Day 090 - 16 Feb 95 - Page 28


     
     1
     2   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  There is no rider to the 34 kilograms in the
     3        code of practice or in any documentation that providing for
     4        it being exceeded if certain conditions are met?
     5        A.  No, there is not.
     6
     7   MS. STEEL:  In this -- I do not know whether to call it a FAWC
     8        or a MAFF booklet now?
     9
    10   MR. RAMPTON:  I do not know whether I should intervene now.  In
    11        a sense, it would be wrong for me to contradict an answer
    12        given in cross-examination in answer to your Lordship when
    13        I re-examine, but, in fact, if one looks at the MAFF
    14        document, I will not say how the witness might have
    15        answered if he had it in front of him.
    16
    17   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  No, I think leave it there for the moment.
    18
    19   MR. RAMPTON:  Shall I come back to it?
    20
    21   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I think in re-examination if there is some.
    22
    23   MR. RAMPTON:  Yes, very well, as long as I am allowed to do
    24        that.
    25
    26   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You call it what you like.  I just wanted to
    27        get my mind around what the actual procedures were.  I do
    28        not think you need worry about whether it is a MAFF
    29        document or not, because the point which I grappled with
    30        rather late was that 34 kilos was in the existing code of
    31        practice; in fact, if one looks at the FAWC report, what
    32        was being contemplated was a possible reduction of the 34
    33        kilometres (sic) and, at the end of the day, FAWC was
    34        content to recommend that it stay the same.
    35
    36   THE WITNESS:  That is correct.
    37
    38   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You carry on, Ms. Steel.  If Mr. Rampton
    39        wants to point to something different, he can do it in
    40        re-examination.
    41
    42   MS. STEEL (To the witness):  On that, so within the subcommittee
    43        that did this report there were people who expressed the
    44        view that it should be less than 34 kilograms per metre
    45        square?
    46        A.  No, there was virtually -- there was very good
    47        agreement on that stocking density.  I do not think there
    48        was anybody really who wanted a change from the 34 kilos
    49        which was already in the code of practice.
    50 
    51   Q.   Nobody at all? 
    52        A.  To my recollection. 
    53
    54   Q.   Why were they bothering to look at it then?
    55        A.  It is part of the overall examination of the broiler
    56        industry which they carried out.  If you look at paragraph
    57        16, for example, on page 24, there is a general
    58        recommendation there that "further research and development
    59        should be undertaken into stocking densities for broilers,
    60        with particular reference to welfare".  I think that just

Prev Next Index