Sad day for animal welfare

[Kizzy]

Didn't think that brexit was being used to remove rights and protections?...Think again

'MPs have voted to reject the inclusion of animal sentience – the admission that animals feel emotion and pain – into the EU Withdrawal Bill.

The move has been criticised by animal rights activists, who say the vote undermines environment secretary Michael Gove’s pledge to prioritise animal rights during Brexit.

The majority of animal welfare legislation comes from the EU. The UK Government is tasked with adopting EU laws directly after March 2019 but has dismissed animal sentience.'

This will impact in all areas of animal welfare, can people still be convicted of animal cruelty? Could it be used to bring back fox hunting or badger baiting?
Will regulations on animal slaughter be relaxed?

My feeling also is that standards in farming will suffer with more animals kept in smaller spaced and potentially battery fed like chickens.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-bill-latest-animal-sentience-cannot-feel-pain-emotion-vote-mps-agree-eu-withdrawal-bill-a8064676.html

[arista]

Yes Kizzy
not me, though.

[Tom4784]

It's not surprising considering that May wants to bring back Fox Hunting. Disgraceful.

[arista]

It's not surprising considering that May wants to bring back Fox Hunting. Disgraceful.


Dezzy
Wasted post.


FOX HUNTING - is never back
ref: DP BBC2HD


May is not in the Next UK Election 2022
Fact.



I assume Dezzy
you are aware that the 5 Year Election was fecking ReSet,

[joeysteele]

Totally shameful and disgusting.

[Cherie]

Just so wrong on every level

[Lostie!]

How anyone can deny that animals experience emotions is beyond me.

[Niamh.]

The world really seems to be moving backwards lately

[Cal.]

****ing twats.

[Cal.]

The world really seems to be moving backwards lately

This.

[Crimson Dynamo]

thankfully the EU stopped bullfighting in Spain and France and the massacre of birds in malta

oh wait..

[bots]

thankfully the EU stopped bullfighting in Spain and France and the massacre of birds in malta

oh wait..

and Cyprus, where lots of rare birds stop off on their migration, only to be shot by enthusiastic locals.

[smudgie]

Badger baiting was banned in this country long before the EU was even formed.

[y.winter]

Remember when Nicky asked about vegetarian suggestions and many have thought it's funny to mock the idea?
Then hi.

[DemolitionRed]

It's not surprising considering that May wants to bring back Fox Hunting. Disgraceful.

I agree this is about fox hunting and badger culling.

[DemolitionRed]

Badger baiting was banned in this country long before the EU was even formed.

Badger baiting has been rife in this country for the past four years https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/14/badger-culls-could-end-tuberculosis-trials-new-test

[Withano]

Dezzy
Wasted post.


FOX HUNTING - is never back
ref: DP BBC2HD

,

Hmm, but then again it might be
Ref: Dave Ja Vu

[smudgie]

Badger baiting has been rife in this country for the past four years https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/14/badger-culls-could-end-tuberculosis-trials-new-test

Badger baiting has nothing to do with badger culling :conf:

[Vicky.]

This is just gross to be quite honest. Didn't see this thread and the story has just popped up on my facebook feed. Horrible people :(

[Cherie]

Badger baiting has nothing to do with badger culling :conf:

Two completely different issues

[Beso]

Prioroties animal rights during brexit...eh hellooo...unless we start with zebra crossings for ants and hedgehogs then you can **** right off with the priorotisation of beast before man

[jaxie]

There are a couple of online petitions for an amendment on this issue that anyone feeling concerned should sign. https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/repeal-the-decision-to-exclude-animal-sentience-from-the-eu-withdrawal-bill
And https://www.change.org/p/uk-parliament-repeal-the-government-decision-to-exclude-animal-sentience-in-the-eu-withdrawal-bill

[joeysteele]

The world really seems to be moving backwards lately

Quote of this thread.

You are right in that.

[Cherie]

There are a couple of online petitions for an amendment on this issue that anyone feeling concerned should sign. https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/repeal-the-decision-to-exclude-animal-sentience-from-the-eu-withdrawal-bill
And https://www.change.org/p/uk-parliament-repeal-the-government-decision-to-exclude-animal-sentience-in-the-eu-withdrawal-bill

Thanks Jaxie

[joeysteele]

There are a couple of online petitions for an amendment on this issue that anyone feeling concerned should sign. https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/repeal-the-decision-to-exclude-animal-sentience-from-the-eu-withdrawal-bill
And https://www.change.org/p/uk-parliament-repeal-the-government-decision-to-exclude-animal-sentience-in-the-eu-withdrawal-bill


Nice one jaxie.
Thanks for that.

