Page 3665 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 26 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Stanhope appears to give great weight to the apparent economic contribution of Parkwood to the territory. But, as I have asked him before, how many employees does Parkwood have, and does it pay any payroll tax to the territory? Looking at the numbers that I think it has employed, I do not believe it will be paying payroll tax to the territory. I would point out again that Pace has a peppercorn lease for the Parkwood property, paying only $486 a year rent to the territory.
This small amount of economic gain needs to be weighed against the moral imperatives of ending such a cruel practice and setting the lead for Australia It is much more admirable than defending an outmoded and unwanted business. The issue is not going to go away. If the bill is defeated by this Assembly, I foreshadow that the Greens in the next Assembly will bring it on again. The issue is not going to go away. The other parties will need to address it at some point.
I will now turn to the second element of my bill, which concerns retail display requirements for cage eggs. Members may have heard that Woolworths recently announced it would voluntarily separate cage eggs and free range eggs on its shelves. In doing so, Woolworths has recognised that consumers are having trouble identifying the different egg production systems so they can make informed choices. However, other supermarkets will not necessarily follow suit. So it remains important to pass my bill because this will require the separation of cage eggs on shelves as well as additional signage about the production methods. Without that, most consumers will be left in the dark.
The new display requirements will really benefit consumers, who are being misled by a variety of confusing egg labels. Some of these labels are so unrepresentative of their realities, they are almost comical. Some have pictures of green open fields with the word “cage” in a tiny font hidden away on the bottom of the carton. This can be very misleading for consumers. The president of the egg group of the Victorian Farmers Federation summed up the problem when he commented on Woolworths changes. He said, “I reckon, at the end of the day, half the people don’t realise what they’re buying. They just buy what looks good, because it’s all nice, colourful, branded products.” He added, “I get confused myself and I’m a farmer!”
Interestingly, Woolworths recognised the shifting attitudes of the community and declared that it would reduce the number of cage egg lines it stocks. McDonald’s also began using free range eggs overseas and has now confirmed that this will happen in Australia. When the ethics of McDonald’s start to advance beyond those of the ACT government it is a warning that something is wrong. Eighty-three per cent of ACT residents answered a recent survey by agreeing that cage egg systems were cruel. It is time to ban the production of cage eggs in the ACT and to back it up with proper, consumer-friendly displays of any imported eggs.
I am pleased to see that Mr Stanhope read my exposure draft and saw the merit in my signage proposal. I understand that he has now written to retailers in the ACT to ask them about that. I appreciate his interest in this area. He may also be interested to know that at the beginning of the year I spoke to a number of Canberra retailers. All of them told me that the changes required by my bill would not cause them any issues.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .