On the back of Cr Ingrid Jackson’s attempt for more transparency by making General Committee minutes public, Noosa Council has quietly attempted, and failed, in its bid to stifle democratic processes by having a parliamentary citizens e-petition against a Noosa Council-funded Eumundi slaughterhouse proposal removed from QLD Parliament’s website.
In a letter, Noosa Council had petitioned Parliament to remove the e-petition claiming “inaccuracies” and “breaches of the Parliament E-Petitions Conditions of Use”. In response, a representative for the principal petitioner had furnished supporting documentation published by the grant recipient, upholding the petition’s validity and democratic rights of QLD residents to petition. The response letter also stated that Noosa Council did not take the opportunity to clarify the extent of the grant’s purpose in their request for the removal of the petition.
The matter was referred to the Speaker of Parliament and resolved at the 2 May 2018 Parliament session. Mr Speaker found the petition to be neither “scandalous or misleading nor that the e-petition breaches any other Standing Order.”
To date, the petition has received over 2,200 signatures.
“Noosa Council has quietly attempted, and failed, in its bid to stifle democratic processes by having a parliamentary citizens e-petition against a Noosa Council-funded Eumundi slaughterhouse proposal removed from QLD Parliament’s website.”
Well, here’s an alternative fact straight off: “a Noosa Council-funded Eumundi slaughterhouse proposal”.
Should read: “a privately-funded Eumundi slaughterhouse proposal”.
As everyone following this story knows by now, Noosa Council is funding a rural study and has no plans to fund an abattoir in Eumundi or anywhere else.
So, if the state parliamentary speaker didn’t even pick this up, then the petition is based on a false premise. Such a petition would therefore be a waste of time.
It is quite clear that Noosa Council has provided funding for a project to see the re-opening of the slaughterhouse proposal. The e-petition states, “Queensland residents draws to the attention of the House the Noosa Council’s decision to award a grant to Country Noosa to reopen the Eumundi Slaughterhouse…” At the
May sitting of Parliament, Mr Speaker of QLD Parliament found the petition to be neither “scandalous or misleading nor that the e-petition breaches any other Standing Order.” A number of documents were submitted by a representative for the principal petitioner. Noosa Council and Country Noosa did not provide any documents to substantiate their argument. There is a lot of green washing going on by those close to Country Noosa. A comment made on ON’s blog by a CN member saying grass fed beef is more sustainable than other cattle rearing practices is misguided thinking and dangerous. There are no degrees of sustainability (i.e. grass fed beef is 50% more sustainable than cattles from feedlots.) It’s either sustainable or it isn’t- full stop!
This is not true: “Queensland residents draws to the attention of the House the Noosa Council’s decision to award a grant to Country Noosa to reopen the Eumundi Slaughterhouse…”
Noosa Council’s grant to Country Noosa was for a rural study. Country Noosa has no plans to reopen an abattoir in Eumundi or anywhere else. If the abattoir is reopened, it will be at the request of individual producers, not Noosa Council and not Country Noosa.
As to sustainable practices, I’d suggest there are degrees of sustainability based on many parameters.
It was the Cowspiracy doco that came down on the side of beef producers using pasture for cattle rearing as the most sustainable way of raising beef cattle.
Thanks Rod. Unless documentation can be furnished to counter the e-petition, your stance can only be considered an opinion. You suggest there are degrees of sustainability. With that in mind, what degree of sustainability to you give Country Noosa’s yearling beef project and do you have any supporting documents to uphold this position?
John, I’ve written ad infinitum on the problems with the petition in many replies to you on Facebook including references to prove my points. And these were verified facts, not opinions.
As to sustainable beef cattle rearing, I’m assuming you’ve read Brian Stockwell’s research report for Country Noosa on this topic, if not, you can find it here:
https://www.noosa.qld.gov.au/documents/40217326/457f3a90-5b94-46da-be65-bdfe9639b505
Hi Rod, thanks for providing the link.
The first modern farm I have visited in our area was probably Hinterland Fejoijas. They are quite rightly hailed as the great soil to plate, farm shop, local employment hub, smart agribusiness heroes. They are proving that soft footprint fruit farming is possible in this area by providing a niche product at high quality.
1. Would you know why the study had such a strong grazier focus in the first place? This, of course, necessitated the dreaded abattoir investigation. Or was this research paper part of a series?
2. Would you know if the viability of more bespoke meat production including field butcher operations were investigated?
Regards, Bettina
Yes, Bettina, Sally’s place is exemplary in many ways and certainly a marvellous business success. To sell virtually your whole crop to locals and to people no further than Brisbane is a huge achievement and economically sound in that the grower is getting the full price for their product. And it’s a product with the proverbial “low food miles”.
The study had a strong grazier focus because so many of the rural properties today are suited to grazing. The alternative is people buying these farms and either letting them go to weeds or spending a fortune slashing the block like it was a suburban plot. I would suggest this activity is far less eco than running cows that would keep pastures in good shape and weeds in check. Another alternative is to rehabilitate land with native vegetation and Noosa Landcare will tell you how much of this kind of work they have done. My concern is for the many old farms around me west of Cooroy which have been let to run down without any of the above happening. So, given that people are buying beef from supermarkets that has predominantly come from feed lot operations far away, I’d like to think that small-scale grazing is a perfectly valid use of land, and one which could make the shire self-sufficient in beef consumption.
Field butchering operations are happening, but this very small operation runs into issues with health authorities once it is consumed beyond the farm gate. I hope this changes.