[Mitchell]

The thought of a hedgehog on a zebra crossing has absolutely made my day.

[Livia]

I think that animal welfare standard in the UK are FAR above the majority of EU countries. I'm baffled at this thinking that being in the EU has made us all fluffy and loving.

[Withano]

https://www.indy100.com/article/animal-rights-vote-mps-list-eu-brexit-voted-animals-not-feel-no-emotions-313-conservative-party-tory-8068691

List of mp's who voted this through. My local guys on here :rolleyes: also it's only tories, dups, and 2 independents on this list.

[Kizzy]

I think that animal welfare standard in the UK are FAR above the majority of EU countries. I'm baffled at this thinking that being in the EU has made us all fluffy and loving.

Who mentioned the EU?... What has the EU to do with the issue here and the vote in OUR parliament on animal sentience.
Don't try to muddy the waters by pointing at other parts of the world and their positions on animal welfare but focus on ours, that is the topic of the thread.
What are your thoughts on the outcome of the vote?

[Withano]

Who mentioned the EU?... What has the EU to do with the issue here and the vote in OUR parliament on animal sentience.
Don't try to muddy the waters by pointing at other parts of the world and their positions on animal welfare but focus on ours, that is the topic of the thread.
What are your thoughts on the outcome of the vote?

I agree. I think Livias point was that the majority of animal welfare regulations before now were mostly EU laws. But I don't think that's directly relevant. This is more about what is happening, than what isn't happening.

[Brillopad]

https://www.indy100.com/article/animal-rights-vote-mps-list-eu-brexit-voted-animals-not-feel-no-emotions-313-conservative-party-tory-8068691

List of mp's who voted this through. My local guys on here :rolleyes: also it's only tories, dups, and 2 independents on this list.

Hardly surprising to most I think. Not because labour ministers care more about the animals but because they are trying to pretend they care - for obvious reasons. Not rocket science.

Got to be seen to be doing the right thing after all. Doesn’t wash with me. Caring about animals is not political. It just gets used by those with an agenda.

[joeysteele]

https://www.indy100.com/article/animal-rights-vote-mps-list-eu-brexit-voted-animals-not-feel-no-emotions-313-conservative-party-tory-8068691

List of mp's who voted this through. My local guys on here :rolleyes: also it's only tories, dups, and 2 independents on this list.



Hardly a surprise from the people who would have legalised again hunting with hounds,had they won a larger majority in June.
Sickening to see the extreme DUP helping them win the day too.

[Withano]

Hardly surprising to most I think. Not because labour ministers care more about the animals but because they are trying to pretend they care - for obvious reasons. Not rocket science.

Got to be seen to be doing the right thing after all. Doesn’t wash with me. Caring about animals is not political. It just gets used by those with an agenda.

What an odd way to defend tories / slander labour.

Bloody Labour doing the right thing :fist: I dont believe you care therefore youre just as bad :fist::fist::fist:

[smudgie]

Didn't think that brexit was being used to remove rights and protections?...Think again

'MPs have voted to reject the inclusion of animal sentience – the admission that animals feel emotion and pain – into the EU Withdrawal Bill.

The move has been criticised by animal rights activists, who say the vote undermines environment secretary Michael Gove’s pledge to prioritise animal rights during Brexit.

The majority of animal welfare legislation comes from the EU. The UK Government is tasked with adopting EU laws directly after March 2019 but has dismissed animal sentience.'

This will impact in all areas of animal welfare, can people still be convicted of animal cruelty? Could it be used to bring back fox hunting or badger baiting?
Will regulations on animal slaughter be relaxed?

My feeling also is that standards in farming will suffer with more animals kept in smaller spaced and potentially battery fed like chickens.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-bill-latest-animal-sentience-cannot-feel-pain-emotion-vote-mps-agree-eu-withdrawal-bill-a8064676.html

I think that animal welfare standard in the UK are FAR above the majority of EU countries. I'm baffled at this thinking that being in the EU has made us all fluffy and loving.

Who mentioned the EU?... What has the EU to do with the issue here and the vote in OUR parliament on animal sentience.
Don't try to muddy the waters by pointing at other parts of the world and their positions on animal welfare but focus on ours, that is the topic of the thread.
What are your thoughts on the outcome of the vote?

:conf::conf::conf:

[Kizzy]

Hardly surprising to most I think. Not because labour ministers care more about the animals but because they are trying to pretend they care - for obvious reasons. Not rocket science.

