans and rivers of oxygen killing marine life on a massive scale.

http://home.att.net/~thehessians/fishkill.html

Agricultural run-offs are largely responsible for eutrophication of oceans and waterways on a global scale, significantly a result of growing livestock – (animal faeces, urine and chemicals.)

Governments refuse to regulate the agricultural industry and like the industry mouthpiece, remain in denial.

However, ag. scientists are endeavouring to address this serious situation - to date with few results.

http://www.nrdc.org/water/pollution/ffarms.asp

Omitted from the observations by scientists on agricultural pollution , is Australia’s estimated 4,000 tonnes of animal faeces and 2-6 million litres of urine washed into the sea from the export of live animals for each single journey.

Australia is the world’s largest live sheep exporter and Government records advise that last year saw around 210 sea journeys for sheep, cattle and buffalo.

Animal faeces: 4,000 tonnes x 210 = 840,000 tonnes per annum

Animal urine including the destructive ammonia: 6 million litres
x 210 = 1,260,000,000 per annum

Then add to the above figures, the bodies of diseased and drug induced animals which die at sea and are thrown overboard to also infect marine life.

Of course one could argue that the oceans are massive. How could one country be responsible for significant ocean pollution?

That is the argument of all the irresponsible big polluters as these countries continue polluting our oceans with relish and without regulatory restraints whilst feigning ignorance of the dire consequences.

Nicky, not a so what attitude. Fat sheep transportation in November(presumably Dec, Jan and Feb as well) should be restricted if mortality can't be controlled through varied diet and disease control. No issue there.

What makes a mockery of the anti-export fraternity agenda is that at anyother time, and any other weight class, no cruelty has been shown. In fact the prosecution limited its attack only to fat sheep, not a peep about anything else. Even then they didn't do particularly well.

My info comes from the AA site, I don't know who Wellards is.

If you mean merinos are "flighty" by highly stressed, I would agree. It seems a very natural reaction from an animal that has few defence systems. My understanding is that they adapt(or at least their cortisol levels normalise) within 24hrs of boarding the ship. It is the ability to adapt that is important, we certainly wouldn't want them stressed for the whole journey.

"neglect and illness" - I absolutely agree that sheep, or any animal, should not die through neglect. Unfortunately illness is not quite as simple an issue, no medicare exists, and unfortunately treatments are unaffordable for heart transplants and chemo let alone antiveneme for snake bite. Sheep will succumb to illness, no question, and their relatively short life span in itself skews death percentage figures. ie approx 3% of the remaining Zimbabwe population are dieing per year from aids alone. (repotedly 4000 a week in a population of 7m). At least farmers attempt to prevent deaths in their flock, even should it only boil down to an economic imperative.

http://www.theworldlink.com/articles/2008/03/28/news/doc47ed27ed810be587859378.txt

Thanks dickie we all need a laugh sometimes.

Err Dickie, you are scraping the bottom of the barrel of ideas
now :)

http://daac.gsfc.nasa.gov/oceancolor/scifocus/oceanColor/dead_zones.shtml

Take a look at this NASA URL. There is a little map there of where
those dead zones actually occur. Not so much oceans, but estuaries,
mouths of rivers, always on the coast, always where far too many
people and far too many livestock live in close confinement. Duh,
of course you will get pollution issues. Perhaps you should have
mentioned that to the Catholic Church, when they employed you :)
People pollution is a real global issue, as nature is out of
balance. Nearly all those dead zones are in the northern
hemisphere, where all the people and their livestock live. Nature
is about balance.

Now take a hike out into the Indian Ocean, what you have is
water. Miles deep, waves, water. If you were a fish, you would
nearly starve, as drinking water is not a way to gain nutrition
and make a living. Put your pet goldfish into a tank of water
with no food and see how long it lasts :)

Given the state of the Indian Ocean and lack of nutrients to
even feed a reasonable fish population, any ground up sheep would
be gone in a jiffy, doing little but increasing the fish population
by a small fraction.

Once again, nature is about balance, don't compare estuaries with
tens of millions of people polluting nearby water with a totally
different scenario in the Indian Ocean. But then I am aware
that you girls would come up with any old excuse, to shut down
the live trade. If its actually a rational argument, is of
course another question.

Hi all
Rojo, my point about Merino sheep was based on something Yabby said; and if they are indeed highly stressed animals, then it seems unconscionable that they have been putting them on these ships, in their millions, for decades, in the full knowledge of that. Likewise their shipping of the "fat" sheep at that time of the year. They knew what they were doing and did it regardless. The same can be said about the shipment of the Southern cattle on the "Maysora" in November 1996, contrary to their OWN (mandatory) standards (see www.liveexportshame.com).

Furthermore, you fail to address the bloodbath in importing countries. Yabby contributes the industry propaganda about "improvements to animal welfare" by MLA, but seems to be unable to support that with reliable information, contrary to Animals Australia, who have spent days at a time filming the atrocities (perpetrated by people "trained" by MLA). That sort of evidence doesn't lie. Note in particular the treatment of the bull (I happened to revisit the 7.30 Report footage again last night). He may not have been Australian, but the importer is the same one who importants Australian animals.

In a case such as this, charges are laid on the basis of what there is a reasonable possibility of being proven (as these were under the WA Act, but only dismissed on a technicality). To lay charges over all the sheep who suffered before, during and after the voyage would have tied the court up for months, so you go for what you think you can win. That's how things are done.

What should NEVER be done is a Minister of the Crown interfering in judicial proceedings, particularly after they have commenced. There is Commonwealth and State Constitutional law to support that, known as the "separation of powers". By doing so, Ravlich has declared her hand as a puppet of the live export industry and invited speculation about corruption. By not sacking her, Carpenter is complicit in that impropriety.

