Day 283 - 21 Oct 96 - Page 27


     
     1        food safety issues, and Maya Hoffe, a very experienced
     2        veterinary surgeon -- I am not sure if he is a actually a
     3        surgeon, but anyway a vet, a slaughter house vet -- who
     4        backed up our position.  So it is no wonder that anyone
     5        would believe in any of those issues I have already dealt
     6        with, before I go over the page, that what was said in the
     7        London Greenpeace fact sheet was true and that our belief
     8        in it was reasonable.
     9
    10        I then move on to animals.  It is a widespread concern that
    11        animal cruelty is inevitable in the meat industry, for
    12        animals reared and slaughtered for the meat industry, and
    13        it is basically down to plain common sense.  In fact,
    14        Mr. Rampton himself said during the case, firstly, that
    15        murder, someone could quite validly hold that opinion who
    16        was opposed to animal suffering.  Whether he would agree
    17        with it is another question.  He also said, although later
    18        amended it, the same for the word 'torture'.
    19
    20        Really, all of these issues -- I have not even mentioned
    21        the Veggies fact sheet -- all these issues are the same.
    22        The London Greenpeace fact sheet continued to be
    23        distributed by Veggies after agreement between McDonald's
    24        and their solicitors over a slightly amended version, and
    25        apart from environment the rest of the issues were the
    26        same.  Except in one respect.  The animal section changed
    27        the words 'torture' and 'murder' to 'slaughter' and
    28        'butchery', because McDonald's were only complaining about
    29        the heading, not the facts.  Now, for whatever tactical
    30        reason, I don't know, they are not complaining about the
    31        heading, they are complaining about the facts.  Which is
    32        the opposite.
    33
    34        So, in any case, I think it is fair to say that the views
    35        on animal cruelty and suffering are well in the public
    36        domain, and that it is a perfectly valid point of view that
    37        some people hold that there should be no animal cruelty or
    38        suffering, and that it is not justified to use animals for
    39        human benefit in that way.
    40
    41        Just one other point on the public domain issue.  I believe
    42        the fact sheet, I think it became clear during the
    43        evidence, referred to a report produced by the Farm Animal
    44        Welfare Council a year before the fact sheet was produced
    45        about concerns over slaughter methods.  We went into some
    46        of the details in that report, which was an advisory report
    47        for the government on evaluating its welfare, what little
    48        welfare regulations there are.  None of which,
    49        incidentally, we would accept as any kind of protection for
    50        the unfortunate millions of animals reared and slaughtered 
    51        for human food.  Although we always welcome criticisms, if 
    52        they are partial, as at least a recognition that there is a 
    53        problem.
    54
    55        Coming on to the next point about what is McDonald's
    56        awareness of these points.  David Walker said -- and I
    57        quote, and we will bring the references later -- "As a
    58        result of the meat industry the suffering of animals was
    59        inevitable."   Dr. Gregory, their expert, and
    60        Mark Patterson from Sun Valley Suppliers, both were aware

Prev Next Index