Got to be seen to be doing the right thing after all. Doesn’t wash with me. Caring about animals is not political. It just gets used by those with an agenda.

So conservative MPs just don't care that we know they don't care?
We knew that long before this vote.

Won't this outcome be used by those with an agenda then? It'll be back to animal testing in labs or cosmetics as their only dumb animals with no feelings.

https://www.peta.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/pcases_biosearch_2_012-300x194.jpg

[Brillopad]

So conservative MPs just don't care that we know they don't care?
We knew that long before this vote.

Won't this outcome be used by those with an agenda then? It'll be back to animal testing in labs or cosmetics as their only dumb animals with no feelings.

https://www.peta.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/pcases_biosearch_2_012-300x194.jpg

And what a coincidence that not a single labour minister voted for it - because they are all such lovely caring individuals. Yep believe that! Care more about keeping their jobs more like.

[Kizzy]

:conf::conf::conf:

The decision on sentience wasn't taken in the EU, that was the meaning behind that statement Smudgie. My post was in relation to the decision taken in our parliament only.

There is as always the challenge from Livia that we have better protections than anywhere, but where are they? Where is the burden of proof that our animal rights protections are better? Of course imagining for a second they are will they still be when the issue of animal sentience is applied to preexisting legislation? Will animals be afforded the same protections due to the fact it has been asserted they have no capacity for emotion?

I'm sorry I confused you but again I'm conscious of the conversation being diverted into an EU bashing exercise rather than a discussion on how our independence is being mapped.
We are a nation of animal lovers, does this ruling speak for us and what will it mean for the future of animal welfare in England?

[Kizzy]

And what a coincidence that not a single labour minister voted for it - because they are all such lovely caring individuals. Yep believe that! Care more about keeping their jobs more like.

And the conservatives don't care about keeping them?... Your post makes no sense brillo, who is gong to get rid of them based on the outcome of a vote?

[Brillopad]

And the conservatives don't care about keeping them?... Your post makes no sense brillo, who is gong to get rid of them based on the outcome of a vote?

Er perhaps a priminister in waiting desperate to make out all his labour MPs are such caring individuals. That is the socialist mantra is it not - that they hold the moral high ground with no other political ambition than to help the have-nots. :hehe:

[Withano]

Er perhaps a priminister in waiting desperate to make out all his labour MPs are such caring individuals. That is the socialist mantra is it not - that they hold the moral high ground with no other political ambition than to help the have-nots. :hehe:

I homestly think that very close to 100% of people in the country would have voted against this movement. That includes snp/labour/green/libdem/every other party.

The gymnastics youre going through to justify this on some level is weird. Sometimes its okay to agree with a party you dislike / disagree with a party you like. Thats basically adulthood, Brillo.

[smudgie]

The decision on sentience wasn't taken in the EU, that was the meaning behind that statement Smudgie. My post was in relation to the decision taken in our parliament only.

There is as always the challenge from Livia that we have better protections than anywhere, but where are they? Where is the burden of proof that our animal rights protections are better? Of course imagining for a second they are will they still be when the issue of animal sentience is applied to preexisting legislation? Will animals be afforded the same protections due to the fact it has been asserted they have no capacity for emotion?

I'm sorry I confused you but again I'm conscious of the conversation being diverted into an EU bashing exercise rather than a discussion on how our independence is being mapped.
We are a nation of animal lovers, does this ruling speak for us and what will it mean for the future of animal welfare in England?

Ah right.
Just that the EU was mentioned in the post.
I can actually see where Livia is coming from, in as much as we do have decent animal welfare here, better than some EU countries.
I know people bring up the foxhunting, but I really can't see a bill to overturn it ever getting through parliament.

[Kizzy]

Er perhaps a priminister in waiting desperate to make out all his labour MPs are such caring individuals. That is the socialist mantra is it not - that they hold the moral high ground with no other political ambition than to help the have-nots. :hehe:

Again I could flip your argument to suggest that the PM at the moment doesn't give a toss how caring the torys appear, and she has no other goal but to push the capitalist mantra and help the haves.

Out of interest what's wrong with the moral high ground and wanting to help people and animals... you almost sound proud that the govt we have atm is doing the polar opposite, that's rather strange imo.

[Brillopad]

Again I could flip your argument to suggest that the PM at the moment doesn't give a toss how caring the torys appear, and she has no other goal but to push the capitalist mantra and help the haves.

