On 16th November, Farming UK published an article entitled, ‘MPs vote to reject inclusion of animal sentience in Withdrawal Bill’. This story was picked up by The Independent newspaper, and became the ‘most viral politics article of 2017’. Celebrities such as Sue Perkins, Ben Fogle and Ricky Gervais retweeted and shared their thoughts on the story that told us MPs didn't care about animals' feelings. Online petitions amassed outrage and signatures in a matter of days. Soon after, The Independent had to update ‘its coverage to ensure it was accurate’.
Michael Gove, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs complained that ‘people… believe that the raw and authentic voice that's shared on social media is more reliable than what is said on… the BBC’, and he seems to be right. So, if we can move past this ‘fake news’ story, and focus on what did happen in the House of Commons, we learn that Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, tabled an amendment to incorporate Article 13 of the Lisbon Treaty into the EU (Withdrawal) Bill. The crucial part of Article 13 is that it recognises animal sentience and forces the state to consider animal welfare when creating and implementing legislation. This becomes a problem when the UK leaves the EU, because this piece of legislation will be lost, and many worry that it will not be replaced, leaving a loophole where animal sentience does not need to be considered. MPs voted against adding Article 13 into the EU (Withdrawal) Bill, because they said that the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) (2006) covered animal sentience. Most of us who know the AWA, know this is most definitely not the case. Animal sentience is not mentioned once. Also, the AWA places the duty of care on the owner or keeper of the animal and covers domestic animals only.
The Prime Minister said that by installing CCTV in slaughter houses, proposing a ban on the trade of ivory, and banning microbeads the UK had exceeded current EU legislation. Mr Gove added that the EU currently restricts the UK from banning live export for slaughter, puppy farming and banning the import of puppies under the age of 6 months. It is argued that that the Treaty of Lisbon has its own failings, for example, allowing the practice of bull fighting and foie gras production, under the guise of cultural practice. But the EU has had some successes, banning battery cages, ending animal testing for cosmetics, and prohibiting the import of seal products. Days later, Mr Gove issued a statement outlining the Government's intention to increase sentences of animal cruelty from 6 months to 5 years, and to create a new independent body to uphold environment standards.
Many worry that a government embroiled in EU negotiations and with a flimsy parliamentary majority, will simply not prioritise animal rights, and that the issue will get lost in debate, meaning that intention will not lead to action. On 28th November, the BVA and BVNA jointly published an open letter in The Daily Telegraph calling for the Government to ‘bring forward an amendment at Report stage. And if it is not to be included in the EU (Withdrawal) Bill, the Government must explain how it will be enshrined in UK law before we leave the EU’.
In a country that has shown once again, how much it loves its animals, this seems to be the least we can hope for. With this current wave of enthusiasm, and powerful social media, perhaps we can dream that people are punished appropriately for mistreatment of animals, and practices that cause pain and suffering banned entirely.