So, Sadjii, what exactly do you think should happen?
i.e. are you happy for the trade to resume with no changes taking place in Indonesian slaughter houses, the abuse continuing?
Do you support stunning of the animal before killing?
Only a very small number of Australians want the live trade closed down, but many want to see mandatory stunning.
The government has created an abysmal mess here, not just in terms of the disaster it represents for producers, but it has also offended the Indonesian government which is equally stupid.
It's funny that you would ask "Do you support stunning of the animal before killing?" after I've already said that no one here is suggesting that we should condone animal cruelty. What sort of silly question is that?
If you do want to ask the question, well, I don't care how the animal is killed, as long as it is done humanely. If they want to put a bullet through the brain (an instant kill which takes place before the animal knows what is going on) I'm happy for them to do it without stunning first. If the most humane way practical in the abbotoir is to stun first, sure, whatever. As long as it's humane I'm happy. "Mandatory stunning" is a stupid rule (because it rules out other humane options which might be better, even more humane than stunning), but hey, if it is humane and it can be brought in, sure, I'm all for it. Just because I don't want to see cattle needlessly shot dead and left to rot, just because I don't want to have food wasted, just because I don't want to deprive families of their income doesn't mean I want to hurt animals! I'm actually a compassionate person who wants the best for animals as well as people.
If very few people want the industry shut down but they want mandatory stunning, how about putting an intelligent course of action in place to bring in mandatory stunning rather than shutting down the industry? There are cheaper methods which could be used to do this, and ones which don't require the slaughter and waste of countless cattle. So what would I do? Well, ANY of those alternatives would be better. What kind of idiot regulates an industry by saying "Oh, look, we found a problem in an isolated part of the industry, let's just shut the entire thing down, IMMEDIATELY"? This is particularly stupid when dealing with a live animal industry, because live animals can't just be put on the shelf for a few weeks, months or years while things get sorted out, they need space, money, feed, man hours etc to keep alive and well. Drastic, unplanned action is going to result in an animal welfare issue, and in most cases that will be a greater problem than the one you were trying to fix, as in this case.
Do you really need to ask if there is a better way to handle things? I can hardly even think of a worse one. With the amount of money this stupid decision is going to cost, it's pretty easy for anyone with a third of a brain cell to rub against the inside of their skull to come up with better, cheaper options.