Senate inquiry into Halal certification.

[daydream**believer]

Brilliant.

Whether people support halal certification or not, there are lots of people with lots of concerns so its time to investigate it all.

http://www.3aw.com.au/news/bernardis-inquiry-into-food-certification-schemes-20150514-gh1c32.html

Here are the reasons i am against halal certification and the questions i want answered.
1. Why are the fees paid by businesses for halal certification kept secret? Why do the businesss have to sign non disclosure agreements?

2. Why are there 20+ privately run halal certification companies in Australia, all charging whatever amounts they want, when Indonesia only has 1 Government run halal certifier? If foods need to be halal certified, then let the Government run it and let the money go back into the whole Australian community.

3. For meat to be halal, the animal needs to be slaughtered a certain way, throat slit while animal is conscious by a Muslim. Yes, there are some abattoirs that use a reverse stun but, from what i have researched, there are at least 15 abattoirs in Australia that slaughter animals using no stun. It is barbaric. This video is very graphic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAQJ-FZo1cA

4. Australia is a predominantly Christian country, so why are we being forced to eat meat that has been prayed over to a "god" that we dont even recognise?

5. If halal certification is supposed to help Muslims recognise what they can and cant eat, then why do so many companies that pay for the certification stamp choose not to display it on their products?

6. Why are abattoirs paying a certification fee and then packing all the meat in one truck and delivering it to butchers and supermarkets who then put it all in the one fridge and display it all in the one display fridge. Once pork products are shelved, stored or transported with other meats, the other meats immediately become non halal anyway. So Aussie Muslims cant eat it anyway.

7. We are told halal certification monies goes towards to building of more mosques and Islamic schools. We know that there are quite a few mosques where the hatred of Australia is preached. As for Islamic schools, the same schools where a principal has said that girls are forbidden to run in races because it will cause them to lose their virginity. Do we need schools like that here?

8. In Canada halal certification money was found to be used to fund organisations linked to extremist organisations. I have no doubt that would be happening here as well.

9. Halal is a part of sharia law and we DO NOT want any part of Sharia law in Australia.

So, what would i like to see? Id like halal certification to be a Government run organisation. Id like every business who pays for halal certification to have to display the stamp on their products. I want all Australian abattoirs to stun before killing. That would be a nice start

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@wayward216 wrote:

Do you even read what you post?
So now you're arguing that quickly must somehow be instant? I'll leave the confusion squarely on your shoulders.

---

Playing semantics?

I'll repeat.

Halal slaughter requires that the animal dies instantly in order to not feel pain. If it's not "quick" enough then obviously the animal WILL feel pain. Therefore it will not be halal.

So tell me why muslims would want to prolong a death even by seconds?

[i-need-a-martini]

I'd also like you to explain to me why, if muslims accept stunning in order for an animal to be halal, there is even an issue at all?

[i-need-a-martini]

And while you are at it, explain how it can be that not one criticism is raised against kosher slaughter even though this directs there be NO STUNNING.

Therefore animals die a horrible, inhumane death.

If you wanted to start a thread about the cruelty and unjustness of kosher slaughter, I'd be agreeing with you. 

[wayward216]

Mate I'm sorry but the more you speak the more convinced I am that you're a nutter. I've objected to kosher slaughter, I've objected to Kosher Tourism. It's not that I haven't objected, it's that you have your head buried so far in the sand you may as well have this debate with yourself, as you're clearly not reading anything that's being put in front of you. You're so far biased against people that may so much as hint as having a problem with anything halal you haven't even worked out that I don't actually have a problem with Halal itself.
You haven't posted anything accurate, you haven't explored anything presented and you haven't come anywhere near dismissing anything I've said. So far you've achieved absolutely nothing.

I'll leave you to your own interpretaion of reality.

Enjoy.

[wayward216]

Prove that the animal dies instantly? Prove that the CSIRO report I provided to you is wrong?

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@wayward216 wrote:

You're so far biased against people that may so much as hint as having a problem with anything halal you haven't even worked out that I don't actually have a problem with Halal itself.

I'll leave you to your own interpretaion of reality.

Enjoy.

---

So what is your issue exactly?

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@wayward216 wrote:

Prove that the animal dies instantly? Prove that the CSIRO report I provided to you is wrong?

---

Firstly, it's not a CSIRO report. It is a report for the University of Malaysia compiled predominatly by Malaysian academics and published by the Meat and Livestock Industry. The research was conducted in order for the malaysian government could make some decisions about the most suitable types of stunning methods.

Secondly, what is it that you think that report is trying to say?

Note the conclusion. In particular the very last line:

In this study, although a lower grain cartridge was used to deliver the low power percussive stun than the high power P.PIP.0197 – Effects of stunning and thoracic sticking on welfare and meat quality of halal slaughtered beef cattle 38 percussive stun, no attempt was made to assess the skulls for damage, so it is unknown as to whether the power used would comply with these requirements. What is evident from the data is that the cartridge used did cause proper stunning in the test animals. No conclusion can therefore be drawn as to the humaneness of improper stunning resulting from insufficient power to the percussive stun.

