End animal exploitation at the expense of the taxpayer
With European money
the spending morality is low. Whoever gets support from
Brussels is inclined to think: "they can spare it,
it comes from Europe". And it's true. The European
Union is financing its own chaos because it's financially
independent. Every day the Union spends 250 million Euro,
which is over 90 billion per year. Over 40% of that is
paid out in agricultural subsidies. One third goes to
"undeveloped" areas in the EU (e.g. the Dutch
province Flevopolder! - AF). Who are the ones
paying for this Europe? Mainly the consumers and taxpayers.
They often don't even know that almost 10% of all VAT
they are paying go to Brussels. VAT accounts for 40% of
all EU income. Furthermore, the Dutch Finance Minister
and his colleagues pay almost that same amount in contribution.
A third source of income is the EU-levies on cheaper products
from faraway (often poor) countries. Because of these
levies the consumer pays extra for such products. From Dutch newspaper Intermediair 14th December
2000 (Jan Werts).
In Holland, animals are exploited in
a number of ways. Cattle farms keep as many animals
as they deem economically profitable. The possibility
of export makes
that we are keeping three times as many animals in our
country as we need for our own consumption. These animals
are brought to their slaughter weight in as short a
time as possible, and, in case of cows, they are ready
for slaughter in an unreasonably short time (4 years
in stead of 8 years).
The consequence is overproduction, animal
suffering and damage to the environment and our
health.
The taxpayer is the one who pays, instead of those who cause the
suffering of pollution, even in case the sector suffers
losses (swine fever and BSE).
Assuming that the actual cost price of pig meat is 30%
higher, this means that taxpayers are paying almost
1 billion Euro extra for their pork. Per pigfarmer this
comes down to about 50,000 Euro. Although these subsidies
aren't paid out directly (just like with chicken farmers)
on the free market, this is definitely a case of indirect
subsidies.
Keeping intensive cattle farming afloat artificially through subsidies is
in the interest of only a few. Via this roundabout way
prices for animal products are kept low.
We think that maintaining this sector should not be done
at the expense of the taxpayer. By making export impossible,
by demanding ecological management of these farms, and
by checking regularly for animal welfare, the exploitation
of animals can be stopped and prevented. In the end, consumers
will pay almost the same.
Consumers should be paying for responsibly produced meat directly
and what it really costs, and not a little through taxation
first and the rest at the butcher's later. These separate
payments hide the real cost of meat.
With the current state of technology, using animals is
no longer necessary in any way, everything could just
as easily be done without animals. Meat and dairy are
not essential to your health, and the sector should have
to be completely self-supporting.It
must be made financially interesting to let animals live
longer and under acceptable circumstances. Cows from many
biological cattle farms are often only slaughtered when
they reach the age of 8 years (twice as old as now) which
is still only halfway through their productive lives.
A higher age of slaughter, together with the testing of
all slaughter animals for diseases that can be harmful
to man, such as BSE, can ensure that we are dealing responsibly
and carefully with living creatures and nature.
Now cows are slaughtered far before they get old, and
before any dormant cases of BSE have manifested. This
seems favorable, but in reality it maintains uncertainty
about the safety of meat.
Our message is not that we should ban animals from society, but that
we have to live together with animals, and give them their freedom to move. Things to
consider are: sufficient space in nature, where animals
are safe from humans, meaning that they have plenty of
living space, food, and opportunities to meet members
of their own species. Animals have the right to their own natural way of life.
If European governments stop paying subsidies to cattle farming,
we will reach an honest situation whereby those who
choose not to eat meat or who want to make even littler
use of animals do not have to contribute to what they
see as exploitation.
Healthier alternatives than even free-range farms will
become more attractive.