Cheers
Nicky

Nicky, nobody said that merinos are highly stressed, so don't misquote.
Merinos are just not as relaxed as some other breeds.
I have some girls here who will come up to your ute and look through
the windows, now a merino would not do that kind of thing.

Clearly its not an issue, as merinos thrive on the boats, as the
data shows. The glass is 99% full!

AA only film isolated incidents, not an overall industry representation.
I could take my little camera into any industry
and film isolated incidents. That is creating dogma, not giving
an objective overall view. The Catholics do the same thing.

The live export industry have made huge strides in the last 10
years, so that is great news. Credit where credit is due.

But nothing will ever satisfy people like you. You see a sheep
hogtied and freak out, as you are too inexperienced to even
realise that its common practise in Australia. Sheeps
throats are cut in Australia every day. Even your new transport
rules accept it. You clearly have two standards, one for
Australians and another for the nations which you hate so much.
Your racist comments are there for all to read.

As to the court case, it was all explained to you. You most
likely never bothered to read the posts in the first place.
Ah well.

Nicky, You focus greatly on the technicality that resulted in aquittal on all 3 charges, but not a mention that only one of the charges would have stuck had they actually been subject to the WA welfare act. The real technicality wouldn't be about 50 odd fat sheep dying, on a boat containing 103 000 sheep would it?

"you go for what you think you can win" - and they didn't even "win" that, what does it say about "cruelty" to the rest of the sheep on board? send the fat sheep in June and there are no problems according to Magistrate C.P. Crawford's findings.

No wonder the WA govt decided not to throw anymore money away. According to one of dickies links WA was forced to undertake the prosecution under Writ of Mandamus in the first place, not necessarily because it was winnable. And it obviously wasn't won.

I've made my thoughts on ME slaughter quite clear in the past and find the topic quite irrelevent to Australian live exports. The ME imports 16 million sheep per annum, of which Australia provides a quarter or less. I don't feel that sheep are any different, no matter what country they're from, so "saving" only Aussie ones is an incredibly narrow view, and while it might make some feel all cuddly here, it does nothing for the rest of the sheep in the ME. Ceasing Aust live-exports may not even impact on the numbers slaughtered there at all, as other producers pick up the slack. Hardly a win for the sheep.
I think by providing animals to the ME we are in a better position to improve slaughter conditions over there, not only for sheep and cattle but camels too. I just can't see our efforts to educate and change having any influence without supplying the product to go with it.

Anyway, it seems to me the battle against "cruelty" aboard ships is shaky when the argument comes round to the animals treatment once they're actually off at the other end.

Hi all
Rojo, we are talking about a matter that was brought to the attention of the WA authorities in 2003, that was why the Writ of Mandamus was filed - basically to force them to do their job. The "new" ALES, I am now told by Canberra, would "prohibit" such a shipment (like they enforce that - as we saw with the "Maysora" cattle and the "Al Messilah" sheep in 2006).

The charges under the WA Act were proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and the WA Solicitor General disagreed with Crawford letting these people off based on the provisions in the Constitution sufficient to have begun appeal proceedings. Subsequent interference by a government minister in judicial process is the argument here.

Given the fact that we are talking about people who still publically flog, imprison and stone to death female rape victims, I really don't think the handful of "animal welfare experts" in the Middle East is going to have too much influencee over the brutality to animals either. That is LiveCorp propaganda. Animals Australia's material was filed over sustained periods on each occasion, showing the very same people "trained" by LiveCorp in animal "welfare" (slow learners?)

I think the focus should be on the fact that if Australia stops sending animals - any animals - to face the brutality that is routine in the Middle East and SE Asia, it is taking a moral position that Australians find that unacceptable. Remember, all these countries are signatories to the OIE Standards, have been for years, routinely ignore them, and face no sanctions for doing so (a bit like LiveCorp here, where AQIS routinely fails to enforce the ALES). If one country takes a stand, then it becomes an international cause of real concern. We can only fix what we can in Australia(i.e. ban it), and hope to influence other countries to do the same.

Cheers
Nicky

Nicky Dickie

We have already offered you and others a full legal team to sort this out.

The fact AA and yourselves choose to ignore that is too bad for the Animals.
I have said plenty of times pale has several lawyers as members. I am not refering to young enviomental ones either.

It really is now up to you all to consider doing what is best for the Animals.

Now I am going to get one of those lawyers to contact AA next week.
So if the assistance is regected once again dont blame us.

Yabby you in particular could have done something towards opening plants by meeting with Me and reps from Asia.

You choose however to allow animals to travel long distances and suffer what they do.

I know this much it might take a while- It might even take longer but anybody involved in this evil trade onday will meet their karma.

Hi again all

PALE, I don't know what Dickie's position is, but what would I do with a legal team? I have no standing to mount an appeal, I think you will find that only political pressure is going to work, unless Animals Australia is working behind the scenes; possibly going to a higher court. I know that they have legal experts as well - one in particular is just excellent; I attended the Animal Law Conference at the University of NSW last year, which was great.

You have to have standing to appeal a decision in such a case (as the WA Solicitor General has), and I don't know the relationships and court structures in WA well enough to make any valid legal comment here.

As I said earlier, I am not in a position to communicate privately, or to attend meetings, particularly at present, and I don't know enough to make the sort of contribution I think you're looking for anyway. All I can do is provide the information I DO know.

As for Yabby, he seems to prefer to comment from the sidelines, and maybe has his reasons for doing so too - I don't know. But just reading the remarkable propaganda at www.liveexportcare.com, MLA claims to have "trained 500 stockmen" (note men) in the Middle East - given the obscene number of animals they import that's hardly a startling achievement in all these decades. And Animals Australia filmed those exact, same, "trained" people brutalizing Australian animals AFTER their "training". You have to question things like, for example the content and duration of the training, and note that the "trainees" most likely do not even speak English, or have any real commitment to the great largesse of this "training". And what qualifications do the "trainers" have an Education?

