Latest news with #AnimalPolicyInternational
Daily Mirror
06-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Mirror
'Cruel' animal welfare practices 'could be imported to UK due to new trade deal'
As Britain and India sign a new trade deal, Animal Policy International revealed the immense suffering of hens confined to battery cages raising concerns about the potential increase in cruel imports Animal charities have joined forces to issue a stark warning about low welfare standards as Britain agrees to a new trade deal. Compassion in World Farming, the RSPCA and Animal Policy International (API) say British consumers could be buying products of practices that are too cruel to be carried out here. James West, Chief Public Affairs Manager at Compassion in World Farming, said: 'Right now is a pivotal time for protecting animal welfare, as the UK Government is currently preparing to announce a new trade strategy. Alarmingly, the UK risks undermining its animal welfare laws and disadvantaging British farmers if the Government allows imports of meat, eggs and dairy produced to lower standards than here.' As Britain and India agreed a long-desired trade deal on Tuesday, a probe by API reveals the immense suffering of hens confined to battery cages on its egg farms raising concerns about the potential increase in cruel imports to the UK. The animal welfare group found overcrowded conditions on Indian farms with up to 10 hens crammed into cages typically used for two-to-three birds , hens with injuries, swollen glands and beaks, dead birds left lying around the cages and insufficient and poorly maintained water access points. India is the world's third biggest egg producer, with 80-90% of hens in battery cages with plans to expand their export market. These systems severely restrict hen movement and natural behaviours, causing significant welfare issues. The British Egg Industry Council has warned that while fresh shell egg imports may not pose a major threat, processed egg products present a serious concern. Liquid or powdered egg imports from countries, like India, using production methods banned in the UK, could severely impact the domestic industry. With approximately a fifth of British eggs used for egg products, competition from lower-welfare imports could force UK egg processors out of business, disrupt the supply chain and potentially raise consumer prices. Vietnam is another potential country for imports. Mandy Carter, Co-Executive Director at Animal Policy International, said: 'We know that British people care deeply about animal welfare, yet we continue to see animals suffering in horrific conditions overseas, specifically for the UK market, in conditions like that as seen in the footage from Vietnam and India. By allowing imports that flout our welfare standards, we risk plunging into a race to the bottom that compromises the welfare of animals, the integrity of British values, and the livelihoods of our farmers.' A new report released by Animal Policy International, Compassion in World Farming and the RSPCA has found that 49 of the 58 countries with which the UK has, or is negotiating, free trade agreements (FTAs) with, have lower farmed animal welfare standards than the UK. The report warns that many animal products imported into the UK are produced using methods that are illegal here, and there is an urgent need to address this issue to avoid it worsening with new trade deals that could undermine both British values and higher welfare UK farmers. This includes a trade deal with the US which is rumoured to include chicken, pork and beef. Previous negotiations with the US saw the US Government push aggressively for unrestricted access to the UK market for agri-food products, including hormone-treated beef and chlorine-washed chicken, both practices that are illegal in the UK. The United States has no federal legislation protecting farmed animals during rearing and the Animal Welfare Act 1966 explicitly excludes farmed animals, including poultry and fish, from its scope, creating a vastly different regulatory environment to the UK. Battery cages for layer hens are only banned in eleven US states. Similarly, sow stalls, which severely restrict movement for pregnant pigs, remain legal in 39 US states despite being banned in the UK since 1999. Painful procedures like tail docking and castration on pigs are routinely performed without pain relief in US farming operations. US poultry are excluded from humane slaughter laws, with no federal requirements for stunning before slaughter. Additionally, antibiotic use per animal in US farming averages five times higher than in the UK, with particularly stark differences in cattle (9-16 times higher) and turkeys (5.5 times higher). Mexican production standards feature minimal safeguards for the welfare of pigs, cattle, and chickens. The use of sow stalls, illegal in the UK, is permitted throughout Mexico. Additionally, Mexican regulations do not mandate pain relief for common procedures like castration and tail docking. Entrepreneur and Dragons' Den star, Debora Meaden who penned the foreword for the report, said: 'Closing this "welfare gap" must be a priority. It's about integrity. We don't just want suffering outsourced overseas - we want an end to farmed animal cruelty entirely.' A Government spokesperson said: "We will only ever sign trade agreements which aligns with the UK's national interests, and we will not lower our high food standards."