Out of interest what's wrong with the moral high ground and wanting to help people and animals... you almost sound proud that the govt we have atm is doing the polar opposite, that's rather strange imo.

Of course I’m not pleased, but if the truth be known many of the Labour MPs are no better. It’s all an act to ‘out-do’ the Tories. Not that you would ever admit to that.

[Kizzy]

Ah right.
Just that the EU was mentioned in the post.
I can actually see where Livia is coming from, in as much as we do have decent animal welfare here, better than some EU countries.
I know people bring up the foxhunting, but I really can't see a bill to overturn it ever getting through parliament.

Why not, with the DUP deal they can force anything through they got this through didn't they. It will happen.
It was mentioned but it was not the topic offered for discussion, we had decent animal welfare as it was fought hard for as are most rights and protections.
This vote is the first step in removing those protections, if it's deemed that animals don't have the capacity to feel pain or have emotions why do they need rights?.. they become nothing but a commodity.

Even with the laws we had they were not enforced adequately now there will be no duty to.

'Animals in labs across Northern Ireland suffered 22,214 experiments in 2016 - even with law recognising their ability to feel pain.

And shockingly there was a 37% rise in the number of cats used in trials, 56% of which were for basic research.
Now a DUP-backed Tory vote to remove EU legislation recognising ‘animal sentience’ has put the future of animal welfare across the UK at risk.

The highly-criticised “backward step” was decided by a vote of 313 to 295 at Westminster, even though it was the UK that convinced the EU to recognise animals as ‘sentient beings’ who feel pain, fear and hunger in 1997.

“It is not good enough for the government to say that animal sentience is covered by the UK Animal Welfare Act – the fact is, it isn’t,” said chief executive of Cruelty Free International, Michelle Thew.

“It certainly takes no account of the pain and suffering felt by animals in laboratories across the country.

“Statistics from Northern Ireland this week show that hugely controversial animal experiments are sadly far from being significantly reduced.”

Universities, charities and commercial operations were responsible for the tests, almost half of which caused moderate to severe suffering to animals (4% severe and 43% moderate).'


If this is the level of 'protection' offered now what will it be now it's been passed that animals don't suffer.... will things for them get better, or worse?



http://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/22000-lab-tests-revealed-northern-13932771

[Kizzy]

Of course I’m not pleased, but if the truth be known many of the Labour MPs are no better. It’s all an act to ‘out-do’ the Tories. Not that you would ever admit to that.

Out do them in what respect... To take scientific, as well as moral and ethical considerations into their decision making?

Isn't that what we want from our representatives, your theory that the commons is a playground full of tit for tat children says more about your own thought processes, out of interest what would you say the logic behind the decision was, do you agree with it personally?

[Withano]

out of interest what would you say the logic behind the decision was

Also my question, there must be one obvious positive to this law that we've all missed if brillo believes 500+ odd mps would agree with this change

[Kizzy]

True, there must be a really sensible, reasonable reason that I've somehow overlooked with regard to this issue.

[MTVN]

The fuller picture:

This week a number of stories claiming the Tories had voted that animals are not sentient beings went mega-viral.

An article on the Independent website – shared thousands of times on social media – reported "The Tories have rejected all scientists and voted that animals don’t feel pain”. The Evening Standard claimed they “just voted that animals cannot feel pain or emotions”. The Indy, which has truly become one of the most downmarket trash clickbait websites around, even named and shamed the Tory MPs “who voted legislation on animals feeling pain and emotion”. These attacks were tweeted out by celebrities like Ben Fogle and Sue Perkins, politicians including Caroline Lucas and failed LibDem MP Sarah Olney, and petitions were signed by hundreds of thousands of unwitting animal lovers. The stats are huge...

Just one problem. It is fake news…

During last Wednesday’s debate, Tory MPs repeatedly explained that the government already recognised animal sentience and that the amendment was flawed. Read it here in Hansard– Tory MP after Tory MP stood up and agreed that animals are sentient. No MPs argued against animal sentience. It is just not true to say, as the Indy did, that “The Tories have rejected all scientists and voted that animals don’t feel pain”. Anyone who has seen the Environment Secretary with his Bichon Frise Snowy, or indeed the hedgehog above, knows these viral articles are fake news. This made up story, circulated by the Tories’ opponents for solely cynical reasons, is cutting through to animal lovers who think they can trust things they believe on the Independent website. This morning Michael Gove categorically committed the government to animal sentience once and for all. He couldn’t be clearer:

“This government will ensure that any necessary changes required to UK law are made in a rigorous and comprehensive way to ensure animal sentience is recognised after we leave the EU.”