Ie. No conclusion. You know why? Because this study was not about whether stunning was humane or not. It was about meat quality. Nothing to do with halal practices.

Thirdly, I'm not your mate.

[wayward216]

besides you being a nutcase that can't prove any of your claims?

My issues - repeated again just for you,

there are thousands of animals slaughtered in Australia each year, under BOTH halal AND Kosher methods, that do not use any stunning whatsover. There is a great deal of evidence this causes pain to these animals. There is NO evidence that these animals all die instantly as you have claimed. We aren't talking a few, we are talking thousands.

There is also a push by Muslim certifiers to expand on the number of animals slaughtered without stunning.

My other issue, just like so many other Atheists, is the way Certification funds Islam. Happy to support a Muslim's right to consume Halal food, however I'm not happy with all these charities come certifiers that raise revenue in the tens of millions each year while avoiding millions in tax. Even many Muslims object to what Halal Certification has become, it was once about the religion, now it's far more about the business of turning a profit.

[wayward216]

Firstly, it's not a CSIRO report. It is a report for the University of Malaysia.

Try again, you've got that wrong too. Here's the background to the trial; and it was actually for Jakim. Jakim initiated the study through the CSIRO, MLA funded and published the results, CSIRO conducted the study with the assistance of researchers at the Universty of Malaysia. I'm sure you caught the part where the application to the AEC for permission to conduct the study was made by the CSIRO and not the University of Malaysia. There are a number of studies where CSIRO and MLA have partnered such as this one. 

What are you looking for? Well there's a host of information for you in the report, or given the link was provided specifically to support my claim that unstunned animals can experience conscious pain for up to 30 seconds, perhaps you could start there.

Research

Researchers at the Universiti Putra Malaysia approached CSIRO and MLA with a proposal to compare different methods of slaughter in terms of physiological stress, Electroencephalogram (EEG) changes and meat quality. Most of the published work on slaughter using different stunning and sticking methods focuses on individual aspects of animal welfare or meat quality. This study aimed to provide a comparative analysis of the effects of penetrative stunning, non-penetrative stunning, post-slaughter stunning and sticking by the 'thoracic' method versus non-thoracic sticking on physiological and biochemical parameters associated with stress in animals, and on meat quality.

The overall aims of project P.PIP.0197 and its associated communication project A.MFS.0167 were to:

• Evaluate the effects of stunning, slaughter and thoracic stick (according to Halal standards) on physiological stress reactions, cessation of vital functions (brain and heart electrical activities) and meat quality in beef cattle.
• Collect information to support application to JAKIM relating to halal slaughter procedures to be used in Australian meat processing plants

CSIRO hosted a visiting researcher from the Universiti Putra Malaysia for a period of 6 months in 2009 in order to facilitate sample collection. The study was carried out in a commercial abattoir. Ten animals were assigned to each treatment group (Unstunned, neck stick only; Penetrative stun with neck stick; Low Power Percussive Stun with neck stick; High Power Percussive Stun with neck stick; Penetrative stun with neck stick followed by thoracic stick 2 minutes later; Low Power Percussive stun with neck stick followed by thoracic stick 2 minutes later). For each animal, blood samples were taken before stun/slaughter; after stun (if applicable); after neck stick; after thoracic stick (if applicable), and tested for a range of plasma metabolites involved in the stress response; EEG traces were taken by telemetric means throughout the slaughter process and for up to 4 minutes after slaughter; and samples oflongissimus dorsi and semitendinosus muscles were taken from the hot carcase, 45 minutes after slaughter, for assessment of meat quality attributes over 2 weeks of storage. The results were analysed by researchers at the Universiti Putra Malaysia.

[wayward216]

• THE AUSTRALIAN
• OCTOBER 29, 2011 12:00AM

• Print
• Save for later

Sue Neales

Reporter - Rural/Regional Affairs

A SMALL number of Australian abattoirs will be allowed to continue killing without the animals being rendered unconscious.

As many as 250,000 sheep, cattle and hens a year will be affected, after a meeting yesterday of state primary industry ministers, including federal Agriculture Minister Joe Ludwig, effectively decided against imposing a mandatory stunning requirement in all abattoirs.

The meeting in Melbourne considered withdrawing the exemptions given to 12 abattoirs in NSW, Victoria and South Australia, which allow the operators to kill animals without first using a stun gun.

The exemptions exist on religious grounds. These abattoirs process about 1 per cent of cattle and sheep killed in Australia.

The Primary Industries Ministerial Council said it had considered the views of scientists, stakeholders and religious groups after a two-year consultation.

"Officials have been asked to continue discussions with the religious groups in order to settle an applicable risk management framework," it said.

The RSPCA labelled the deferment a "non-decision".

"This is completely unacceptable and will dismay the public, who were shocked to discover that un-stunned slaughter was occurring in Australia in the first place," said RSPCA scientific officer Melina Tensen.

"There is no excuse for delaying this decision."

The Executive Council of Australian Jewry has argued that if forced to stun all animals before slaughter, it would become impossible and illegal to produce kosher meat.

Some Islamic groups require their halal meat to be killed in a similar manner.