Scoop
06-05-2025
- Business
- Scoop
Action Urged As New Bill And Petition Seek To Close Animal Imports Loophole
Press Release – Animal Policy International The petition, by animal law expert Associate Professor Marcelo Rodriguez Ferrere, was received by Labour MP Rachel Boyack, while Green MP Steve Abel announced the introduction of his bill, the Animal Products (Closing the Welfare Gap) Amendment … A new member's bill addressing the import of animal products was announced at Parliament today (6 May), alongside the delivery of a petition with over 11,000 signatures calling for imported animal products to meet local welfare standards. This powerful legislative proposal, backed by thousands of concerned citizens, creates momentum for change as New Zealand begins trade negotiations with India. The petition, by animal law expert Associate Professor Marcelo Rodriguez Ferrere, was received by Labour MP Rachel Boyack, while Green MP Steve Abel announced the introduction of his bill, the Animal Products (Closing the Welfare Gap) Amendment Bill. National MP Grant McCallum alongside representatives from Animal Policy International, SPCA, SAFE, and farmer Walt Cavendish spoke at the event, providing diverse perspectives on the pressing need for reform. The timing could not be more critical as yesterday New Zealand formally began trade negotiations with India — where over 90% of hens remain in battery cages, a practice banned in New Zealand — highlighting the urgent need to address this inconsistency. Last year a report revealed that many animal products come from countries that allow practices like confinement of egg-laying hens in battery cages, pregnant pigs in sow stalls, and live lamb cutting (mulesing) of sheep – all banned in New Zealand due to welfare issues but still used by major trading partners. During the event Labour animal welfare spokesperson Rachel Boyack emphasised the need for consistency in animal welfare standards: 'The petitioner raises a fair point that there are products sold on New Zealand shelves that are made in countries with lower animal welfare standards than ours. I commend the petitioner on bringing this petition to Parliament and look forward to it making its way through the select committee process for thorough consideration. Consumer preferences are changing, and New Zealand customers rightly expect that all products in our market, regardless of origin, meet New Zealand's animal welfare standards.' Steve Abel highlighted the ongoing issues with imports: 'It has been years since New Zealand took the principled decision to ban sow stalls due to the immense suffering they cause to mother pigs. Yet, we continue to import significant quantities of cruel pork each year, contributing directly to animal suffering worldwide and undercutting more ethical local producers. My 'closing the welfare gap' Bill will close this loophole. Every day we delay adds to the suffering of animals farmed overseas and sold in New Zealand, and disadvantages our local farmers.' In his address, Animal Policy International Co-Executive Director Rainer Kravets stressed the urgency: 'As New Zealand negotiates new trade agreements, the amount of cruel imports may rise further. The time is now to require imports to meet our standards: creating certainty and ensuring our standards are not traded away with each trade deal. Not only is this possible, it's the right thing to do – for animals, for our farmers and for New Zealanders who want truly better welfare for animals. The Government has a strong mandate to enact legislation with over 8o% of New Zealanders agreeing that imported products from outside New Zealand should respect the same animal welfare standards as those applied in New Zealand.' This situation also creates a competitive disadvantage for New Zealand farmers who must comply with local laws, while effectively allowing practices rejected by New Zealand voters to continue entering through imports. Walt Cavendish, a dairy farmer said, 'The welfare gap is growing with many imports not up to the high standards that consumers demand of their Kiwi Farmers, farmers are not able to compete on a level playing field and the high animal welfare standards are ignored on many imported products. Farmers and consumers deserve better and so do our livestock. If better is possible, good is never enough.' Debra Ashton, CEO from SAFE said, 'Whilst there are still many improvements to be made in New Zealand, it is hypocritical of us to be importing products from countries with lower welfare standards than our own. At the very least, our laws must extend also to imports. This is something both SAFE and farmers can agree on.' 'We know that New Zealanders care deeply about animal welfare, yet we continue to import products that are the result of cruelty that would be illegal here at home. Without swift action, imminent trade deals could further compromise New Zealand's values, standards and our global reputation. Animals deserve protection no matter where they are raised, and we urge the government to take action,' said Arnja Dale, Chief Scientific Officer at the SPCA. 'For Aotearoa, addressing this issue isn't something for the future—it requires immediate attention to maintain our integrity in animal welfare,' Marcelo Rodriguez Ferrere said. 'We must act to close this welfare gap and stop cruel imports'.