Will that go as viral as the fake news BS that hoodwinked thousands in the last week?

https://order-order.com/2017/11/23/viral-animal-sentience-fake-news-story-seen-by-2-million-people/

[MTVN]

Even the Mirror has attacked the Independent story:

'No, MPs did not pass a vote saying animals can’t feel pain or emotion': http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/no-mps-not-pass-vote-11572216.amp

[AnnieK]

Bloody media whipping up a storm based not in true facts....shocker

[bots]

that's unfortunately the levels that Corbyn's supporters will go to. Disgusting

[AnnieK]

that's unfortunately the levels that Corbyn's supporters will go to. Disgusting

Am sure all sides are equally as guilty to be fair....be good to have one media outlet that actually tells the truth regardless of who said or did what

[Toy Soldier]

'No MPs did not pass a vote saying animals can’t feel pain or emotion': http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/no-mps-not-pass-vote-11572216.amp

I can't believe there wasn't ONE single MP who didn't pass this awful piece of cruel legislation. Totally ridiculous. What the hell is going on in politics today??

[joeysteele]

Actually it is still a reflection of distrust towards the Cons.
This was an amendment put forward by Caroline Lucas to put into UK law the sentience of animals.

She argued the 2006 legislation of the UK only covered domestic animals.

Now it has to seem odd that every other party felt able to put this amendment in place except for the Cons and the DUP.

Why not just have supported it and transferred it fully into UK law if there is no other agenda on animal welfare.
Is this a move as to possible trade deals relating to animals with other Countries as some in Farming indicate it possibly is.

I don't get it,Caroline Lucas put it forward,what was the issue against not transferring it.
Why only the Cons and DUP.

I think not a fake story but one that opens up a lot of questions as to just what was the Cons issue of not transferring into UK law,this recognition of animal feeling and welfare.

The most surprising thing for me is that this deceitful govt.wasnt wanting to transfer this into UK law themselves anyway.
Why?

What other hidden agenda have they,I'd more easily believe they have such.
Every other Party,Labour,Lib Dems Green,Plaid Cymru,SNP could all support Lucas's amendment.
Only the Cons and DUP refused to and voted it down.

That stinks to high heaven for me.

[Kizzy]

The fuller picture:

This week a number of stories claiming the Tories had voted that animals are not sentient beings went mega-viral.

An article on the Independent website – shared thousands of times on social media – reported "The Tories have rejected all scientists and voted that animals don’t feel pain”. The Evening Standard claimed they “just voted that animals cannot feel pain or emotions”. The Indy, which has truly become one of the most downmarket trash clickbait websites around, even named and shamed the Tory MPs “who voted legislation on animals feeling pain and emotion”. These attacks were tweeted out by celebrities like Ben Fogle and Sue Perkins, politicians including Caroline Lucas and failed LibDem MP Sarah Olney, and petitions were signed by hundreds of thousands of unwitting animal lovers. The stats are huge...

Just one problem. It is fake news…

During last Wednesday’s debate, Tory MPs repeatedly explained that the government already recognised animal sentience and that the amendment was flawed. Read it here in Hansard– Tory MP after Tory MP stood up and agreed that animals are sentient. No MPs argued against animal sentience. It is just not true to say, as the Indy did, that “The Tories have rejected all scientists and voted that animals don’t feel pain”. Anyone who has seen the Environment Secretary with his Bichon Frise Snowy, or indeed the hedgehog above, knows these viral articles are fake news. This made up story, circulated by the Tories’ opponents for solely cynical reasons, is cutting through to animal lovers who think they can trust things they believe on the Independent website. This morning Michael Gove categorically committed the government to animal sentience once and for all. He couldn’t be clearer:

“This government will ensure that any necessary changes required to UK law are made in a rigorous and comprehensive way to ensure animal sentience is recognised after we leave the EU.”

Will that go as viral as the fake news BS that hoodwinked thousands in the last week?

https://order-order.com/2017/11/23/viral-animal-sentience-fake-news-story-seen-by-2-million-people/

From Hansard...
Caroline Lucas

I thank all right hon. and hon. Members for what has been an interesting and good debate, albeit sadly too short.

'I am disappointed by the Minister’s response to new clause 30. It is not good enough to claim that animal sentience is already covered by UK law by virtue of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 since the protocol is not even explicitly included or referred to in that Act and the word “sentience” does not appear anywhere in it. The Act applies only to companion animals—domestic pets. It does not apply to farm animals, wildlife or laboratory animals. For those reasons, I intend to press new clause 30 to a Division.​'

Enough trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes eh?