I think we'll probably see that Animals Australia is not going to be beaten on this, and still has some cards to play. Good luck with your negotiations there.

Cheers
Nicky

http://www.law.usyd.edu.au/slr/slr30_1/Gerangelos.pdf
http://www.animalsaustralia.org/media/in_the_news.php?article=82

Magistrate Rules that Live Export is Cruel
8 February 2008
In a landmark animal cruelty trial, a Perth magistrate has today ruled that Australia's live export industry is cruel.

"Magistrate Crawford's finding is not only damning for the industry, as this was a routine shipment," said Animals Australia's Director, Glenys Oogjes, "but politically it is groundbreaking. There is now immense pressure on the Federal government to respect state law."??>

DEFINITION OF DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION OF POWERSProbably the leading modern work on separation of powers is by Professor Vile, published in England in1967:"Constitutionalism and the Separation of Powers" where the following definition is given:A 'pure doctrine' of the separation of powers might be formulated in the following way: It isessential for the establishment and maintenance of political liberty that the government be dividedinto three branches or departments, the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. To each ofthese three branches there is a corresponding identifiable function of government, legislative,executive, or judicial. Each branch of the government must be confined to the exercise of its ownfunction and not allowed to encroach upon the functions of the other branches. Furthermore, thepersons who compose these three agencies of government must be kept separate and distinct, noindividual being allowed to be at the same time a member of more than one branch. In this way

Nicky

Understand Your position. Pitty though Robert and the crew have offered to do it. You know AA dont talk to us.

What would you do with a legal team? There people Nicky. I guess have a yack on the phone and have a whole fresh view of what they think they can get up on .

"I just cant take anymore on at the moment". Nicky as for this SH about them training and all the other rubbish- I posted something on the meat thread but I thought you might miss it because you said you were going away and in a rush.

I might whip it up here as your thread is about law and order so I guess that could include ....

You will note Yabby stopped posting as usual.

In short its fresh off the Maylasian Journal which isnt made public here. It written by them and hosted on the AFIC site but you have to have pass words to read it.

Anyway I am sure Yabby you didnt miss the bit about the bolt guns.

Umm, There goes your lots story on Halal Having to be slaughtered without using bolts. Oh Yeh the old fairy tale they have got very little refigration in ME.

Back to Nicky- Its late and I wonder hows the foot? The MLA Livecourpe thumbing their noses at RSPCA clearly with Government support (giving six young ones to promote the live trade)

while giving the red meat and abattoir industry 'NO' Ambassitors says it all!

Cries for an enquiry into MLA have been around a long time.


I recall when the person in charge at MLA said to me regarding finding support to promote reopening abattoirs= "NO" because that would effect live exports and that's "Mark Vailes personal baby."

Ian Ross MLA cheif contacted me by phone and said Quote.

We wont be doing anything to compete with live exports??

Bring on the enquiry into the WA case and Bring on the MLA enquiry and WE will demand the terms of reference!

*we are talking about people who still publically flog, imprison and stone to
death female rape victims*

Nicky, its overdue that you get off your arrogant Western high horse! Not so
long ago, they still gassed 6 million to death in the “civilised West”.
In America they electrocute people etc.

The ME is undergoing dramatic changes. Have a look at Dubai. But changing
culture takes time, does not happen overnight. That it is happening at a rapid
pace, cannot be denied however.

Yes the odd person is still stoned in Iran, they are not Arabs and we don’t send
our sheep there. The point is Islam teaches that Muslims should be kind to animals
and the fact that the animal welfare lobby is not using this to help bring about
change to improve animal welfare, shows me that if the animals are not Australian,
you clearly don’t care.

You complain about how a cow is slaughtered. Rest assured its not easy without a
restraining box. That is exactly why Australian farmers have bankrolled a whole
pile of restraining boxes, so that now most cattle in Indonesia are put through them.
That is positive change, positive for animal welfare. What have you done? Nothing.

The same sort of equipment for sheep and cattle in the ME could make a huge
difference for all animals slaughtered there. Rather then having to spend money
fighting off you fanatics, we farmers could be speeding up
those sorts of programmes. Or you could chip in and help and actually make a difference to
animal welfare in the ME.

*We can only fix what we can in
Australia(i.e. ban it), and hope to influence other countries to do the same.*

Hogwash. You can be proactive and bring about real changes. Like installing
equipment, Australian technology etc. Australia is reasonably experienced
when it comes to animal handling and making suitable equipment. There is
no reason all that can’t be rolled out in the ME. Combine that with the
Islamic view that requires Muslims to be kind to animals and you are going to
make progress.

Dear Yabby ...

From ABC News last November:

17 Nov 2007

A Saudi court has increased the sentence given to a gang rape victim to 200 lashes of the whip and six months in prison

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/17/2093611.htm

Note SAUDI ARABIA, and that is "customary" in Sharia Law, practiced in most Middle Eastern countries. It has nothing to do with Western arrogance, it is completely unacceptable in any decent society. Or do you agree with such behaviour? As for the teachings of Mohammed of kindness to animals, we've seen undeniable evidence of how much these people enjoy brutalizing them on film.

Your comments about the holocaust are interesting. Like your comments about capital punishment (I think these days it is by lethal injection), abortion and the Catholic Church, it is just another "red herring".

It is the Australian government (with taxpayers' dollars) which claims to be funding "improvements" (that is clearly stated in a letter I received last week)- not Australian farmers, who, by sending their animals, demonstrate clearly thst it is the dollard that matter, and that they have absolutely no concern for the fate of the animalsd they send.