Scoop
06-05-2025
- Business
- Scoop
Action Urged As New Bill And Petition Seek To Close Animal Imports Loophole
A new member's bill addressing the import of animal products was announced at Parliament today (6 May), alongside the delivery of a petition with over 11,000 signatures calling for imported animal products to meet local welfare standards. This powerful legislative proposal, backed by thousands of concerned citizens, creates momentum for change as New Zealand begins trade negotiations with India. The petition, by animal law expert Associate Professor Marcelo Rodriguez Ferrere, was received by Labour MP Rachel Boyack, while Green MP Steve Abel announced the introduction of his bill, the Animal Products (Closing the Welfare Gap) Amendment Bill. National MP Grant McCallum alongside representatives from Animal Policy International, SPCA, SAFE, and farmer Walt Cavendish spoke at the event, providing diverse perspectives on the pressing need for reform. The timing could not be more critical as yesterday New Zealand formally began trade negotiations with India — where over 90% of hens remain in battery cages, a practice banned in New Zealand — highlighting the urgent need to address this inconsistency. Last year a report revealed that many animal products come from countries that allow practices like confinement of egg-laying hens in battery cages, pregnant pigs in sow stalls, and live lamb cutting (mulesing) of sheep - all banned in New Zealand due to welfare issues but still used by major trading partners. During the event Labour animal welfare spokesperson Rachel Boyack emphasised the need for consistency in animal welfare standards: "The petitioner raises a fair point that there are products sold on New Zealand shelves that are made in countries with lower animal welfare standards than ours. I commend the petitioner on bringing this petition to Parliament and look forward to it making its way through the select committee process for thorough consideration. Consumer preferences are changing, and New Zealand customers rightly expect that all products in our market, regardless of origin, meet New Zealand's animal welfare standards." Steve Abel highlighted the ongoing issues with imports: "It has been years since New Zealand took the principled decision to ban sow stalls due to the immense suffering they cause to mother pigs. Yet, we continue to import significant quantities of cruel pork each year, contributing directly to animal suffering worldwide and undercutting more ethical local producers. My 'closing the welfare gap' Bill will close this loophole. Every day we delay adds to the suffering of animals farmed overseas and sold in New Zealand, and disadvantages our local farmers." In his address, Animal Policy International Co-Executive Director Rainer Kravets stressed the urgency: "As New Zealand negotiates new trade agreements, the amount of cruel imports may rise further. The time is now to require imports to meet our standards: creating certainty and ensuring our standards are not traded away with each trade deal. Not only is this possible, it's the right thing to do - for animals, for our farmers and for New Zealanders who want truly better welfare for animals. The Government has a strong mandate to enact legislation with over 8o% of New Zealanders agreeing that imported products from outside New Zealand should respect the same animal welfare standards as those applied in New Zealand.' This situation also creates a competitive disadvantage for New Zealand farmers who must comply with local laws, while effectively allowing practices rejected by New Zealand voters to continue entering through imports. Walt Cavendish, a dairy farmer said, 'The welfare gap is growing with many imports not up to the high standards that consumers demand of their Kiwi Farmers, farmers are not able to compete on a level playing field and the high animal welfare standards are ignored on many imported products. Farmers and consumers deserve better and so do our livestock. If better is possible, good is never enough." Debra Ashton, CEO from SAFE said, 'Whilst there are still many improvements to be made in New Zealand, it is hypocritical of us to be importing products from countries with lower welfare standards than our own. At the very least, our laws must extend also to imports. This is something both SAFE and farmers can agree on.' 'We know that New Zealanders care deeply about animal welfare, yet we continue to import products that are the result of cruelty that would be illegal here at home. Without swift action, imminent trade deals could further compromise New Zealand's values, standards and our global reputation. Animals deserve protection no matter where they are raised, and we urge the government to take action," said Arnja Dale, Chief Scientific Officer at the SPCA. "For Aotearoa, addressing this issue isn't something for the future—it requires immediate attention to maintain our integrity in animal welfare," Marcelo Rodriguez Ferrere said. 'We must act to close this welfare gap and stop cruel imports'.
