Lancashire County Council's voted to ban schools from serving halal meat from animals that are not stunned before slaughter.

The proposal to ban the practice was brought by Geoff Driver, its leader, who argues it is 'abhorrent' and 'really, really cruel' to slaughter animals without stunning them first.

Lancashire currently supplies 27 schools with 'unstunned' halal meat, catering for up to 12,000 children who are served 1.2m meals a year.

Councillors voted 41 to 24 to ban the meat from county-run schools; fifteen councillors abstained. During a heated debate last night, Labour councillor Lorraine Beavers said 12,000 children in Lancashire were being used as a 'political football', and said the motion sent a message to children of a particular faith that they were not being respected by the Conservative-led council.

Conservative councillor Andrew Snowden said the issue was about 'the minimum treatment we expect animals to receive', adding he would support a ban on the 'inhumane' practice of not stunning animals before slaughter 'because my moral compass obliges me to'.

Concluding the debate, Driver denied that the vote was antisemitic or Islamophobic, and insisted it was instead about animal welfare. He accused Beavers of hypocrisy, saying she had a sticker promoting a ban on the fur trade on her car.

Lancashire Council of Mosques (LCM) has accused Driver of leading a 'crusade' on the issue. Abdul Qureshi, the LCM’s chair, said any decision to ban unstunned halal meat would create a huge difficulty.

“People will pull out of school meals and people who should eat properly will be deprived of that. For us it’s a matter of faith. For Geoff Driver it is his feelings,” he told the BBC last month.

The debate around the provision of stunned and unstunned halal meat to schools has already 'resulted in community tensions and fed the agenda of the far right', and Paul Golding, head of the far-right group Britain First, has tweeted about the Lancashire council vote.

Schools may seek alternative suppliers of halal meat who may not be accredited suppliers and therefore less accountable, the report warned.

“We currently offer meat accredited by the Halal Monitoring Committee, which is a trusted quality brand amongst Lancashire’s Muslim communities,” the report said.

UK law requires farm animals to be stunned before slaughter, but provides a religious exemption for Jews and Muslims. There is no single defined standard for halal in the UK. Instead, there are a range of halal accreditation agencies which inspect and accredit firms involved in the production and handling of meat in order for that meat to be described as halal.

The LCC report warned that a move away from the current policy to supply both stunned and unstunned halal meat may have adverse effects such as: 'fewer young people accessing their free entitlement of free school meals; risk of quality assurance within the supply chain; high uptake of packed lunches that don’t meet the school food regulations; and longer-term effects on attainment and achievement of young people, from high-risk social economic backgrounds.'

Why do we permit Halal meat at all in this country?

The practice is either cruel or not cruel, if it is decided that this is cruel, should be banned altogether, end of argument.

At last some action has been taken over halal meat. Its certainly taken long enough. We are so scared to upset a faith that the government is allowing animals to suffer. I haven't been to Subway since I heard they only use halal meat. Its about time more action was taken over this matter.

Originally Posted by Seashells&sand

At last some action has been taken over halal meat. Its certainly taken long enough. We are so scared to upset a faith that the government is allowing animals to suffer. I haven't been to Subway since I heard they only use halal meat. Its about time more action was taken over this matter.

Well said. The supermarkets should be forced to display how the Animal is slaughtered. I think the reason is we would never touch the stuff.

If any evidence were needed to support the fact that this society avoids any action which might offend any non Christian belief - but especially Muslims - look no further that the blind eye turned to large scale sexual abuse and rape of schoolgirls in towns the length and breadth of this country.
The cultural or religious argument to support their mediaeval beliefs and practices is a busted flush.
If the argument is made that Britain is a predominantly Christian country then the Bible has practices and beliefs equally as outmoded as found in the Qur'an yet those have largely been looked at as being 'of their time' and no longer adhered to.
If Farmer Giles were to announce he intended to stop sending his lambs to the licensed slaughterhouse and instead proposed to string them up by their hind legs, cut their throats and let them bleed out - do think it would be allowed.
The answer is clearly no - so why is it tolerated on religious and cultural beliefs that are alien to the majority of the United Kingdom and Wales?
I'm all for tolerance but there comes a point beyond which a stand should be made and, any group which wishes to indulge in practices that go against our values are told, firmly and clearly - no!

I shan't hold my breath.

If you come to live in this country you abide by its rules and laws, if not go and live elsewhere.

Fuss over nothing. It's not as if a normal slaughterhouse is humane.

Originally Posted by rogerblaxall

Lancashire County Council's voted to ban schools from serving halal meat from animals that are not stunned before slaughter.

The proposal to ban the practice was brought by Geoff Driver, its leader, who argues it is 'abhorrent' and 'really, really cruel' to slaughter animals without stunning them first.

