on 17-06-2016 09:11 PM
so we have good ol' barnaby joice trying to convince us he has the welfare of live exported animals at heart, yeah right barnaby.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-17/email-leak-suggests-profit-before-welfare/7521620
i suspect behind closed doors barnaby has the opinion they are just dumb animals dieing anyway what does it matter how.
his farmer mates are making money thats all that matters hey barnaby.
on 22-06-2016 09:02 PM
looks like a coverup to me, hire someone to 'cleanup' the industry then sack them for trying to clean up the industry. good going liberal govt.
like i said in my first post, having barnaby in charge of live export is like putting a fox in charge of a henhouse.
our prime minister is a gutless wonder who will say and do anything to keep his job.
and hes running around complaining bill shortons a liar!
at least the labor govt put a stop to the miss treatment of animals when they stopped live exports. the liberals just hide the truth from us.
too often profit is put above doing the right thing.
i bet slimy barnaby and slippery turnbull will say its all a beat up. just the biased ABC trying to ruin a huge industry.
on 22-06-2016 09:52 PM
It was very confronting, wasn't it?
on 23-06-2016 08:14 AM
looks like a coverup to me, hire someone to 'cleanup' the industry then sack them for trying to clean up the industry. good going liberal govt.
The way I see it, she was employed to be part of a committee to bring the export industry to the standards of the World Organisation for Animal Health . The Committee completed its Review. She along with the rest of the Committee were no longer required.
With an election looming, I think that this story could be linked to a Greens Party vote-seeking agenda.
Another ABC program, Landline, recently aired the following story which shows some of the outcomes of that Committee's recommendations.
http://www.abc.net.au/landline/content/2016/s4475763.htm
DEB
on 23-06-2016 06:42 PM
I have written to every candidate in my electorate asking for their views on live exports.
I have only received three personal responses. Two from the Independents....one suipports live export, one is absolutely appalled.
And from the brain dead National....who supports it 100% because "there is no proof that they are Australian cattle anyway".
on 24-06-2016 10:00 AM
I just do not get it; surely live animals are much more expensive to transport than meat. Whole cow (minus the bits that are discarded) could be easily packed in less than cubic meter, while live cow has to have several cubic meters of space, it has to be fed, kept healthy, the area has to be cleaned by pumping water from many meters bellow to wash out the dirt. By what we saw in the 7.30 report that is not always working. The only extra expense for transporting meat is the refrigeration, but as long as that works the cargo needs no personnel, no care, only fraction of space.
I do understand that some countries prefer the freshly killed animals, but tough luck if they are not available they will have to get used the frozen.
I believe NZ only exports meat now.
And as far as I am concerned it does not matter if the cows slaughtered in the film were Australian or not, we should not be sending livestock to countries that allow such things happen.
on 24-06-2016 11:02 AM
agree Nova
this story about Joyce broke last night
http://newcastle.amieu.asn.au/barnaby-joyce-live-export-stanbroke/
which is kind of interesting
on 24-06-2016 11:39 AM
The customer is buying the whole beast because of the by-products and employment in their country. Not just for the edible meat.
Here are a few ways in which cattle by-products touch our lives:
https://factsaboutbeef.com/tag/cattle-by-products/
DEB
on 24-06-2016 01:56 PM
Well,there is absolutely no reason why the whole animal could not be shipped. Just butchered, gutted and packed. i imagine such parts as the offal and brains would have to be packed separately.