Day 291 - 31 Oct 96 - Page 36


     
     1        production end of the business."  So in fact she is not
     2        really concerned with animal welfare at all.
     3
     4        As far as beef and pigs are concerned on page 44, near the
     5        top of the page, "I would say she probably visits
     6        slaughtering of beef and pork no more than two or three
     7        times a year."  Question, "Does she ever visit the farms?"
     8        Answer, "No, no, not for beef or pork."  So McDonald's
     9        effectively do not have any monitoring system of their own,
    10        and they do not effectively have any welfare policy of
    11        their own, because it is only the law of the land anyway,
    12        and they do not employ anybody who is responsible for
    13        welfare specifically, despite having over 40,000 employees
    14        in this country.  If there is anything else of relevance on
    15        this, I will see if I can find it.  (Pause)
    16
    17        On the top of page 45, while I am on this, it also came up
    18        in this section, said that McKane's and Howard Long
    19        International were the main two in the agro-chemical area,
    20        this is the use of chemicals for growing potatoes and
    21        salads for McDonald's use.  Top of page 45, that was.
    22
    23        Then on page 48, Mr. Oakley was asked, at the bottom of the
    24        page, line 56, "Would you describe a battery cage as, as
    25        comfortable?"  Answer, "I think it is pretty comfortable."
    26        And then when he was asked on the next page, at the top of
    27        page 49, line 15, "The chickens in the broiler unit, do you
    28        think they are comfortable too? "  Answer, "They seem to
    29        be, when I have been there."  Then it seems to me that here
    30        we have the two representatives of the company completely
    31        indifferent to the welfare of animals that end up in their
    32        product, unable to notice any kind of level of suffering,
    33        inhumanity, cruelty or even uncomfortableness.  I would say
    34        it was callous indifference by McDonald's.
    35
    36        Then he says top of page 50, line 18, "Have you ever given
    37        Sun Valley a warning?"  Answer, "No."  So all the things
    38        that we have heard of, where they rely on their suppliers,
    39        and none of the defects and cruelty involved in the
    40        Sun Valley operation have resulted in a single warning as
    41        far as their purchasing officer, chief of purchasing,
    42        Mr. Oakley, knows.  Then he was asked, "Just what checks
    43        are you making to ensure that this animal welfare policy is
    44        complied with?", whatever policy they claimed.  "We do not
    45        actually make the checks, the checks are made by the
    46        government health inspectors and veterinary officers", et
    47        cetera. Then there was a discussion about that.  That was
    48        page 50.
    49
    50        At page 51, it was put to him that he had said he would not 
    51        purchase from a company if they did not conform to the 
    52        codes of practice, he answered, "Consistently."  Obviously, 
    53        backtracking by this stage.  Then he tried to defend the
    54        practices at Sun Valley as not really being consistent
    55        breaches, even though they are continuous, and many
    56        different points which have all come up in evidence.
    57
    58        So, McDonald's would not notice consistent breaches of
    59        Codes of Practices, it appears, even if all the evidence
    60        was put in front of them, which is not surprising because

Prev Next Index