Animal Rights after the Brexit Repeal Bill

What on earth are the last two posts all about? They seem very rude to me and quite uncalled for.

I posted some good news (to me) which seems to have unleashed yet more personal comments. I will never understand some people on here, always determined to be negative.

Some posters seem to think the EU is brilliant for everything, and that other European countries are far far better than Britain at absolutely everything as well, the wonder is, that they are still living in Britain at all.

Durhamjen you are such an expert on everything. May I suggest you remove your head from a certain part of a certain politician's anatomy and take a trip outside of Durham. To France for example... they don't adhere to the notion that animals are sentient beings. Take a walk round the average village and have a look at the way they treat their dogs for starters and then move on to the treatment of livestock.
You could then travel on to Eastern Europe. Travel broadens the mind, you know ..... or maybe you don't.

"I still can't understand why they didn't just allow Article 13 to go through, can you?"

Because that would not have been "taking back control"

They want to reduce regulation (you know, the ones that are there to keep us safe and healthy) and they want to be seen to be reducing regulations.

No I can’t dj. I suspect they got all stubborn about it and then realised the strength of feeling meant they had dropped a clanger.

But thank goodness for some sense at last. And in the spirit of Christmas I will say ‘thank you Mr Gove’

I've just been reading that, nightowl.
I still can't understand why they didn't just allow Article 13 to go through, can you?
Brilliant news, though.
Maybe Gove is not sentient enough.

Good news.

www.ciwf.org.uk/news/2017/12/a-victory-for-britains-animals?utm_campaign=politics&utm_source=enewsemail&utm_medium=email

alaw.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/Article-13-Legal-Briefing-Note.pdf

I don't twist things. Those who say that the EU law is different to ours twist things. We should all stick to the EU law as far as care of animals is concerned. Because some people and some countries don't doesn't mean that EU law is any different.
All countries in the EU have animal welfare inspectors. As I said, I know someone who had to go into Bernard Matthews sheds, and closed some down because of the state of the animals in there.

This is how sentient animals are treated.

"The installation is operated by Bernard Matthews Food Limited and comprises four poultry houses, numbered 1, 2, 4 and 5.
Shed 3 is currently used as a store. A layer of approximately 40 mm of soft wood shavings over the whole of the floor area provides bedding in the units prior to bird placement, with additional shavings added as necessary to maintain litter in a clean and dry state during the growing cycle. All litter is exported from the installation for spreading on land owned by third parties, or to electricity generating stations for burning.

The five poultry houses provide a combined capacity for 87,000 commercial stag turkey places. Turkeys are
brought onto the farm at 1 day old, then at 6 weeks old two
thirds of the turkeys are transferred to other
farms, while the remaining turkeys will be depopulated at approximately 20-21 weeks of age. There will be
an average of 2 cycles per annum. "

I make no excuses, I was merely stating what I remember.

Subject to EU rules and regulations then, in 2007

The turkeys imported from Hungary were from his own factories over there.

That's why he was fined for it. Was he? I thought he wasn't fined for that.

There was the turkey twizzler furore (Jamie Oliver) and we probably all remember the avian flu incident in 2007 which, as far as I remember, was traced to meat imported from Hungary. Matthews died in 2010 and had been suffering from Alzheimer's for some time before that
The Great Witchingham-based turkey giant was transferred to the Boparan Private Office, the investment company headed by 2 Sisters Food Group entrepreneur Ranjit Singh Boparan
2 Sisters Group was fined for re-packaging and selling meat past its sell-by date.

Gosh, you really are expert at twisting things. I give in. I’m no match for you.

www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/news/rabbit-farming-gets-eu-lawmakers-hopping-mad/

What you said is NOT true, Nfk. EU law says a maximum of 8 hours without a break, and they must have access to clean water.
Farmers break laws here and in the EU, which we are part of still. That's why groups such as CIWF, PETA and Viva! follow them about, taking film and prosecuting them.

Not seen the link, then to a Bernard Matthews barnful of turkeys, then?
Birds were supposedly not allowed to be kept in such conditions. That's why he was fined for it.
Sentient beings were allowed to sit in ammonia, and have their lega, feet and stomachs burnt by it, were they?
People who worked there were allowed to use turkeys to play football and baseball, were they?
That's okay in a turkey factory, is it, because you never buy from him?

It's now owned by two sisters, who have been fined for the way they treat lamb and chicken. But that's okay because they think they are sentient and you won't eat them.
What strange morality.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/201711/medium-352679-2753056e-c3b4-4671-b4de-13530a7eb2a8.png https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/201711/medium-462493-472ee91a-33f9-4127-a6ea-dbe7362f7ce4.png

EU Law permits sentient beings to be transported standing across Europe for 24 without a break, rabbits to be kept in battery cages with scarcely room to turn on wire floors, veal calves to be kept on slats. Perhaps the meaning of sentient beings should be re-examined.

Some pharmaceutical companies are planning to move to UK - great for jobs ...

and then you realise it is because they will be able to continue to torture animals, in a way no EU country would be allowed to shame

What makes you think Bernard Matthews thought his birds were not sentient beings? He thought they were warm, well ventilated, well fed and watered. Therefore happy. To his standards. He didn’t force feed them or leave them without shelter. He knew they were sentient beings and not cabbages. I have never eaten anything that came from Bernard Matthews because I don’t agree with factory farming, I think all animals should be given the best possible lives - and the best possible deaths.

There is good reason for things we ‘take for granted’ to be enshrined in law. The EU has that particular clause for good reason, and it was thanks to the U.K. that it exists. It beggars belief that the U.K. should now wish to discard it.

We take for granted the fact that murder, rape, assaulting one’s spouse are wrong and could say that no one in their right mind could argue otherwise, but if they weren’t against the law we’d be in a right old mess. The inclusion of animal sentience in our laws sends a very clear message, and requires those dealing with animals to consider their treatment just a little more carefully. Although you wouldn’t think so judging by the terrible abuses in this country.

I think anyone who argues that a chicken might be happier in a factory farm because it is warm and fed has never visited a factory farm. It’s much easier to indulge in the fantasy of happy animals down on the farm rather than having to think about the reality while munching away on their chicken nuggets.

www.viva.org.uk/resources/video-library/turkey-investigation-footage

Bernard Matthews didn't think so. I know someone who had to inspect his turkey farms.

I don't believe anyone in this day and age would query whether or not an animal feels pain, or is just feeling restricted as used to be claimed by fishermen. Of course they are 'sentient beings'. Who claims they're not? Certainly not any farmer I know. Some believe creatures - such a chickens - are quite happy being factory farmed as they are well fed and watered in warm, well lit units, others of us believe they should be allowed more natural freedom, but none would say they are not sentient beings. On the other hand, in many parts of the EU, whether or not an animal feels pain is irrelevant (perhaps because they don't have souls?) so a law stating it is more necessary.

You will always get cruelty where the owner has led a cruel life themselves and know no better. World Horse Welfare works on this premise. Give the owner a reason to improve the conditions for his horse and his treatment of his wife and children improves also. We are fortunate in this country that this lesson was learnt (in the most part) a long time ago.

So do you understand the difference between the Lisbon treaty and the UK animal welfare act?

Read all the other posters comments durhamjen can you understand those ?