Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1472276
maltatoday | SUNDAY • 3 JULY 2022 9 INTERVIEW six million animals an hour? not mistaken: the 'unsweetened' versions, too; not even, as one might expect, the ones 'with added sugar' - Benna products are VAT-exempt. So it's all nonsensical, if you ask me. Even looking at it from a purely health perspective: Malta is known to have high levels of cholesterol, for instance. You do not get cholesterol from drink- ing almond, or soy milk; but you can get it from drinking cow's milk – or goat's milk, or any other dairy product. What sense does it make, then, to subsidise the less healthy of those two options… while slapping extra charges, on the healthier one? Even health-wise, then: we are simply not putting the right prices, on the right products… But there's more to it than health, isn't there? You are al- so a member of the 'End The Slaughter-Age' Campaign, which argues that all ani- mal-based food industries – meat, fish, dairy, eggs, etc. – have a devastating impact on the environment. How much of this recent veganism trend, would you say, is down to that sort of concern? Let me put it this way: everything I just said about the price of milk-products in Mal- ta, applies just as much to how Europe approaches the same is- sues. Right now, for instance, Europe is consistently talking about the need to 'Go Green': 'Green Ener- gy'… the 'Green Deal'… 'Green everything', basically. And yet, the greenest thing there is, is a plant-based diet. There is noth- ing greener than that. Because we know that the meat industry, for example – and cows, in par- ticular – generates more than 15% of greenhouse gases, glob- ally. So what we are saying, with the 'End the Slaughter Age', is that there are two options that we can take. We can either go along with a situation whereby Eu- rope remains utterly dominated by these strong lobbies – the meat lobby; the dairy lobby; the fisheries lobby, etc. – that are basically contributing to (and profiteering from) the global en- vironmental problem… Or else, we can explore other, greener options… Such as what, though? Leav- ing aside that any individual always has the option to 'go vegetarian' – as you did, when you were 18 - the reality is that most of Europe will remain, to some degree, 'meat-eating': at least, for the foreseeable fu- ture. What are you actually pro- posing, then? Well, a little more fairness in the distribution of public funds would be a good start. If I'm not mistaken, last year's budget for the Common Agricultural Policy was around E55 billion. How much of that ended up funding the meat, fish and dairy industries? How much of it was invested in more environmen- tally-friendly technologies, that do not involve the killing of any animals? That's precisely what I mean, though: if you remove 'killing animals' from the equation al- together, the only remaining solution is for everyone to sim- ply 'stop eating meat'. I know that's your ultimate goal, as a Vegan, but… how realistic is that, in practice? No, there are other options. In Israel, for example, there are already shops selling 'chicken', made out of lab-meat. No chick- ens need to be killed in the pro- cess: it involves simply 'growing' the meat, in a controlled envi- ronment, from a few cells. And no antibiotics or steroids are needed, either. As for the end product itself: it is identical to chicken-tissue. It's basically the same meat, produced in a more environ- mentally-friendly way. And the same technology is already be- ing used to make burgers, sau- sages, and so on, in America, and other parts of the world. Another technology we could be talking about more, is hy- droponics. In a very small, very hot island like ours: wouldn't that be a practical solution to our food-supply problems? A closed hydroponics system, that is designed to waste as little wa- ter as possible? There are even supermarkets, elsewhere, that have started hy- droponically growing their own vegetables, and selling them at the same site: removing the need for any form of transpor- tation whatsoever… Now: if you take all that as an example of what we COULD be doing – not just for the sake of 'not killing animals'; but also for the sake of the environment, as a whole – and compare it to what we actually ARE doing… it's insane, quite frankly. Let me put it to you in anoth- er way. According to official data, we, as human beings, kill around six million animals… an hour. In the EU alone, nearly 360 million pigs, sheep, goats and cattle - as well as several billion poultry - are killed in slaughterhouses, every year. And that's excluding fish, by the way. Because if we also in- clude fish, it becomes almost impossible to even quantify. The official measurement used is 'tonnage'; and according to some equations – because it's very difficult to equate, precise- ly – we could be killing as many as 2 trillion fish, annually… And that's just… absurd. It's not just 'wrong', or 'bad': it's totally illogical. Totally insane. We are depleting our natural environment, on such an in- dustrial scale, that… just to give one example: our own Mediter- ranean Sea is now so severely over-fished, that local fisheries are extending their operations to the Pacific (having already depleted the Atlantic, in be- tween…) If I'm understanding correctly: you seem to be implying that this same environmental deg- radation, has now grown so alarmingly visible – and yes: so 'totally insane', as you put it – that people are beginning to change their own eating habits, as a way of protesting against it? Perhaps, in a sense. But it's not just about eating habits. I be- lieve there are a number of pil- lars behind veganism. It's more than just 'the food you eat'… or even the 'clothes you wear', or the 'cosmetics you use', and so on. It's a complete lifestyle. In fact, there was even a legal case, in the UK, because some- one wanted to grant veganism the status of a 'religion'. Now: I don't agree with that, myself. Certainly, I don't believe in any God shaped like a 'Brussels Sprout in the Sky'… … but I would say that it does have the same sort of holistic vision. One 'leg of the chair', so to speak, is Animal Rights; and justice for animals in general. Another is 'environmental jus- tice'; the next one is 'health' – in other words, justice for humans – and finally, there is 'social jus- tice'. This is why I find it difficult to accept that there are so many different labels, to describe the same thing. 'Veganism' is one label; 'Fair Trade' is another… but me, there is no difference between those two, whatsoev- er. If I feel bad about buying clothes, when I know that they were produced using child-la- bour in some factory, God- knows-where… it's because there's a social justice perspec- tive to veganism, too. For the same reason: as a Ve- gan, I feel that the food that I eat, should not just conform to the same principle of 'respect for animals'… it should also be sourced locally, as much as pos- sible. Because there's an envi- ronmental perspective to that as well. Apart from the cost, in terms of carbon-footprint, of food transportation… at a time of food shortages, should I not support local farmers? Of course, I should! 100%... Because they're all intercon- nected: environmentalism, an- imal welfare, health, social jus- tice… if you help one, you help them all; and if you help them all, you help everything. If, for instance, we take care of the local farmers; the local farmers will take care of the en- vironment. But what is happen- ing instead? The moment agri- cultural land falls into disuse, because it's been neglected: you know how it goes. Some devel- oper from Gozo comes along, and turns it into a block of flats. Or it gets requisitioned, to build a road-network… [shakes his head in despair] But like I said, earlier: it doesn't have to be this way. And I think that more and more people are beginning to see, for them- selves, that… it SHOULDN'T have to be this way, either.