Day 288 - 28 Oct 96 - Page 10


     
     1        become frantic as they watch the animal before them in the
     2        killing line being prodded, electrocuted and knifed."  I
     3        will be going through that in more detail tomorrow.
     4
     5        We say that the evidence of Mr. Lyman and Mr. Long supports
     6        that, in particular the evidence of Mr. Lyman, which I have
     7        just read out.
     8
     9        The fact sheet then continues: "A recent British government
    10        report criticised inefficient stunning methods which
    11        frequently resulted in animals having their throats cut
    12        while still fully conscious".  We heard in evidence that
    13        this was the report of the Farm Animal Welfare Committee in
    14        1984, which did makes those criticisms, and I think we
    15        asked Dr. Gregory.  In fact, I think Mr. Rampton might have
    16        asked Dr. Gregory about that, and he said he was aware of
    17        that report.
    18
    19        The report dealt with conditions throughout the industry,
    20        in slaughter houses.  Obviously, McDonald's suppliers are
    21        part of the meat industry, as indeed are McDonald's down
    22        the chain, and the general observations that appear in that
    23        report would apply to McDonald's suppliers.  Indeed,
    24        McDonald's say that their animal welfare policy is to abide
    25        by the laws of the country in which they operate.  It must
    26        therefore follow that their standards are the same as the
    27        general industry standards.  I mean, Mr. Oakley, when we
    28        questioned him about the animal welfare policy, said that
    29        the animal welfare policy is in fact just a policy to
    30        comply with the laws of the various countries in which
    31        McDonald's operate.  Then he added, "We do not go beyond
    32        what the law stipulates."
    33
    34        The fact sheet then goes on:  "McDonald's are responsible
    35        for the deaths of countless animals by this supposedly
    36        humane method."  I have been through some of the figures
    37        concerning how many animals are reared and slaughtered for
    38        McDonald's products.  This sentence is obviously a
    39        reference to the previous sentence.  'This supposedly
    40        humane method' is talking about the methods outlined in the
    41        Farm Animal Welfare Committee Report of 1984, i.e. the
    42        industry standards.
    43
    44        Actually, I think there is a part here -- (Pause) Can we
    45        just say that the Plaintiffs used the words in their
    46        pleaded meaning, under LB, "The animals (chickens, pigs and
    47        cattle) are slaughtered by methods which are grossly
    48        inhumane", and it goes on to give examples.  If I point out
    49        that the words 'grossly inhumane' do not appear in the
    50        leaflet. 
    51 
    52   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Forget the 'grossly'.  What about the word 
    53        'inhumane'?
    54
    55   MS. STEEL:   'Inhumane' does appear in the fact sheet, yes, it
    56        says, "McDonald's are responsible for the deaths of
    57        countless animals by this supposedly humane method."  I
    58        mean, all it is basically saying is that other people are
    59        claiming that this is humane, and in our view it is not
    60        humane.  But it does not use the word 'grossly'.

Prev Next Index