[Beso]

You ****ing mugs.:joker:

[DemolitionRed]

Let's not allow our government to take a giant step back for animal welfare. it's not an absolute; it now goes to the House of Lords. There is a petition on Avvaz that needs 25,000 signatures to make the petition viable. It was up to 194,700 and counting!

https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/uk_animal_bill_loc/

[DemolitionRed]

Wow, there's a lot of anger about this in the farming world of all places. Farmers are suggesting its because the government will want to broaden factory farming after Brexit and export more meat animals to unknown slaughter practices abroad.

[Kizzy]

Of course they are it's bloody obvious, they're after battery farming cows like they did chickens!

'Poultry farms tend to be biggest, with seven out of the 10 largest housing more than 1 million birds, and the biggest two capable of holding 1.7 million and 1.4 million birds. The biggest pig farm found holds about 23,000 pigs, while the biggest cattle farm, in Lincolnshire, houses about 3,000 animals.'

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/17/uk-has-nearly-800-livestock-mega-farms-investigation-reveals

[joeysteele]

Wow, there's a lot of anger about this in the farming world of all places. Farmers are suggesting its because the government will want to broaden factory farming after Brexit and export more meat animals to unknown slaughter practices abroad.

There is.
I just don't get why the Con and DUP MPs could not and would not,want this in UK law.

It shouldn't even be a controversial issue,it should be decency to want this transferred into UK law too.

It probably is as Farming sources indicate and as you have pointed out,to broaden,cheapen and cut corners on some animal welfare,particularly as to trade in the food chain,at the very least.

[MTVN]

From Hansard...
Caroline Lucas

I thank all right hon. and hon. Members for what has been an interesting and good debate, albeit sadly too short.

'I am disappointed by the Minister’s response to new clause 30. It is not good enough to claim that animal sentience is already covered by UK law by virtue of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 since the protocol is not even explicitly included or referred to in that Act and the word “sentience” does not appear anywhere in it. The Act applies only to companion animals—domestic pets. It does not apply to farm animals, wildlife or laboratory animals. For those reasons, I intend to press new clause 30 to a Division.​'

Enough trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes eh?

Except that's not actually true about farm animals. From the Mirror link:


Doesn’t that only apply to pets? What about farm and lab animals?

Nope. It applies to farm animals too - in fact, there’s a whole section giving authorities the power to search farm premises to look for violations. Farm animal welfare is also regulated by the Welfare of Farmed Animals Regulations 2007.

It doesn’t specifically cover animals being used for scientific research, but only because they’re regulated by a different law - the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.

So why are people upset about losing the word ‘sentient’ from the law?

The best argument being put forward by the Green Party and others is that including the statement that animals are sentient beings in law is a symbolic gesture.

It sends a message that we as a country are resolved that animals have the capacity to feel, and we protect them as such.

But in law, that’s mostly meaningless. It wouldn’t have any impact on how animal cruelty is prosecuted. And it’s possible it could introduce complications and philosophical arguments into legal actions in the future, which are neatly avoided by the Animal Welfare Act’s broad acceptance that all animals can feel suffering.

[MTVN]

The Indy admitting its original story was misleading:

Campaigners – and some news coverage – initially said that the Government had voted against recognising sentience.

The Independent was among publishers that reported the story in that way. But it became clear that this claim was not right, even though it had been interpreted by some campaigners in that way. (The Independent updated its coverage to ensure it was accurate).

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/animal-sentience-brexit-vote-caroline-lucas-michael-gove-truth-fact-argument-a8072071.html

[DemolitionRed]

The Indy admitting its original story was misleading:

Campaigners – and some news coverage – initially said that the Government had voted against recognising sentience.

The Independent was among publishers that reported the story in that way. But it became clear that this claim was not right, even though it had been interpreted by some campaigners in that way. (The Independent updated its coverage to ensure it was accurate).

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/animal-sentience-brexit-vote-caroline-lucas-michael-gove-truth-fact-argument-a8072071.html

Thanks for this MTVN.

So what this means is, there has yet to be a debate.
This is why, if I'm going to read any paper I read the Independent.

[Kizzy]

Except that's not actually true about farm animals. From the Mirror link:


Doesn’t that only apply to pets? What about farm and lab animals?

Nope. It applies to farm animals too - in fact, there’s a whole section giving authorities the power to search farm premises to look for violations. Farm animal welfare is also regulated by the Welfare of Farmed Animals Regulations 2007.