I take it that you find the methods used on cattle at Bassetin slaughterhouse acceptable then. The last Sixty Minutes story described ONE restraining box, which had never been used.

And no animal welfare group worthy of the name will contribute to this atrocity.

PALE, Thanks for that Separation of Powers material; it saved me going back through loads of work to find a recognixed definition. I was thinking too, that since I'm not a member of any organization, any contribution I couod make would not have much credibility. I do think that the Australian public should be told exactly how many taxpayer dollars have gone to MLA for live export support though. Your Robert may find with the WA case that the only person with standing would be the WA Solicitor General, so the matter should probably be appealed to him/her, or taken to a higher court.

Cheers
Nicky

Yes Nicky, I followed the Saudi story, it is one story. It was taken
up by CNN, highlighted globally and I think in the end the King
pardoned her. You forget that the internet and satelite dishes
are changing the world, even in Saudi Arabia.

What we have in SA is no different from what we have had in the
West. Old Archbishop Pell still preaches the evils of condoms.
The Catholic Church used to have people like me burnt at the stake.

They can't do it any longer and similarly in SA the young are rebelling
against the old traditions and want change. The old ones
don't want change. Some of them need to die until it can happen,
but the pressures are enormous right through the ME.

Fact is that with the advent of the internet, the genie is out of
the bottle and the old brigage simply cannot put it back.

Typical of you, you mention one single restraining box in Egypt,
but what about the other 70 in Indonesia? Fact is Nicky, you
are unable to think objectively about the big picture,
you are far too obsessed.

By far the majority of MLA funding comes from farmers in the way
of levies. Yes, the Govt makes a contribution dollar for dollar,
for research projects etc. If another 10 million was spent tomorrow
for installing proper slaughter equipment in the ME, I for one would
be thrilled, as animals would benefit

Nicky, One of the three charges was "proven beyond reasonable doubt" the one relating to "fat sheep in november", of which there were 4010 aboard a shipment of 103 000. You cannot say "charges" truthfully when only one charge would have stuck under the WA act.
The other two charges were not proven and thus dimissed. It's in the findings, I'm not sure why you continue to argue to the contrary.

flogging etc is just a cop out Nicky, that's a "too hard lets not try" mentality. Does that make it easier to turn a blind eye to it all but Australian animals? At least the meat industry here is trying to do something.

"handful" - oodles better than none. One would hope any lessons learned could be applied to non-aussie animals too. How many AA personnel are over there training stock handlers?

yep, moral positions will save the day "Given the fact that we are talking about people who still publically flog, imprison and stone to death female rape victims". Take your own advice, for what it's worth.

I'm quite sure the North African countries which supplied during Australias past market absence, and who seem to share similar religious beliefs, will be more than happy for Australia to withdraw from live-export. Won't do their sheep any favours though.

I was thinking too,...

Nicky
What Can I say- you’re wrong. Also and I have to pick my words so not to offend. your work is known and respected. Look you know you have a better handle on many of the aspects.

Tell you what. Robert can post you and ask you himself. He’s read your comments along with others and said- Ask her to contact me. We will do it. I can only pass it on.

You might find a team of lawyers a bit refreshing in a way because they only look at the legal side with I will say a totally different approach which has been taken before. I think you should at least talk to him. Then if you’re not interested- nothing lost. They are not asking you to sue just supply your unique background on ships- he needs that.
Ok I won’t nag- look for his post is all I can say. There are several of them who are willing to help.

Nicky Said
I do think that the Australian public should be told exactly how many taxpayer dollars have gone to MLA for live export support though.
Pale.
Yes I know but it’s the massive time and resources to follow the blood trails. I mean we would have to include all the enquires that the public purse has paid for over the last twenty years and trust me they refuse to disclose and that’s millions upon millions of the publics money. For EG how would I work out what’s still going through AWB live exports. I can promise you they would still be paying, err, road transport. So do you think the Australian public would be happy about that? Umm, perhaps we should expose more but its time. I am working 16 to 20 nows- You can’t be far behind me.

Funds going through one department to another and another and back again passed on as so called grants for buildings and land that doesn’t even exist.

Anyway, thanks I will think about it.

Yabby

Gertrude is so badly informed ..

I make a point of telling YOU most if not ALL these projects are HKMs!

And this one in particular belongs 100%to the girls you are debating! And other Animal minded people.

all hells going to break loose – Very Soon! Do not tell me I don’t know what’s going on behind the
Scene pls.!

http://www.halaljournal.com/?page=article&act=show&pid=1487&PHPSESSID=6c39a74c8d4d420d6c75aa2aa2a20cee

Gertrude btw doesn’t have to know every cut of beef to have a beef up with MLA Yabby; Gertrude has her own unique evidence.

My God I even had one head MLA tells me there was nothing going on with Malaysia.

Didn’t know Mohamed while I was looking at him standing right next to Mohamed and the Malaysian Minister at a meeting I ORGANISED! Dur!

Then you have Ian Ross – (Head of MLA tell you in person that NOTHING will ever be assisted that competes with LIVE EXPORTS.

I note you shied like a horse away from the posts I put up done by the Malaysian Government and industry.

Information never made public before in this country. Let’s take a look and see what Livcorpre and MLA are up to with OUR Australians public purse while defying RSPCA and other Animal Welfare organizations shall we.

Yabby you would even know 20% of the tricks of the trade to cycle funding.

