Ban on foie gras stepped up
A ban on the serving of foie gras in council buildings in the Bath area is to continue.
The pressure group Viva! is keen to get the food banned because it says it is produced through the cruel force-feeding of ducks or geese.
Bath and North East Somerset Council does not allow the serving of foie gras at buildings such as the Guildhall and Assembly Rooms, which are used for weddings, dinners and parties.
Viva! and Bath Animal Action recently presented a petition signed by 1,890 people to the council urging it to keep up the ban.
Dyson DC50i - Bagless upright vacuum cleaner - BALL Technology -...
View detailsThisi is Dyson's smallest upright vacuum cleaner with the performance of a full size upright machine. The DC50i has Dyson's most advanced cleaner head technology and 2 Tier RadialTM cyclones.
Terms: LIMITED STOCK OFFER. FREE delivery to most UK postcodes - Next working day dispatch.
Contact: 01664 491439
Valid until: Monday, May 27 2013
Council leader Councillor Paul Crossley has told the campaigners that the ban will stay in force.
"Much of the industry is simply torture in a tin, for the ducks are force-fed vast quantities of food through a metal tube so that their livers swell up to ten times their natural size. This is cruel, inhumane, and the so-called delicacy has no place in the council's current or future food sales."
The council will also put a clause in future leases on the commercial premises it rents out in the city centre, stipulating that foie gras should not be served, but it cannot impose this rule retrospectively.
Megan Lebasci, from Bath Animal Action, said: "We are really pleased the council has proved to be forward-thinking on ethical and animal cruelty concerns regarding the sale of foie gras in its premises."
Viva! campaigns director Justin Kerswell added: "Viva! were delighted to support Bath Animal Action on such an important campaign. Well done also to Bath for being the first authority in the region to make this ruling. I hope other local authorities look to follow their example."
Comments
by rogerh3
Friday, December 09 2011, 2:16PM
“People should have the freedom to buy, sell and consume anything that is not illegal."
As they do. And a council has the freedom to buy, sell and consume what it wishes on its own property.”
by Pompeybelle
Friday, December 09 2011, 1:21PM
“I'm in complete agreement with you, Twertonite, but, as with Aesop's fable about the North Wind and the Sun, I can't help but feel that persuasion is better than force, and that all this ban will do is to entrench prejudices. Perhaps putting up photos of this ghastly process might have been better.”
by sejhfkjsdhg
Thursday, December 08 2011, 3:53PM
“Had a quick look at the 2010 accounts for Viva! (full name Viva Campaigns Limited). There seems to be one director, and Viva! has lent her £15,452 due to be repaid within 12 months.”
by sejhfkjsdhg
Thursday, December 08 2011, 3:31PM
“Aaah.. This ban followed a protest by Viva!. Viva is the "Vegetarians International Voice for Animals" They "opposes all slaughter and we promote vegetarianism as the only truly effective way to prevent animal suffering".
Don't make the mistake of thinking it is a charity, it isn't it is a limited company. The confusion over its charitable status seems to have entered the mind of its major celebrity supporter and patron:
""For me it's the best as far as animals, health, education and campaigning go - the whole shebang charity - the best I've ever worked with anywhere. At the time of my divorce I was working with several big charities and Viva! was the one I'd helped the least. The ones I'd helped the most dumped me as soon as the separation was announced, which shocked me".
Heather Mills, Patron Viva!”
by drawde29
Thursday, December 08 2011, 3:22PM
“Mmm... foie gras... tasty.”
by Twertonite
Thursday, December 08 2011, 1:31PM
“It's a pity the same freedom of choice isn't offered to the ducks and geese!”
by Dave_Weston
Thursday, December 08 2011, 1:18PM
“Whilst I'd personally love to see Foie gras banned worldwide because of its cruelty, this action by the council concerns me. As far as I can recall there is no democratic mandate for this ban, nor is it within the normal range of activities that would be expected by a council. In short it is elected councillors using (abusing?) their position to carry out a moral crusade rather than enabling the council to carry out its statutory duty. It is my view similar to the hectoring we get about environmental issues which go way beyond the council's remit to manage waste and recycling, and costs us in terms of employees paid to lecture us on common sense like cutting down energy use! Where does the line get drawn - suppose we ended up with a strong grouping in the council sharing particular religious convictions - would it be OK to impose those views on the area?”
by mcupis
Thursday, December 08 2011, 12:18PM
“There is nothing liberal about this sort of authoritarianism. People should have the freedom to buy, sell and consume anything that is not illegal.”