Lancashire currently supplies 27 schools with 'unstunned' halal meat, catering for up to 12,000 children who are served 1.2m meals a year.

Councillors voted 41 to 24 to ban the meat from county-run schools; fifteen councillors abstained. During a heated debate last night, Labour councillor Lorraine Beavers said 12,000 children in Lancashire were being used as a 'political football', and said the motion sent a message to children of a particular faith that they were not being respected by the Conservative-led council.

Conservative councillor Andrew Snowden said the issue was about 'the minimum treatment we expect animals to receive', adding he would support a ban on the 'inhumane' practice of not stunning animals before slaughter 'because my moral compass obliges me to'.

Concluding the debate, Driver denied that the vote was antisemitic or Islamophobic, and insisted it was instead about animal welfare. He accused Beavers of hypocrisy, saying she had a sticker promoting a ban on the fur trade on her car.

Lancashire Council of Mosques (LCM) has accused Driver of leading a 'crusade' on the issue. Abdul Qureshi, the LCM’s chair, said any decision to ban unstunned halal meat would create a huge difficulty.

“People will pull out of school meals and people who should eat properly will be deprived of that. For us it’s a matter of faith. For Geoff Driver it is his feelings,” he told the BBC last month.

The debate around the provision of stunned and unstunned halal meat to schools has already 'resulted in community tensions and fed the agenda of the far right', and Paul Golding, head of the far-right group Britain First, has tweeted about the Lancashire council vote.

Schools may seek alternative suppliers of halal meat who may not be accredited suppliers and therefore less accountable, the report warned.

“We currently offer meat accredited by the Halal Monitoring Committee, which is a trusted quality brand amongst Lancashire’s Muslim communities,” the report said.

UK law requires farm animals to be stunned before slaughter, but provides a religious exemption for Jews and Muslims. There is no single defined standard for halal in the UK. Instead, there are a range of halal accreditation agencies which inspect and accredit firms involved in the production and handling of meat in order for that meat to be described as halal.

The LCC report warned that a move away from the current policy to supply both stunned and unstunned halal meat may have adverse effects such as: 'fewer young people accessing their free entitlement of free school meals; risk of quality assurance within the supply chain; high uptake of packed lunches that don’t meet the school food regulations; and longer-term effects on attainment and achievement of young people, from high-risk social economic backgrounds.'

Where the hell are our animal protection groups? Why are they remaining quiet now? This process to obtain meat should be banned completely - it is cruel and unnecessary! It was not that long ago that this would have led to massive riots in the UK - now we are supposed to accept Muslim demands without fuss. Muslims and others who want Halal meat should have gone to those countries that provide it OR accept that which is provided in the UK. Better still for all the animals concerned - Muslims should become vegetarians!

88% of animals slaughtered for halal meat ARE stunned first.
The method of stunning some non halal meat is a bolt through the brain.
If anyone thinks there's a nice fluffy British method of slaughter they're deluded.

Originally Posted by salus.populi

88% of animals slaughtered for halal meat ARE stunned first.
The method of stunning some non halal meat is a bolt through the brain.
If anyone thinks there's a nice fluffy British method of slaughter they're deluded.

By any chance - are you a veggie?

Originally Posted by gazaprop

By any chance - are you a veggie?

Not at all. I love eating meat. Not particularly bothered how it is slaughtered either. Anyone who eats dead animals but nit picks over slaughtering methods is a hypocrite.
Anyone who thinks stunning is humane and causes no pain should perhaps volunteer to be stunned.

Originally Posted by salus.populi

88% of animals slaughtered for halal meat ARE stunned first.
The method of stunning some non halal meat is a bolt through the brain.
If anyone thinks there's a nice fluffy British method of slaughter they're deluded.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/reli...hem-first.html

Originally Posted by Seashells&sand

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/reli...hem-first.html

https://www.animalaid.org.uk/the-iss...gns/slaughter/

Originally Posted by salus.populi

https://www.animalaid.org.uk/the-iss...gns/slaughter/

ANY slaughterhouse not following procedures should be dealt with. I stand by my beliefs that not pre stunning animals is wrong..it happens... it needs stopping.

Originally Posted by salus.populi

Not at all. I love eating meat. Not particularly bothered how it is slaughtered either. Anyone who eats dead animals but nit picks over slaughtering methods is a hypocrite.
Anyone who thinks stunning is humane and causes no pain should perhaps volunteer to be stunned.

What a silly final comment but anyway - the discussion is around the question of abhorrent cultural practices alongside which method is more humane - not whether they are 'fluffy' or not.
If we are going to eat meat then the slaughter needs to be done in a manner which is least prejudicial to welfare.
I would say the captive bolt wins hands down over bleeding out for a couple of minutes.