Animals Australia has said that it was ‘exasperated’ that sectors of the rural community have widely criticised supermarket giant Coles over the ‘Make it Possible’ bag campaign.
The National Farmers Federation along with other rural groups have labelled the animal rights group as ‘anti-farming’ claiming that the group openly supports veganism and is actively working to stop animal agriculture.
Animals Australia believes that the reference to a secret vegan agenda is nonsense and detracts from the real issue of the campaign which is to see animals raised humanely.
“We understand that we have a differing view to rural lobby groups on the live export trade, but it is profoundly disappointing to see this attack on Coles for supporting an unrelated campaign that encourages consumers to support higher welfare methods of production,” said Animals Australia Executive Director, Glenys Oogjes.
“How does this look to the average Australian to have rural lobbyists actively criticising efforts to encourage consumers to invest in higher standards of welfare? Consumer-driven change should be seen as a win/win as it gives producers the confidence to move to higher welfare systems.”
Oogjes believes that Coles should be ‘applauded’ for supporting higher welfare standards for livestock along with suppliers who comply by those high standards. Oogjes said that it is Animals Australia’s job to inform the public of welfare standards so consumers can make an educated decision at the checkout.
Animals Australia say that having the ‘make it possible’ bags in store serves as a reminder to consumer of their power to create a kinder world for farmed animals.
“Representative bodies need to realise that it is in fact their own defence of unconscionable industries such as factory farming and live export that is driving people to consider meat-free diets.”
“The goal of ‘Make it Possible’ is simply to see animals being raised in systems where they are afforded quality of life and protection from cruel treatment. It is both astonishing and disappointing that this hasn't represented a point of agreement between animal welfare and industry bodies.”