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
