Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 6 Hansard (21 May) . . Page.. 1571 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

The second problem is a very practical problem in respect of the code of practice for domestic poultry. The application of a tighter code in the ACT in respect of the keeping of battery hens would result, quite probably, in the removal of the major battery hen producer from the ACT to a place where restrictions of the kind proposed did not apply.

Ms Horodny: No. You did not listen.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, Ms Horodny does not believe that. She maintains that you can conduct this other mechanism for egg production as cheaply as you can conduct battery hen farming and that it would not occasion any considerable increase in cost in producing those eggs. That is not my advice. My advice is that the costs that would flow from the suggestions made by Ms Horodny would be quite considerable and would significantly add to the cost of egg production.

Ms Horodny: Two cents an egg for an aviary system.

MR HUMPHRIES: Aviary production has a number of problems associated with it.

Ms Horodny: Two cents an egg. Can you not afford that?

MR HUMPHRIES: I heard what you said, Ms Horodny, but I have to say to you that my advice - I am not an expert in hen farming - is that there would be considerable costs built into the system of having aviary farming. Many more eggs would be broken because the hens would be in a position to lay away from nests. There would be more opportunity for hens to interact with one another and cause one another injuries. That is a major cause of mortality. The application of those other standards would result in a much higher cost.

I note that presently free-range eggs are more expensive than battery-farmed eggs. That may be a reflection of what I have said; it may be a reflection of something else. I say to Ms Horodny that the Government's policy is quite simple. We will be quite prepared to endorse, in her words, more humane treatment of animals, be they hens or any other form of beast in the ACT, provided that in doing so we do not depart from the nationally developed codes of practice and the national standards in such a way that we cause businesses operating in the ACT to lose their viability and we risk their leaving the ACT altogether. I assure Ms Horodny that if the ACT standards were high enough to encourage people like Parkwood to cross the border and operate in New South Wales there would probably be no threat to their market. The market would still be there. They would not be paying payroll tax or any other taxes to the ACT. We would be poorer for that fact. It is also possible that the people employed there would come from New South Wales rather than from the ACT.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .