25-02-2010 Meeting with Mike Hancock MP and LibDems animal policies
(Photo: Mike Hancock MP (left) with fellow Lib Dem MP Bob Russell at an event in parliament, hosted by Mike, to allow the animal rights charity Animal Aid to brief other Members of Parliament on the increasing problem of death and injury in thoroughbred race horses.)
Liberal Democrat policies on animal welfare
By Andrew Knight BSc., BVMS, CertAW, MRCVS, FOCAE, a spokesperson for Animals Count
In the lead-up to the forthcoming national elections, the political party Animals Count is meeting with other political parties and candidates, to ascertain their positions on animal issues, and to encourage the adoption of better policies (or, in some case, any policies), on animal issues and welfare. Following previous meetings with Green MEPs and a Conservative MP, in February we met with the Liberal Democrat MP for Portsmouth South: Mike Hancock.
Mike has been campaigning on animal issues for over 40 years. His passion for animals began in a household “filled” with animals — thereby demonstrating a phenomenon increasingly recognised: children raised with pets usually become more empathetic toward animals. Furthermore, such development of empathy and consideration for others may also improve their future relationships with people. Unfortunately the converse is also true: violent people may have a prior history of animal abuse — an issue of no small importance, given disturbing modern rates of violent crime.
As a teenager Mike campaigned passionately on behalf of circus animals, and even released farm animals confined within a small cage at a Portsmouth city farm one dark night — although an outer fence rendered their freedom short-lived. Unsurprisingly, the inmates chose not to stray too far from their known food source, but Mike still smiles when he remembers their one night of relative freedom.
Soon afterwards Mike became an anti-hunting campaigner, and also began to play an active role in the campaign against live animal exports from Portsmouth and other ports, mostly to European destinations. Along with the campaign against the Spanish ‘Running of the Bulls’, this campaign took him to Southern Europe from time to time.
Since then, Mike has taken an active interest in encouraging animal welfare education for children. He continues to remain very active in the campaign against live exports, and indeed, has succeeded in preventing Portsmouth from being used as a live export port.
Mike is also organising a petition against the forthcoming implementation of EU Broiler Chicken Directive 2007/43/EC, which allows for stocking densities that could give chickens an individual space smaller than one A4 sheet of paper, by the time slaughter weights are reached. He is also seeking to increase the rights of elderly people in care homes to be accompanied by their companion animals.
Within Parliament, Mike is currently the Joint Honorary Secretary of the Associate Parliamentary Group for Animal Welfare. This cross-party body is comprised of over 80 MPs and Lords, and aims to promote the cause of animal welfare within both the UK and European parliaments.
Unfortunately, however, Mike’s enthusiasm for animal causes is not reflected by his party at large. Within the present parliament, animal protection initiatives are likely to receive support from only a small group of his Lib Dem colleagues. They are more likely to generate reluctance from the majority, and active opposition from a few. To date the Party Leader, Nick Clegg, has shown very little interest in advancing animal welfare.
This is clearly reflected in the Lib Dem policies available on the party website www.libdems.org.uk, as of February. As with other major parties, Lib Dem policy focuses on mainstream social issues, such as the environment, economy, health, law and order, education and transport. Animal issues are mostly mentioned in the context of biodiversity or wildlife preservation, within the relatively strong Lib Dem environmental policies. The main examples of animal-related policies seem to be:
- Support for a “policy of vaccination before the culling of livestock in cases where Foot and Mouth has been confirmed,” although they recognise that “it is imperative to adhere to the recommendations of veterinary experts on a case-by-case basis”.
No other plans for addressing animal diseases, in any species, were mentioned.
- A duty for local authorities “to protect local biodiversity and set local targets for wildlife, using the planning system to encourage the provision of wildlife-friendly features and wildflower areas in all new developments, with a duty to promote the establishment of wildlife corridors.”
- The establishment of “conservation zones for highly sensitive areas”, to “strengthen the protection of commercial fish stocks, dolphins, porpoises and other endangered marine wildlife.”
- Targets of: “At least a 75% reduction in global emissions from deforestation by 2020, and the halving of the carbon intensity of global food production by 2050.”
Given that the consumption of animal products such as meat and milk has recently been identified as the largest source of anthropogenic (generated by human activity) carbon emissions (Goodland and Anhang 2009), and that such worldwide consumption is expected to roughly double by 2050, we would need to decrease the emissions associated with animal agriculture to an implausible degree, to achieve the necessary improvement. As observed by Steinfeld and colleagues (2006), “The environmental impact per unit of livestock production must be cut by half, just to avoid increasing the level of damage beyond its present level.” To make matters worse, significant reductions in present levels are actually required, to avoid runaway climate change.
Unfortunately however, the Lib Dem policy lacked any further detail about how such incredible reductions in the carbon emissions associated with livestock production might actually be achieved. They also failed to include any mention of the range of policy initiatives necessary to reduce our consumption of animal products, that must form a key part of any realistic strategy aimed at slowing climate change (e.g. Brown 2009).
- Additionally, the Lib Dems aim to: “Work through the EU to guarantee high standards of animal welfare across the board for farm livestock, working animals and domestic pets.”
Whilst this sentence is clearly laudable, the lack of any further detail about how any of these goals would actually be achieved again serves to highlight the lack of serious Lib Dem commitment to animal welfare issues.
Unfortunately, most of the broad range of animal issues were excluded entirely from Lib Dem policies. Accordingly, we left Mike with a range of policy suggestions, in the areas of overall responsibility for animal welfare, farm animals, fishing, whaling, companion animals, the use of animals for entertainment, zoos, and scientific animal use. We took great care to limit our suggestions to very simple policies that appeared to be politically desirable, potentially achievable, and economically affordable. Within the area of companion animals, for example, we proposed that:
- “Purchasers of animals should be of adult legal age.”
- “Breeding of companion animals to meet breed standards, or for other purposes, that result in hereditary anatomical, physiological or other impairments likely to significantly compromise good welfare, should always be prohibited.”
- “The profound benefits of microchip identification, when compared to its minimal costs, justify making microchipping a compulsory preventative healthcare measure, for both dogs and cats.”
After all, we believe that broad concern for animals (as distinct from more radical viewpoints) constitutes a mainstream sentiment within UK society. This is not hard to understand, when one considers that most people either have a companion animal, or have close links to someone who has. We believe (and indeed, have demonstrated in the elections we have contested), that such concern for animals can be a vote-winner, and should be reflected in the priorities of our elected representatives.
Unfortunately, however, Mike informed us that in light of the recent economic meltdown, the political reality for animals is presently grim. All major parties are focusing almost entirely on the ‘big issues,’ including the economy, health, law and order, and education. Mike felt that the only way to progress any animal policy within the current political climate was to link it to one of these big issues, in a positive way.
He did, however, offer to place some of our policy suggestions on his website, www.mikehancock.co.uk, and to ask for comments, to determine the level of social support for them. We hope that he will indeed do this, and that any policies eliciting a positive response might be further considered within his party.
Mike spoke passionately of his belief that there was a much more powerful way to influence party policy, however. He felt that we should target marginal electoral seats, raising awareness about the differing policies on animal issues positions of closely-matched candidates. If we could actually alter an election outcome as a result, other parties might start to realise that animals do matter to voters.
Funnily enough, that is exactly what we have been planning during recent months, and is a core Animals Count strategy. As a fledgling political party, we can afford to contest only a single constituency effectively within the forthcoming UK elections. Accordingly, we have chosen one of the very few in which the leading candidates are separated by a very small margin: London’s Islington South and Finsbury. We will be making voters in that constituency aware of the positions of the various candidates on animal issues, with the aim of achieving exactly such an outcome. It was very gratifying to learn from a politician with over 40 years experience that our strategy is sound.
In the lead-up to the national elections we will continue to seek meetings with the remaining political parties, as well as the candidates in Islington South and Finsbury, to determine their position on animal issues — and to similarly encourage their adoption of policies that safeguard the welfare of animals.
References
Animals Count recognises animals as sentient beings and aims to raise the legal status of animals to reflect their sentience. This legal status would include their protection in national and international law. Therefore, Animals Count is completely opposed to the annual reckless and cruel seal cull in Canada which is due to commence in a few days time. This year up to 330,000 seal are allowed to be killed, while populations are already struggling with reduced sea ice formation due to climate change.
On 27 March, Animals Count kicked off its General Election campaign with the Fourth Party (Spring) Conference at the Finsbury Library in Islington.
As a response to growing public concerns regarding the increasing number of serious dog attacks, the government has proposed a revision/extension of the Dangerous Dogs Act (DDA) 1991. The main changes include making it compulsory for all dogs to be covered by third-party insurance in case of attack and to be micro-chipped, as well as an introduction of Dog Control Notices, or “Dogbos”. The micro chipping would make it easier to trace the owners and measures in general aim at more responsible dog ownership.
On 8th March, Lorraine Parker from Cardiff, represented Animals Count at a 
Today the 
The Dutch 
Our spokesperson Andrew Knight, who is a Fellow of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics and expert on animal experiments, gave two presentations at Manchester University (MU) on 3rd March. They were arranged by MU student and Animals Count (AC) supporter Anita Davies, and attended by an enthusiastic audience of around 30 students and others.
The Animals Count Nomination Committee has formally endorsed Richard Deboo, Deputy Leader, as a Prospective Parliamentary Candidate. Richard has been an active member of Animals Count for three years, and was also a candidate during last June’s European Parliamentary elections. An eloquent and passionate speaker, Richard commented on his nomination: