Sickening too.
From the article it seems that the veterinary profession are clear that if animals are to be slaughtered then by not pre-stunning their welfare is further compromised, where the likes of the RSPCA and the government's own experts agree, and the articles makes no reference to the quality of the meat being lessened by pre-stunning. Presumably then, given the expert opinion and that this issue has been flagged up in the public arena, any reluctance to legislate in the UK so as to outlaw animal slaughter without compulsory pre-stunning is a sop to certain religious traditions, where it seems these traditions do involve avoidable cruelty (hence the objections of these animal welfare experts) but they are considered to outweigh animal welfare issues.
I also wonder what the position of farmers is since, presumably, they are aware of slaughter arrangements for the animals they supply, and no doubt there is profit to be made from the halal market and it also seems the volume of meat produced without pre-stunning is greater that the traditional religious market - so where is the surplus going? The article is in a farming journal but it doesn't say anything about the welfare views of farmers who supply animals for halal slaughter.
It needs looking at.
