Animal welfare and the judgement of history

Although great strides have been made, history is as complex as the people who make it and certainly it is never a straightforward tale of progress. The decision by the Gillard government to ban live exports was reversed. A more recent Four Corners program that broadcast footage of Australian cattle being beaten to death with sledgehammers in Vietnam did not move the Turnbull government to institute a similar ban.

The expediency of live animal export is to send overseas responsibility for how the animals will be killed. Australian abattoirs are bound by laws governing the degree to which the animal is allowed to suffer before death, though no guarantee of enforcement of standards is possible in other countries.

Critics have attacked as bigoted Pauline Hanson's objection to halal certification. Irrespective of Senator-elect Hanson's real attitude towards Muslims and regardless of the basis for her objection to halal certification, the fact remains that a traditionally favoured halal method of slaughter is to cut the animal's throat without stunning.

In Denmark, both kosher and halal methods of slaughtering animals without stunning were outlawed due to the excessive suffering involved and not on religious or cultural grounds. Vegans, of course, can be religious and have a clear conscience with regard to any form of animal slaughter for food production.

Certain politicians and figures in the media rejected the Baird government's ban on greyhound racing outright. Steve Foley, the NSW opposition leader, affirmed his support for the industry. Federal National Party leader Barnaby Joyce also offered his support and linked the decision with the Gillard ban on live export, while admitting he had not read the McHugh report. Troy Grant, the NSW state leader of the Nationals rejected Joyce's views, confirming that he had actually read the report.

Meanwhile, the state governments of Victoria and, in a more qualified statement, Queensland also lent their support for their respective greyhound racing industries. In Victoria, that government support was given at around the same time as the news broke that four greyhound trainers at Tooradin would plead guilty to animal cruelty charges as a result of being filmed whilst engaged in live baiting. In NSW, meanwhile, a mass grave of "under-performing" greyhounds reportedly has been uncovered.

Not everyone in the ALP supports greyhound racing. Federal Labor MP Maria Vamvakinou, whose seat of Calwell includes The Meadows, a centre for greyhound racing in Victoria, has expressed the view on social media that the "ethical considerations outweigh the economic".

Politicians who either move against greyhound racing in Australia or else continue to support the industry will be answerable for their views one way or another the next time they face the electorate. In the meantime, the Baird decision to ban greyhound racing will need approval by the parliament in order to have the force of law.

The way we as individuals choose to treat animals, or as voters allow them to be treated, is a clear test of conscience.

To know exactly how animals think and feel and how they are treated, as increasingly we all can, due to scientific discoveries, modern technology and social media, is in some sense to be responsible ethically for the nature of that treatment.

Increasingly, the concern or otherwise we show for animal welfare will be a matter for judgement by future generations.