In the aftermath of the scrapping of the Kept Animals Bill, the government appears to be furiously engaging in damage limitation.

Reasons cited for it’s withdrawal range from a lack of parliamentary time, to the Labour Party looking to add an amendment banning drag hunting, the government terrified of this creating an opportunity for some Conservative MPs to resurrect calls for a repeal of the hunting ban, and the public outrage it would rightfully provoke.

From what we can see there appears to be a substantial amount of disquiet within Tory ranks themselves about the abandoning of the Bill.

Minister of State for Food, Farming and Fisheries Mark Spencer has claimed the government is still committed to measures contained such as a live exports ban, and that this will be brought about via separate legislation.

On hearing this statement, a collective eyebrow went up.

Last year, after rumours began to circulate that the Animals Abroad Bill was to be dropped, the minister was asked in parliament to confirm whether a ban on the import of foie gras and fur (provision for which was in it) would be introduced. He said “I see no reason why that legislation won’t be forthcoming.”

The Bill was thrown in the bin shortly after. It was reported that Spencer himself was instrumental in blocking it.

Scotland for Animals has no confidence in this man’s word, or that of the government in which he holds office.

It’s vital we stand united in taking these grifters on. Keep fighting.

Please take a few minutes to contact Sunak and let him know that we’re all watching, and his actions (or lack of) will be answerable.

104 million, 168 thousand+ animals slaughtered.

212 thousand+ cattle (steers, heifers, young and adult bulls, and calves)

1 million, 73 thousand+ sheep

783 thousand+ pigs

102 million, 100 thousand+ poultry (chicken, turkeys)

326,700+ tonnes of corpses.

*Numbers do not include other species slaughtered, e.g. goats, ducks, geese, horses, aquatic animals.*

Source; UK Government

Prince Charles still enjoys thrill of the chase while still legal despite mother’s advice

Stephen Bates

Sat 6 Nov 2004 00.46 GMT

Prince Charles, the country’s most eminent foxhunter, has no intention of stopping hunting until the practice is made illegal, Clarence House has said.

Such is the heir to the throne’s predilection for the chase, that it is well attested that he has defied his mother’s advice that he should scale back, or stop, his hunting activities because his support is verging dangerously close to the party political. His sons, princes William and Harry, have agreed to stop.

The Queen is understood to be concerned that more than 60% of the public are opposed to hunting and that allying too publicly with a raucous minority campaign could prove damaging.

Other members of the royal family who hunt include the Princess Royal and her children, Zara and Peter Phillips, and Prince and Princess Michael of Kent.

Of the four demonstrators who invaded the Commons chamber in September, two have played polo with the prince and a third, Luke Tomlinson, is a friend of William and Harry.

Camilla Parker Bowles, the prince’s partner, has also ostentatiously continued hunting and has made her views clear on matters such as the countryside demonstration in London two years ago.

She was only narrowly deterred from attending the march and defiantly sported a Countryside Alliance sticker in her car.

Clarence House made clear that Charles intends to continue hunting, though his spokesman would not divulge how often he hunts or when he would be doing so, for obvious security reasons but officially because his participation is a private not a public engagement.

The prince, Mrs Parker Bowles and William and Harry have usually ridden with the Beaufort hunt which meets in Gloucestershire, near his country home at Highgrove, but he also occasionally goes out with other hunts including the Meynell in Derbyshire, where he fractured his shoulder blade in a fall in January 2001.

He had previously also broken a rib in January 1998 while riding with the Wynnstay hunt at Malpas in the Welsh borders.

Despite the monarchy’s studied public political neutrality, surreptitious accounts of the prince’s private views on the matter have occasionally leaked out.

He is said to have expressed great sympathy for hunt supporters and was reported before the countryside march to have said: “If the Labour government ever gets round to banning foxhunting, I might as well leave this country and spend the rest of my life skiing.”

Donna Rosen, an American guest at a party attended by the prince for the British Museum last year, reported him as saying of hunting that “it hadn’t gone away yet and if it does, it would come back”.

Gloucestershire police were reported to be concerned that protecting the prince during hunts could cost them £50,000 a time, with no sign that Charles has offered to contribute to the cost from his private income.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/nov/06/monarchy.hunting

The much heralded Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill has been passed pending royal consent.

While it is a welcome addition that animals such as crabs and lobsters are explicitly recognised, a result hard fought for by dedicated campaigners, we disagree that the Act will be the earth shattering moment is it being made out to be by some.

In practice, the new legislation more or less replaces Article 13 of Title II of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which applied to the UK before leaving the EU.

Article 13 states:

“In formulating and implementing the Union’s agriculture, fisheries, transport, internal market, research and technological development and space policies, the Union and the Member States shall, since animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals…..”

What too many who cite Article 13 neglect to follow on with however is the next paragraph stating that this is to be carried out:

“…while respecting the legislative or administrative provisions and customs of the Member States relating in particular to religious rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage.”

What this effectively did was to stipulate certain actions with one breath, then in the next provide such a broad caveat that the original mandate ends up pretty much not worth the ink.

Factory farming, slaughter, bloodsports, animal experiments, live exports, the massacre of aquatic animals…..all of this and more continued unimpeded.

With regards to the new Act, it’s stated “The purpose (of the Animal Sentience Committee created through the legislation) is that of ensuring that, in any further formulation or implementation of the policy, the government has all due regard to the ways in which the policy might have an adverse effect on the welfare of animals as sentient beings.”

But then:

“Recommendations made by the Committee must respect legislative or administrative provisions and customs relating in particular to religious rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage.”

This is familiar.

The explanatory notes go on to state that:

“The Bill recognises that animals are sentient beings and creates an accountability mechanism which aims to ensure that UK Ministers have due regard to their welfare needs when formulating and implementing government policy.”

But that this:

“does not mean that the welfare of sentient animals should take precedence over other considerations when formulating or implementing a particular policy.”

There it is.

Despite the noise, despite the headlines, despite the assurances, our right to torture, slaughter, subjugate and exploit animals remains protected by the state.

What we believe is happening here is an attempt to sell us an empty box, as part of an opportunistic attempt by government to garner public support through the illusion of action.

We’re back to a situation where the sentience of animals is recognised in law, while the same law simultaneously permits their enslavement and murder.

We believe that animal organisations need to be very clear about the realities of the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act. If not it’s helping politicians create a veneer of honour while they throw billions of animals onto the fire.

The words of the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs sum it up:

“While its (the Bill) aim is to improve the policy and decision-making processes of Government, the committee’s reports will not bind Ministers to any particular course of action. Ministers will remain free to determine the right balance between animal welfare and other important considerations.”

“the right balance” being the business of misery and death continuing as usual.

* The Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act will extend to the whole of the UK , but will not apply to policies implemented or formulated by Ministers in devolved administrations.

Pic credit: ASR Activism Photography

After 20 years of the continued terrorising and slaughter of foxes, enabled by legislation full of loopholes, the Scottish Government’s solution is to propose legislation full of possible loopholes.

Although the The Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill has the potential to be terminal for the viability of fox hunts in their current form the use of dogs for hunting will still be legal under a wide range of exceptions, and provision remains to obtain licences to use multiple dogs.

These measures are at Bill stage which presents the danger of further dilution, and rest assured the bloodsports mob will be working both overtly and covertly to ensure business continues uninterrupted. At the same time this provides an opportunity to make any legislation effective and watertight.

Please keep your eye out for calls to action, and continue to give your support to the Sabs.

See Bill here