Battery farmed hens eggs to be banned in 4 years.

About time too.

So we will paying a pound an egg then.

quote:

Originally posted by Humble_Horace:
So we will paying a pound an egg then.

So do free range eggs cost £6 for half dozen?

Or can you justify the cruelty just so you get cheap eggs?

Nic

free range are only about 40p extra per half dozen, and they taste so much better

One wonders if this will be like the ban on fox hunting?

Either way, while watching the C4 Food Fight programme its demand, which is no difference for broiler house chickens, people will always gravitate for the cheapest price.

quote:

Originally posted by Humble_Horace:
So we will paying a pound an egg then.

But think of the quality. I only eat free-range eggs anyway.

When we were little my sister went on a school trip and saw battery hens and so mithered my parents to switch to free range.
After watching those Chicken run programmes I would only buy free range chicken now too, mind you I'm still not eating meat, but if I was cooking for others I would go free range. If not for ethical reasons for the fact that the chickens were manky and didn't look like something that would do you any good if you ate them!

I'll definitely only buy free range chicken now. I've only ever bought free range eggs anyway though, as my mother always talked about 'battery eggs' as the work of the devil.

No matter how caring people might be about animals, many will simply buy the cheapest option when shopping. For this reason customer demand is not enough, we need government intervention to prevent this cruelty.

Shame it took a couple of telly programmes and paper articles to atually get out government to do this sort of thing.

its for eggs only not meat birds. The price will standardise. Currently there is a premium profit in it because its not factory. Once that goes prices will come down.

next we need to stop factory cage farming full stop. no need for it.

quote:

Originally posted by Ewellguy:
Shame it took a couple of telly programmes and paper articles to atually get out government to do this sort of thing.

And thank god for the likes of Hugh and Jamie - they might be a major irritant to some, but the fact is that the majority of people in this country don't respond to issues unless presented with them graphically on television.

But yes, shame on the gvt for letting it come to that.

At the same time...I hope some emasures are put in place to help the poorest families. I want this law to change, I 100% do, but we must take into account that some people will be hurt by this.

I think when people are shopping they don't really think where things are coming from. They are trying to find a bargain and that is fair enough, I do that myself. But I think it can only be a good thing to start making it properly known what state the food on the shelves was in before it became wrapped in celophane.
It is very easy to see meat and not think of the animal it came from.

quote:

Originally posted by ShoppingGirl:

quote:

Originally posted by Ewellguy:
Shame it took a couple of telly programmes and paper articles to atually get out government to do this sort of thing.

And thank god for the likes of Hugh and Jamie - they might be a major irritant to some, but the fact is that the majority of people in this country don't respond to issues unless presented with them graphically on television.

But yes, shame on the gvt for letting it come to that.

So do we reckon this is how the future governance of this country will happen? Get your issue on television with a major celebrity and it will be passed? Reactive government rather than proactive.

Absolutely. We already have a nation far more interested in voting for karaoke singers than for politicians. To many people, nothing really exists until it is on television, with celebrities involved.

Gvt has always been reactive really hasn't it - giving in to mass public outcry now and then, but resisting change if it can get away with it at all.

I read a survey a couple of years ago of OECD countries asking teenagers what they wanted to eb when they were adults. I cannot remember much of it but three things stuck in my mind:

1. Most French teens wanted to be civil servants.
2. Most Brits wanted to be celebrities.
3. Most American teens (or at least a pluarlity) wanted to be the next Bill Gates.

Our obsession with celebrity is actually a source of comedy aroudn Europe. Itr's pathetic.

I mean good on Jamie and Hugh for doing this, really, but even so...

To be fair to Hugh and Jamie, their celebrity has come on the back of a specific talent. At least they weren't just harvested from a reality show.

They both know their onions when it comes to food and it's production, and have a genuine passion for the subject. Coupled with their charisma and ability to engage the public, they are ideally placed to affect change in the food industry.

I wouldn't describe either as a 'celebrity' first and foremost, as neither of them are famous just for being famous. Unlike that hideous bint doing that binge drinking show

This is true. They do have a particular skill, so perhaps I am being unfair in that regard.

Clebrity for the sake of it just baffles me. The idea of an It girl for crying out loud. where is the next generation of richard Bransons, Stephen Hawkins,Sir Norman Fosters...?

quote:

Originally posted by duffle:
I think when people are shopping they don't really think where things are coming from. They are trying to find a bargain and that is fair enough, I do that myself. But I think it can only be a good thing to start making it properly known what state the food on the shelves was in before it became wrapped in celophane.
It is very easy to see meat and not think of the animal it came from.

we've(well...townies have) become removed from the process, out of sight out of mind etc.
though not so removed as the vegetarians who still eat dairy products and seemingly dont know about the shocking treatment (especially on the continent) of veal calves.

I have watched the ‘Hugh’ show the last few nights. The French would laugh at us and so they should.

[QUOTE where is the next generation of richard Bransons, Stephen Hawkins,Sir Norman Fosters...?[/QUOTE]

There's only one way to find out. 'If you'd like to see the next Stephen Hawkings dial 0800....'

You're hired

quote:

Originally posted by pwg:

quote:

Originally posted by duffle:
I think when people are shopping they don't really think where things are coming from. They are trying to find a bargain and that is fair enough, I do that myself. But I think it can only be a good thing to start making it properly known what state the food on the shelves was in before it became wrapped in celophane.
It is very easy to see meat and not think of the animal it came from.

we've(well...townies have) become removed from the process, out of sight out of mind etc.
though not so removed as the vegetarians who still eat dairy products and seemingly dont know about the shocking treatment (especially on the continent) of veal calves.

Even where cruelty isn't a factor, it's still a major eye opener to see how some of our food is made/ caught. Anybody here watch 'Deadliest Catch'?

I've eaten free range and sometimes organic meat (the organic status of which I have my doubts about) for year---it tastes better and that's what matters and that's why you should avoid the alternatives; the plight of the cute wittle henny-wennys is less of a concern to me.

You have to think about what the quality of inferior food is doing to the body. Even the most callous of consumers should be aware of quality and the fact that if a farmer doesn't care much about his livestock he won't be too bothered about the people who eat it.