The truth IS Yabby it is only those with vetted interests with contacts with Government and other involved industries that are stopping the Aussie Farmers getting on board this-
http://www.worldhalalforum.org/

This is an important gathering to discuss and share ideas on how to push the halal agenda further forward…Malaysia continues to be open and keen to work with other countries in advancing the global halal industry .towards this end, the World Halal Forum and its programmers can provide an effective platform due to its focused agenda and wide ranging reach”

Datuk Seri Hj Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
The Prime Minister of Malaysia

Not only Malaysia but other countries. You only have to look here to see how the meat Industry makes or breaks a country.=

http://www.halaljournal.com/index2.php?page=article&act=show&pid=1480

Hi all
Just a last quick one ... PALE, there is an excellent document at www.liveexportshame.com called "A Disaster by Another Name" which details pretty much every ship that I've heard of, and some that I haven't. From what I can gather it was researched through the Fairplay International Register of Shipping and AMSA defect and detention records, and it has photographs too. Your Robert may be interested in looking for that. It's a bit tricky to find though - tell him to search the site for "A Disaster..." and go for the updated version (late 2006/early 2007) I think.

AMSA lists ship detentions on its website under the Port State Control link (the Deneb Prima was holed up in Port Adelaide for some days in September last year over safety and fire hazard defects, for example. Read about the Torrens (the former Farid F) the terrible too - it's still transporting cattle from Australia, I think.

Nite all
Nicky

Nicky

Thanks, I will tell him buts that just one part of it I am afraid. In order to do something successful in the courts he and his lawyers friends would require someone to do the leg work= which mostly involves supplying them a full background.
Much of this history took place well before our involvment with Animal Welfare.
I am sure anything can be researched but the costs would be enourous especially considering the time involved. Then theres the chance something would be overlooked etc.

Nothing like someone Savvy with All of the background to brief them.

Then I have to weigh up the quickest way to the long term result. Lets say for eg the Government banned live exports overnight.
That would create a monumental problem in itself - especially short term.

This is one of the reasons why we created HKM to put the alternative on the table which blocks people like yabby making claims that people like us have no idea of what we are doing.

So all things considered we think as much as we would love to take on the courts our time is best spent introducing new projects and reopening plants throughout Australia.

To stand by the red meat industry does not mean we agree with feed lots or some other issues.

What it does do is start to head in the direction of a very long journey. To support or unite with others effected by the unfair Government and Industry policies purposely directed the promote the evil vile trade of exporting Animals still alive purley for a trade dollars gain - for a very few is the first step.

More than once- more than a thousand times I have questioned if we should go all out and do the legal thing- BUT Its would still require some form of co-operation from others to brief the silk.

That co operation was refused.
I have no reason to believe that position has shifted.

PALE, I guess you don't know until you try. And the fact remains that you would still have to have standing to bring an challenge, that's why I think political pressure is the only thing that will work. Most of the information I've got has come from stuff that I've researched, and from www.liveexportshame.com, where there is a huge volume of background. Beyond that, Animals Australia is the only place where the background and evidence for this particular case would be held. Not being a member of any group myself, I have neither standing nor credibility in that sense (that sense only, Yabby, before you start!).

There was talk when the FOI reports were released about some action in Tasmania over the "Al Messilah" shipment in February 2006, but as I understand it, Tasmania's Animal Welfare Act has a statute of limitations of 6 months, so that was well over by the time the reports got out. It would possibly have failed on the same grounds anyway (i.e., cruelty proven but Commonwealth law over-riding State law.

I can't recall any mortality events arising out of Queensland shipments, but there is the current case of the goats in the Northern Territory.

I think that trying to mount any sort of legal challenge would fail on the basis of standing. The WA Solicitor General, I suspect, would be the only person who can be prevailed upon to act, unless perhaps the Writ of Mandamus instrument could be used again to force him/her to act (carry out a duty).

Cheers
Nicky

Nickysaid

PALE, I guess ...

Palecomments
I am trying Nicky. Trying to work out which is the most practicle move. I still come back to the reopening on Australian Abattoirs along with Agreed improvements for Animals.

Nickysaid
And the fact...

Pale
Yes correct. Leave that to the fellows. They are not enviromental lawyers. See runing it differently.

Nickysaid
that's why I...
pale
No Nicky No. Political pressure will NEVER succeed alone. Dont you believe it. Unless: There is a alternative on the table with powerful backers. The Government need that and also must be seen to be reasonsible to the farmers who have been blindly willingly or unwillingly made realiable on the evil trade.

Nicky-
Most of the information www.liveexportshame.com, ...

pale
Yes Dawn Lows work- Shes Brilliant, WA

Nicky-
Beyond that, Animals Australia ....
pale... umm, thats never going to happen- I guess we could request RSPCA furnish them.

Nicky said
I have neither standing nor credibility in that sense (that sense only, Yabby, before you start!).

Palecomments
No No nicky your incorrect. A person or people is perfect- Cant be dismissed as exteme running with groups- its best.

Nickysaid
but as I understand it, Tasmania's ...

palecomments
No Nicky someone is being ill advised. Not if there was a complaint made 'within' the six months?

Dont take this the wrong way but enviromental lawyers are not familar enough with playing the courts and the legal loop holes.

They have been told that - buts it incorrect!

Nicky
goats in the Northern Territory.

Pale- Theres a lot more than that IN QLD

Nicky
I think that trying to mount any sort of legal challenge would fail.

Pale - I dont. Has to be run another way thats all. Its VERY tempting

Goodnight Nicky Its good to post with someone who can put a few words together and has honour regarding our innocent Animals.

May Karma pay back every B that has tortured them!

Hi PALE,
Yes, BRING IT ON (the Karma).

The way I heard it from people in Tasmania was that the "Al Messilah" report only became available AFTER the six month statute of limitations had expired, otherwise it WOULD have been taken up. although it was known that it had been a reportable voyage earlier than that. Reports were made about ill and injured sheep being loaded, but none of the people there could get any action taken.