It doesn’t specifically cover animals being used for scientific research, but only because they’re regulated by a different law - the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.

So why are people upset about losing the word ‘sentient’ from the law?

The best argument being put forward by the Green Party and others is that including the statement that animals are sentient beings in law is a symbolic gesture.

It sends a message that we as a country are resolved that animals have the capacity to feel, and we protect them as such.

But in law, that’s mostly meaningless. It wouldn’t have any impact on how animal cruelty is prosecuted. And it’s possible it could introduce complications and philosophical arguments into legal actions in the future, which are neatly avoided by the Animal Welfare Act’s broad acceptance that all animals can feel suffering.

And the mirror is gospel now? I'll remember that.
People are worried with good reason, if the sentience of an animal has no importance then why include it in a vote, if it's taken as read that they do why the insistence on the clarification in parliament that they do not?

What complications and philosophical argument could arise during animal welfare cases in the future, how and why would they be any different?

'The Lisbon Treaty includes the specific recognition that animals are sentient (that’s part of article 13 of title II). Because that wording was transferred to UK law as part of being in the EU, the British government also has to act in keeping with that legislation, until Brexit.

But once the UK leaves the EU, that will no longer apply. If it’s going to stick around, it will have to be passed again through Parliament – and that’s what MPs refused to do this week.'

'Two of the most damaging and widely-read stories of the election campaign were about the Conservatives’ failure to support the fox hunting and ivory trade bans '

Goves statement that the vote was done as a “rejection of a faulty amendment”, Voting against the amendment was not a vote against the idea that animals are sentient and feel pain – that is a misconception.”

The argument that the government has is weak, the 2006 Act is too broad too weak and again only encompasses companion animals, some like yourself may not be alarmed by the lack of specifics....I am.
I would very much rather there was no room for argument should a case including he issue of sentience be made.

I also disagree that it was 'fake news' the wording wasn't for me misleading MPs did vote down animal sentience as by refusing the inclusion it amounts to the same thing, the hooha at the independent as well as Goves statement proves that they are more than a little rattled at their rather shifty move here that I'm sure they hoped would pass unnoticed.


http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/animal-sentience-brexit-vote-caroline-lucas-michael-gove-truth-fact-argument-a8072071.html

[joeysteele]

I never read papers or take much notice of them.
I saw Caroline Lucas propose the transfer into domestic UK law that animals were sentient beings.

That was her amendment in these debates.

The fact remains only the Con and DUP MPs out of all the Parties and MPs at Westminster,voted against that.
The govt only won this with DUP votes,313 to 295 was the result.

If it's no big issue why was the govt so intent on ensuring it had all its guns voting against said amendment.

I know nothing of the Independent since it went online only,I only know what Caroline Lucas proposed in her amendment.
I ask again,if there's nothing sinister why have only the Cons led the charge against such a simple proposed amendment.

[Kazanne]

The fuller picture:

This week a number of stories claiming the Tories had voted that animals are not sentient beings went mega-viral.

An article on the Independent website – shared thousands of times on social media – reported "The Tories have rejected all scientists and voted that animals don’t feel pain”. The Evening Standard claimed they “just voted that animals cannot feel pain or emotions”. The Indy, which has truly become one of the most downmarket trash clickbait websites around, even named and shamed the Tory MPs “who voted legislation on animals feeling pain and emotion”. These attacks were tweeted out by celebrities like Ben Fogle and Sue Perkins, politicians including Caroline Lucas and failed LibDem MP Sarah Olney, and petitions were signed by hundreds of thousands of unwitting animal lovers. The stats are huge...

Just one problem. It is fake news…

During last Wednesday’s debate, Tory MPs repeatedly explained that the government already recognised animal sentience and that the amendment was flawed. Read it here in Hansard– Tory MP after Tory MP stood up and agreed that animals are sentient. No MPs argued against animal sentience. It is just not true to say, as the Indy did, that “The Tories have rejected all scientists and voted that animals don’t feel pain”. Anyone who has seen the Environment Secretary with his Bichon Frise Snowy, or indeed the hedgehog above, knows these viral articles are fake news. This made up story, circulated by the Tories’ opponents for solely cynical reasons, is cutting through to animal lovers who think they can trust things they believe on the Independent website. This morning Michael Gove categorically committed the government to animal sentience once and for all. He couldn’t be clearer:

“This government will ensure that any necessary changes required to UK law are made in a rigorous and comprehensive way to ensure animal sentience is recognised after we leave the EU.”