Newsroom
01-05-2025
- General
- Newsroom
NZ congratulates itself on animal welfare. But it shouldn't.
As a nation whose economy depends on animals, our farming is often a source of national pride. When tourists exclaim how yellow our butter is, we smugly give ourselves a pat on the back. Why wouldn't we? Since the turn of this century, New Zealand has led the world in animal welfare standards. The legislation setting those standards made headlines in the New York Times when we presumptively banned research on great apes in 1999 and in the United Kingdom when we recognised animal sentience in 2015. Many jurisdictions have cited our animal welfare legislation as a model to follow. While it has many problems and improvements to be made, New Zealanders can still be broadly proud of legislation that recognises the intrinsic worth of animals. Higher animal welfare standards, after all, is something almost all of us want and expect. When people tuck into Sunday morning eggs benedict, Christmas Day ham or our national dish of fish and chips we expect that because this is Aotearoa – the land of the long white cloud and endless green pastures – the animals we're eating had a relatively humane life and death. The problem is that there's a high chance that the bacon in that eggs benedict, the ham at Christmas lunch and the crabstick in the fish and chips order didn't come from New Zealand. In its groundbreaking report earlier this year, Animal Policy International found that we import a tremendous amount of animal products. Sixty percent of all the pork we eat in New Zealand isn't produced here, and we imported 11,000 tonnes of it from Spain alone in 2022. That may be shocking to most of us, but there's a reason for our ignorance. If (and it's a big if) we're looking at a food label (and we can read it without a magnifying glass) it's likely we'll see a vague mention of 'made from local and imported ingredients' that does nothing to indicate exactly where our food comes from. It's also highly likely that the 83 tonnes of liquid eggs we imported from China or the 4600 tonnes of dairy we import from the United States each year come from animals that likely did not have a good life. The animal welfare standards in these countries are woefully deficient and while New Zealand is far from perfect, those standards would be far below what we require of our own farmers. It is illogical to ban Kiwi farmers from using certain practices while, at the same time, throwing the doors open to the import of the same products, the production of which has involved cruelty to animals. For example, while New Zealand finally banned sow stalls in 2016 and is due this year to phase out farrowing crates (which prevent a mother pig even from turning around), they are still somewhat commonplace throughout the world. That means that while New Zealand farmers are having to comply with fair and reasonable standards, it's likely that the Spanish producer of the bacon eaten at that Ponsonby café didn't. That's pretty weird. We don't think twice about safety when we jump in a car or take medicine that has been manufactured overseas, because those products are required to meet our safety standards. As they should. While other countries can take advantage of their economies of scale and produce all sorts of things more efficiently and cheaply than we can, when it comes to our safety, we draw a line. We're also extremely strict when it comes to biosecurity. Just as we carefully regulate imports for safety or biosecurity reasons, I'd argue that we should apply that same diligence to ensuring imported animal products meet our high animal welfare standards. New Zealanders agree that we should expect the same standards from overseas farmers as we do as ours. The same Animal Policy International report showed that 83 percent of Kiwis agree that imported products from outside the country should have been produced by applying the same animal welfare standards that apply here. It's hard for 83 percent of New Zealanders to agree on anything, but we evidently agree on wanting to know that if we eat animals, that they lived a reasonable life before a humane death. A petition is being presented to Parliament next week that demands legislation to require imports of animal products to meet or exceed New Zealand's animal welfare standards, and hopefully it's one that all parties in Parliament will take notice of. Another part of our national ethos is to take a courageous stand and to lead the way. Over 130 years ago we did that by giving women the right to vote. Forty years ago we took a stand against nuclear testing. By requiring our trading partners to meet our animal welfare standards, we would be standing up for our rural sector, and for animals worldwide.