Dawn Lowe doesn't have anything to do with www.liveexportshame.com - I think she may have started it with other people but she now does some great work with Animals Angels. There are others doing the work on LES now because of Dawn's commitment to Animals Angels.

I still think Animals Australia must have a few cards still to play behind the scenes; they have gone quiet for a reason. The RSPCA may not have all the material from the case but it would be worth asking them. The judgment, and a commentary by Dr Malcolm Caulfield, one of their legal people, are at the live export indefensible site.

I've still got a heap of work to do yet, so good night to you too.

Cheers
Nicky

Nicky
Yes I hear Suzzanne Caz had taken over shamelivexports along with AA etc .

Regardless of that I can say that Dawn did an awful lot of work and has great knowledge. She was also savvy enough to represent herself inderpendantly to the Federal Government ( past) I am not sure whats happening now with this Government.
She won a lot of respect from them too.They always spoke very highly of her and supported her stand to represent her self.

It is really important that people do that. I can say in all honesty and without any offense meant to anybody if you try to speak as a AA follower you wont get a hearing.

Regardless if it is fair or not we must take that onboard and put the Animals first.

Nicky said
I think she may have started it with other people but she now does some great work with Animals Angels. There are others doing the work on LES now because of Dawn's commitment to Animals Angels.

Yes that all Started when I contacte Christa In Germanny.
Which reminds me do you know how I can contact lindy?

Yes I know your busy.
Nite Again

Hi PALE
Who is Lindy?

AA is the organization which is representative on the Animal Welfare Consultative Committee, so it is not without some "clout". But I prefer not to be a direct member of any organization because it can lock you in to various policies that can prove very onerous at times.

Suzanne does contribute to www.liveexportshame.com, her name is at the end of the document about the ships, and I think she may be represented as a "moderator" under the name of Export News Tasmania. That's about as much as I know - sorry!

Cheers
Nicky

Nicky
Goodevening
Yes, BRING IT ON (the Karma).
Nicky
pale

Ok Nicky maybe its time we stepped in. In hindsite we should have just gone ahead and done our own thing years ago instead of waiting for the others. WA is a strange little place within the legal grounds and those who surround it.

Could you please post the link with the transcipt to save me hunting.


We would really appreciate it.

However lets remember regardless of what happens its on the ground we require more plants to make any findings practicle.

The real answer will always lie within the industry .

Hi Pale
Here is the link. The document is 33 pages.

http://www.liveexport-indefensible.com/downloads/Al_Kuwait_Reasons2.pdf

Cheers
Nicky

Nicky
Thats a really big help to save me looking.
Thanks.
I cant let you know much on here. Give us a coulpe of weeks and email if your interested. Also thanks for all you do - and Dickie.

Good evening everyone
This is a really interesting thread, and it will be interesting to see where it goes. I wonder if there are any plans to overturn Minister Ravlich's actions through some sort of administrative appeal? There is much to be said for the constitutional conventions regarding separation of powers, given how easily bought politicians can be.

Good evening Penny
I seem to remember you as a Animal Welfare minded Person.
Its gone up for Advise but the Lawyer requires a willing helper- just to send docs and background to him.
These are not enviromental lawyers and QCs they are old and well repected.
The bottom Line is- We will pay but its going to take much longer if we cant get a helper. As much as we would like to we cant put this first. There are other things however will will pay costs etc.

Anybody prepaired to work with lawyer and QC can do so directlty without going through us.
As I said To Nicky its hard to know where to put the time and we have always tried to put it in a more direct manner by getting farmer talking direct to buyers etc and working with muslim contacts to convince them to take a ban live export policy to their congress

I am hoping that is happening soon. However dont want to post too much here just yet.

So If you know anybody seriously interested to help the lawyers get this back to court please email info@livexports.com
To be given direct contact to Lawyers.
Forget it Yabbs , just in case you were thinking of playing up with the boys:)
Mind You personally I wouldnt mind hearing from you to hear a proposal I have.
Cheers All

btw Penny
Just in case you are wondering why we are putting this out to the universe- because we are two short in the office with Tayn in WA and the other lady away for several months.
At the end of the day if I have to drops omething else to do this the Animals miss out on other projects that we consider its actually even more important. ( not that this isnt).

- even if it were banned tomorrow Penny without a plan to put before the government to introduce an alternative- how long do you think it would take parliment to over turn it.
So it is towards establishing a well funded well planed alternative we give most of our attention.

WE post in here because we think is important to keep Animal Welfare as high profile and never far away from the attention of the public and Government.
Despite not really having the time - We make it.
Goodnight

Sorry, Pale, I wouldn't know where to start, you need someone with far more expertise than me, and I would suggest that they'd have to be in Western Australia. Besides, isn't that what you pay lawyers for if you have already retained them? They're the ones who are supposed to have the knowledge. All the information that seems to be out there for the public is on the liveexportindefensible website.

Thanks for the link Penny
WA courts are a tiny inter connected bunch that seem to operate with their small clicky clam out back in corridors.
They operate almost totally separate from the rest of the system, funny ideas and really quite interesting as to what they ‘think’ they can get away with.
Fortunately there is a whole another world out there in the justice system. If he can help -good.
if not...
Goodnight

Nicky
By the way a very good call on opening this site. Interfearance with court cases by Government will not be tolerated.
By now of course you realise that this Government is a different cookie to the much hated Howard Government.
They play it by different rules. Like they just lie interfear or change them.
Soon when we get time we will give your thread the attention it deserves. Not so much about the particular case you raised but the overall threat to justice in this country being interfeared with.

I think at the end of the day this whole affair will have to go up to the UN. All that requires is some cooperation to make it happen and the right team of of some high profiles and legals.

These people have a right btw to have their appeal upheld and if we leave out just for a moment the matter at hand and look at the interfearance it cant be allowed to continue.

The WA government crawling up the @ of that industry have really gone too far this time.
The powers quite clearly from fed to state must be inderpendant.

A long time ago one of the people you follow said for eg Jack lake was ok.
Well he would have been the biggest problem at the time refusing to consider options but being oh so nice to her face.

I feel very sure anything that is filed down there regarding this matter now will be responded by in chamber applications to get it struck out without any a formal court transcipts.

This is a very interesting case in a legal sense. Quite apart from Animal Welfare.

Improper Ministerial intervention in WA live export cruelty case indeed
Its really is beyond the pale

Hi all
PALE, I doubt if there are grounds for it to be taken to the UN. But there might be grounds to take the trade collectively, and the players in it, to the OIE, since almost all the countries to which Australia exports animals are signatories to the OIE Standards and none are meeting them. You wouldn't do it on just this case though, it would be a matter of presenting all the available evidence as a whole, and also finding a way of forcing the OIE to take action (it seems to be as lethargic as animal welfare authorities in Australia, and there is no way it could not be aware of all this).

Just a thought.

Cheers
Nicky

Nicky
Thanks for that. Could you run any ideas by. Cant talk here
robertcochrane@qldlawgroup.com.au
Just informally and I will tell him I requested you to.
If its a prob for you dont worry.
Thanks again Nicky we really appreciate your interest.
Have a good night.
I see you girls are giving our poor old resident rat Yabbs a dust up Ah.

Poor Yabby does bring it all on himself, I'm afraid, with half-baked and unsupported "scientific" theory and his sexist bagging when he is backed into a corner. Still, it wouldn't be the same without him.

If would be better if you just copied and pasted what I've said here to your lawyer friend, I think. I shouldn't think you would have to have "standing" to bring a complaint there as you would if you contested the WA matter.

Cheers
Nicky

Nicky

Yes I agree it wouldnt be the same without our poor old Yabbs.

I was thinking to reopen the yabbys adventures thread again soon.

I was wondering if we could base it on real ships and real happenings. What do you think? To educate the public.

You have so much knowledge in your head. More than I. perhaps you might help see yabbs off on one of his ships.

I must addmitt I am a bit usleless at that. I always get the names and dated mixed and have to loook things up.

They tell me Gleynse is fantasic with the knowledge in her head. Pity she doesnt post here.

Re the legal stuff. Its going to be a few weeks yet I suppose before we know advise.

I can only assume if we run it the Qc will invite all states to join etc.
We will if that happens invite all groups to join. This is what we invited AA to join us in in 2003 but AA refused to meet with us about it.
God knows why because we have the x crimes commissioner running it. Anyway thats in the past- i guess!

iF RSPCA dont respond in a very positive manner do not think pale will be silent either.

When this was mentioned before to RSPCA National they said we would have to contact AA.

Fair enough we are happy to do that if and when it happens.

If there is no co operation then we will supeana. All we care about is fixing it for the animals minus personalites.

The aim would be to get it on track and hand it lockstock and barrel back over to AA with our lawyers to assist them.

We have 'too much' already with afic and international halal.

Hey cant you see poor old yabbs little face when the muslims themselves demand live animal exports to be stopped- hilarious.
( soon Yabbs very soon)

Nicky this is 'very important' please. Tell me as much as you know about rspca and money you mentioned earler.

Dear Nicky, yes we know that you should have been a traffic cop, so that you can
follow your passion of imposing fines on people. As I have explained to you before,
that is not how AQIS operates, for reasons that I have explained. 1000 dead sheep
cost a company 100’000$, that’s a pretty large fine in itself.

The standards are quite good, I’ve read them. Where problems will always arise,
is that when humans do things, there will be stuff ups due to human stupidity.

I know its beneath you to watch commercial tv, but one day take a look at Gordon
Ramsay’s Kitchen Disasters. It might occur to you how some people can’t even
run a simple restaurant, let alone a complex operation like exporting live sheep.

Don’t talk to me about what happens in the ME. I made you an offer to help
change things when it comes to the slaughter of 12 million non Australian animals
there, you are not the slightest bit interested.

Meantime it sounds like in the saleyards under your very nose, they are unable to
organise themselves to see that animals are treated humanely, so who are you
to preach to the ME?

If people were fudging AQIS charge cheats, they would be sacked. The press
would only need to get a whiff of corruption in Govt, heads would have to role,
or the Govt would not survive.

*You have so much knowledge in your head. More than I.
I must addmitt I am a bit usleless at that. I always get the names and dated mixed and have to loook things up.*

Hehe Getrude you said it! I am going to have to agree with you :)

Oxytocin Nicky, is part of your genetic make up and affects your behaviour. Look it up and educate
yourself. Otherwise of course, ignorance is bliss!

"Oxytocin Nicky, is part of your genetic make up and affects your behaviour. Look it up and educate yourself. Otherwise of course, ignorance is bliss!"

Ah Yabby no doubt about you eh? Your rants on oxytocin have nothing to do with this thread have they so why are have you raised it here? Trying to conceal this rant from other posters on the other thread, who you are endeavouring to impress eh? What a spineless little sissy you are!

"I have my own theories and it gets back to endocrinology. Instinct
is clearly influenced by genetics and oxytocin is not known as
the cuddle hormone for no good reason." (Yabby)

Yabby when you dust off the hayseeds, cease riding mountain goats and refrain from trying to get that poor old wether you have lashed to your bed post, to do your bidding, you may (though I doubt it) learn that oxytocin is not exclusively a female hormone. Oxytocin is released by both male and female.

Why do you continue to dredge up your obsessive know-it-all crap about oxytocin which you spruiked on about months ago?

Clearly your own lack of oxytocin is contributing to your impotence but that does not give you the right to bore us to sobs.

There are such medications as Viagra you know? Assuming Willie Wether's all tuckered out.

So give us a break Grandpa - for goodness sake!

Yabby said

if people were fudging AQIS charge cheats, they would be sacked. The press
would only need to get a whiff of corruption in Govt, heads would have to role,
or the Govt would not survive.
pale comments.
Yabby do you really believe AQIS fairly controls the export licences?
If you do you must be a bigger twit than I thought.

AQIS CONTROL 'who' gets accreditation. Yes That is correct.

Now Yabby a short sory about everyday plant operators and even some butchers applying for export licences might clear the air for anybody thinking that its fair.

I will especially request some of those butchers and other plant opertors to post on this forum and tell of their lack of assistance given by AQIS.

Why you ask would I suggest AQIS made it near impossible to obtain a export licence?
Easy Question- easy answer. To keep control of the meat industry and crawl up the backsides of the big live export companies such as AWB Elders and many others.
To earn their donations to political parties. To pay for their support in electrion time and other times.

The Government in Australia has long been in bed with the cruel live animal shipping agents and companies. AQIS is part of the Government.
So why Yabby refer to them as if they are inderpendant.
Rudd has chosen to pick up where Howard Left off.
Mind you they are well used to this system as these companies for years have tossed the opposition some donations too.
Its called feeding the chooks. That is to make sure the opposition dont speak out about animal cruelty also. Anything else you would like to know - just ask.

Yabby
I will say it again shall I.
Oh yes you always run and hide when I post the truth plain and simple so people understand.

What Isaid before is just like it is. You know it and so do I.

AQIS CONTROL 'who' gets accreditation. Yes That is correct.

Now Yabby a short story about everyday plant operators and even some butchers applying for export licences might clear the air for anybody thinking that its fair.

I will especially request some of those butchers and other plant opertors to post on this forum and tell of their lack of assistance given by AQIS.

Why you ask would I suggest AQIS made it near impossible to obtain a export licence?
Easy Question- easy answer. To keep "control" of the meat industry and crawl up the backsides of the big live export companies such as AWB Elders and many others.
To earn their donations to political parties. To pay for their support in electrion time and other times.

The Government in Australia has long been in bed with the cruel live animal shipping agents and companies. AQIS is part of the Government.
So why Yabby refer to them as if they are inderpendant.

Rudd has chosen to pick up where Howard Left off.

Mind you they are well used to this system as these companies for years have tossed the opposition some donations too.

Its termed "feeding the chooks.'

That is to "make sure" the opposition "dont speak out about animal cruelty also"

Anything else you would like to know - just ask.!
Shame on live export avgents who hide behind faslse names and company names!
Shame on Kevin Rudd who 'lied' to the Australian public regatrding this two weeks out from a federal election!

Hi all
PALE, what I had was the stats of what each RSPCA State Branch had INVESTED at the financial year 2006, and I can't remember the details but it ran into the millions; that was money that was donated by the public, and probably to some extent governments, which was not being spent on the animals for which it was collected.

If Animals Australia decides it can pursue this case, they have a great team of barristers themselves, but as I said before, it is a matter of who has standing to do so. I think it would have to be a case of removing Minister Ravlich and re-instating the appeal (by the WA State Solicitor who does have standing) on the grounds that there is no inconsistency between Federal and State (WA) legislation.

I don't think there is, because there are no national animal cruelty statutes. Emanuels may have complied with the Australian Standards for the Export of Livestock as they were at that time though, which would complicate it, even though they were found to have breached WA cruelty provisions. Section 118 of the Australian Constitution does, however, state that "full faith and credit shall be given throughout the Commonwealth to the laws, public Acts and records and the judicial proceedings of every state".

Magistrate Crawford was relying on S109, which states that "when a law of a state is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid".

But I'm sure Animals Australia's barristers would be onto that.

Cheers
Nicky

Nicky
Thanks for that re rspca. Now re the wa case its probably not a good idea to go into too much detail on here.
If you think aa are not finished with this matter we will not start any action until they have followed up on whatever they are considering.

There will be a conference this week regarding advise on the matter however its a matter of principle that they would actually contact their council to inform them of actions they might consider.

I am almost sure however any action would not be done in wa and they are considering a whole different manner etc

So like I said nicky if you feel they are still taking advise we would probably hold off out of respect and consideration.

I should hope they may pay us the same respect with our work with Muslim Leaders.
Goodnight

PALE, I have absolutely no idea what they are doing. I was only surmising about what might be able to be done. It would have to go to a higher court if it were to take place in WA, based on that legislation, and I don't know what grounds they could appeal it on, for example, in the Federal Court (since there are no National animal cruelty statutes).

I also have no idea what the Council is to which you refer, or what they might be doing on any other level.

Cheers
Nicky

Nicky
oh I see. Well thanks for that. I am sure anyway the lawyers would be able to talk between themselves.

Of course if their dont wish to speak with the qld Qc I should think that would pretty much settle the matter.

I honestly dont know what to expect from people anymore.

Not sure either there is much real vaule to keep posting on olo.

I am tried of the nastiness of many people. Thats something we are not used to as our people all get along and support each other.

Even the members are starting to complain about olo. Tayn and Antje used to post but stopped because of the same thing.

We came in here to highlight the need for the public to think about what is happening to animals.

Since then yourself and Dicky have come along and also done a lot to make people stop and think.

Perhaps our time may be best spent now working fully or our mous and cojoint rspca work

TBO I am sick of twenty hour days

Time to slow up a bit I feel