Will that go as viral as the fake news BS that hoodwinked thousands in the last week?

https://order-order.com/2017/11/23/viral-animal-sentience-fake-news-story-seen-by-2-million-people/

This is why I didn't respond the headlines,it is obviously rubbish,of course they haven't voted that animals don't feel pain,a lot of them will have animals themselves,just another slur to try and get people to dislike them,how desperate,makes me go against the opposition more.

[joeysteele]

Caroline Lucas's amendment states the wording animals have sentience.
She simply put forward the already set out EU act in the Lisbon treaty as to animal welfare,to be transferred to now UK domestic policy.

Simple enough.

Every other Party and MPs supported the amendment.
Only the Cons and DUP did not.
Since the wording of the amendment states animals have sentience,then the Cons voted against the amendment.

How does anyone who supposedly cares about all animal welfare not question that.

It was discussed on the Daily Politics today and even Doomwatcher Melanie Philips,a programme guest,after Zac Goldsmith's contribution couldn't get how they could not just support this amendment from Caroline Lucas.

I see we get digs at the opposition too on this, for crying out loud,it was the Green MP,Caroline Lucas proposing this,not the opposition.

Although it was supported by every other Party in the Commons except for the Cons and their extreme poodles the DUP.

The only probable good thing about this is this hateful deceitful govt.after the furore about it,wíll now be scrutinised closer as to them now saying sometime in the future,they intend to bring forward animal welfare plans.
Especially since as was said on the Daily politics,even Zac Goldsmith admitted the UKs own legislation from 2006 does not cover all animals.

Discussed on the Daily politics with a Geen party spokesman, Melanie Philips,Jo Coburn and Zac Goldsmith.
Not a Labour rep at all but don't let that stop those who hate Labour have a pop as usual and unfairly.

This was I repeat,a Green party amendment,not Labour's which all Parties in Westminster supported apart from the Cons and their sick DUP allies.

Had the Cons proposed this amendment and Labour MPs voted it down,there would have been cries for them to be hung drawn and quartered.

[Kizzy]

Why has this become a labour v tory thing?... It was a green party amendment :/

[Kizzy]

that's unfortunately the levels that Corbyn's supporters will go to. Disgusting

Sorry what... Are you too blinkered by your own ignorance to read that this is a mainstream media article discussing a commons vote on an amendment tabled by Caroline Lucas for the Green party?

Honestly you sound like a stunned mullet, corbyn blah blah... he's got whack all to do with the issue ....lordy! :/

[joeysteele]

Why has this become a labour v tory thing?... It was a green party amendment :/

My point exactly Kizzy.
Nothing about daft newspapers from me,which I take hardly any notice of anyway.
This was Caroline Lucas and the Green party who wanted to ensure all animal rights were incorporated in legislation as to leaving the EU.

This was being omitted Caroline Lucas and the Green party submitted this amendment.
As I said earlier,despite the wording of the amendment clearly stating this amendment recognised animals have sentience so should have the fullest protection in law.

Only the Cons and DUP voted against it to stop it becoming part of the legislation.
Even with that wording.

Without this,we only at present have the UK 2006 legislation,that even Zac Goldsmith on the Daily politics today,admitted that 2006 UK legislation,does not cover all animals.

People can make of that what they will but I would have doubted as to really good intentions,any MP that voted against such an amendment.
As it is,it doesn't surprise me which parties all the MPs that did vote against it came from.

Only 2.
The Cons and DUP.

All other Parties and MPs had no issue at all as to supporting it.
It speaks volumes for me.
Animal welfare matters to me and any party that jeopardises that or drags it's heels on the issue.
Arouses only my suspicion as to not only why they are but why they would even want to do so.

On this amendment, the Green party amendment,not a Labour or opposition one,could have started a full concensus on the issue across Parliament.
The govt and DUP chose to not let that happen,even on an issue of animal rights.

Now the Cons say,only after the row that exploded, they are to bring forward plans for animal rights,they can't say what they are or when they will either.
One wonders without this row, we're they ever thinking of doing anything at all.

I'd more easily believe they were never originally going to add any further wider protection as to animal welfare to the limited already in place 2006 legislation.

[Kizzy]

Were they hell, and they are spitting fire that it's in the full glare of the public now, it's obvious whatever plans they had are for the moment thwarted otherwise why is Gove issuing statements desperate to create a smokescreen around the whole issue?

The whole thing stinks like rendered pigs innards!!