Animal Welfare & Brexit Aftermath
The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) defines animal welfare as how an animal copes with the conditions in which it lives. An animal is in a good state of welfare if it is healthy, comfortable, well nourished, safe, able to express innate behaviour and if it is not suffering from pain, fear and distress.
Animal welfare is first and foremost important for the animals, as where welfare is poor an animal may suffer physical and mental distress. However, animal welfare can be relevant to business: poor welfare can impact the ability of animals to grow, produce and reproduce, which in turn can reduce productivity and food quality; and ultimately impact company performance.
Animal welfare is gaining international recognition
Tougher legislation – including several European Union laws and the Indian Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (which does not allow for the caged confinement of animals) – highlights the growing global focus on animal welfare. A number of global and regional initiatives have also emerged to provide guidance on good practice, such as the Pan-African Animal Welfare Alliance, the UK’s Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ (RSPCA’s) ‘RSPCA Assured’ farm assurance and food-labelling scheme and OIE standards.
Five Freedoms of animal welfare
Originally established by the UK Farm Animal Welfare Council, the Five Freedoms underpin international dialogue on animal welfare and refer to idealised states of welfare rather than to standards:
Freedom from hunger and thirst: By ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigour.
Freedom from discomfort: By providing an appropriate environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area.
Freedom from pain, injury or disease: By prevention or rapid diagnosis and appropriate treatment.
Freedom to express normal behaviour: By providing sufficient space, proper facilities and the company of other animals of its kind.
Freedom from fear and distress: By ensuring conditions and treatment that avoid mental suffering.
The Brexit aftermath
Here is an extract from the opinion piece: “Brexit would be disastrous for Britain’s farm animals”
Brexit would mean that the UK would not be subject to future directives on farmed animal rights. Second, an independent Britain will not need to keep to previous EU rules that protect farmed animals. Sadly we can discount the possibility that an independent Britain under the current government would choose to increase animal protections. Cameron’s administration has shown no desire to go beyond any minimum EU position on animal rights and is instead actively pursuing a deregulatory agenda. Just last month it emerged that Conservative ministers wanted to scrap many guidelines on animal welfare, beginning with letting the poultry industry self-regulate in some areas.
Their preference for deregulation over animal welfare is also demonstrated by plans to review the foxhunting ban, despite most of the population backing it. Beyond their preference for deregulation, the Tories are the party of business, and complying with animal rights laws costs money. I