Dáil debates

Tuesday, 22 March 2005

Fur Farming (Prohibition) Bill 2004: Second Stage.

 

7:00 pm

Photo of John BrowneJohn Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)

I congratulate Deputy Catherine Murphy and wish her every success representing the people of Kildare North.

The Government is opposed at this time to the introduction of a ban on fur farming. The Government considers fur farming to be a legitimate farming activity in this country, a view that is shared among the vast majority of member states of the European Union. While there is no specific national legislation in place relating to fox farming, the particular legislation relating to the licensing of mink farms is the Musk Rats Act 1933 and the Musk Rats Act 1933 (Application to Mink Order) 1965. Under the Musk Rats Act 1933 (Application to Mink Order) 1965, the keeping of mink is prohibited except under licence from my Department. Licences, which must be renewed annually, are issued under this legislation only if the applicant, following an inspection, is found to be fully compliant with a number of key conditions. In addition, in common with all agricultural enterprises, licensed farms must comply with the animal health and welfare requirements pertaining to their particular sphere of activity.

The Department of Agriculture and Food has statutory responsibility for the welfare and protection of farmed animals through the Protection of Animals kept for Farming Purposes Act 1984 and the European Communities (Protection of Animals kept for Farming Purposes) Regulations 2000, SI 127/2000. In addition, the Council of Europe has made recommendations regarding animals kept for fur farming. The regulations for the protection of animals kept for farming purposes make up a general piece of animal welfare legislation and apply to many types of farming systems throughout the country, including cattle, sheep and pigs, as well as the animals kept on fur farms. The on-farm welfare inspections carried out by the Department veterinary inspectors include assessment of the animals, the facilities provided and the management practices employed. It is essential that the animals be cared for by a sufficient number of staff who possess the appropriate ability, knowledge and professional competence. Adequate care and attention must be provided to all animals on farms.

In fur farming husbandry systems, the animals must be inspected frequently to safeguard their welfare. Owners are obliged to keep records of any medicinal treatments given and of the number of mortalities found at each inspection. Buildings and equipment must be safely constructed and comply with certain standards for the animals. Adequate amounts of appropriate food and water must be provided at acceptable intervals. In addition, fur farms are obliged to comply with the methods and conditions for slaughtering fur animals as laid down in the regulations for the protection of animals at time of slaughter.

In June 1999, the standing committee of the European Convention for the protection of animals kept for farming purposes adopted a recommendation concerning fur animals. The recommendation applies to all animals kept primarily for their fur. It sets out guidelines for the stockmanship and inspection of fur animals, the enclosures, housing and equipment, management, breeding, slaughter and minimum space requirements. Licensed fur farms are inspected by the Department to assess compliance with the Council of Europe recommendations concerning fur animals and also Council Directive 98/58/EC concerning the keeping of animals kept for farming purposes. These inspections have to date found that all of the licensed fur farms in this country have been operating in compliance with current legislation. Inspections by the Department have also found that the slaughter methods employed by the licensed fur farms are permitted under the Sixth Schedule of the European Communities (Protection of Animals at time of Slaughter) Regulations 1995.

The six fur farms licensed to operate in this State provide valuable employment in rural areas across the country. I understand that some 80 full-time workers and 85 seasonal workers are employed by the industry. The industry generates significant exports and has invested considerable sums in bringing their facilities up to a standard that satisfies the Department of Agriculture and Food. The Department is satisfied that they meet these requirements.

As regards animal welfare generally, all animals must be treated in an appropriate and responsible manner. Increasingly, consumers and citizens alike want improved animal welfare standards and an appropriate legal framework to ensure their legitimate expectations are honoured. I recognise that animal welfare can be an emotive issue. While there is a broad consensus on the need to ensure that animals are properly cared for, there are divergent views on how this is best done. We have all seen evidence of veterinary, cultural, religious, economic, social and other considerations featuring in the ongoing exchanges. From time to time, we have seen very polarised positions adopted on particular aspects. This is not helpful.

As with most issues, the best prospects for progress and positive development lie in trying to identify as much common ground as possible and building on that. As far as animals kept for farming purposes are concerned, it has consistently been my view that adherence to high standards and commitment to further improvement is best secured by demonstrating to all involved that there is a strong correlation between legitimate economic interests and the welfare of the animals. Moral and ethical considerations are of great importance but to achieve real progress it is necessary to deal realistically also with economic, social and other considerations.

Primary responsibility for the care of all animals rests with farmers and other keepers of animals. In this regard, farmers and keepers are by and large pragmatists and realise that the best way to remain in business is to ensure their animals are properly treated. Farmers are the traditional custodians of animal welfare conditions and have over the years demonstrated their commitment in this area. Furthermore, they realise that there is little prospect of a long-term future for the business if the general public is not satisfied that legitimate sensitivities in relation to the welfare of animals are not taken into account by operators in the sector. The CAP has long recognised this.

Welfare of animals is governed by a wide range of EU and national legislation, much of which has been enacted in the past 20 years. A number of very important legislative initiatives have been undertaken in this area. These include provisions on animal welfare contained in the protocol annexed to the treaty and provisions concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes, as well as measures aimed at improving the welfare conditions of transported animals. Community legislation has also brought about major improvements in the standards governing the rearing of veal calves, specifically the harmonisation within the European Union of the size of the crates used in production of such calves. In 1999, the Community introduced new rules in order to improve the welfare of hens kept in battery cages and other rearing systems. More recently, in 2001, the European Union adopted rules to improve the welfare conditions of pigs, laying down provisions intended to provide them with proper surroundings, facilitating their natural behaviour and social interaction. New tighter animal welfare conditions applying in respect of transporting animals and the granting of export refunds on live animals have also been adopted.

It is also worth noting that the recent reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy will lead to a strengthening of the position of animal welfare in the agricultural policy of the EU. The cross-compliance requirements of the reform require that farmers respect basic animal welfare rules to benefit from the new single farm payment. Furthermore, the reformed CAP will focus on quality rather than quantity, with even greater emphasis on good animal husbandry. There has therefore been a constant updating in the Community's rules, which have brought about a significant push for improved animal welfare standards.

Here, we have been particularly proactive regarding animal welfare. In particular we have transposed all welfare legislation into national law and we were to the forefront in developing a regulatory framework for approving seagoing vessels for transporting animals. The livestock trade accepted that strict compliance with these requirements was entirely consistent with its economic interests, on the basis that if the welfare of animals being shipped was compromised during such journeys, the economic return and the future of the trade would be jeopardised. Farming organisations, transporters and shipping companies all bought into this regime because they realise there is little prospect of future business if concerns about animal welfare are not addressed.

We also have in place a farm animal welfare advisory council which includes representatives from farm organisations, animal welfare groups, the veterinary profession, animal transporters and others with an interest in animal welfare. This council provides a forum in which interests with opposing views have the opportunity to meet, discuss each other's positions and reach consensus on animal welfare issues which can inform public policy in the area. The forum has completed over two years of work and with the commitment of all its participants it is beginning to make a real contribution to progress in this area. The degree of consensus attained would have a bearing on the council's capacity in influencing the formulation of policy at both national and European level. Included in the work programme of welfare issues for discussion was the subject of fur farming. The council heard a number of submissions from parties who have a particular interest in and knowledge of the area. Following discussions on the subject the chairman concluded that the council could not take an absolute stance on fur farming.

A key aspect of any system of rules is the aspect of enforcement. It is essential that the monitoring arrangements in place are effective. It follows that detecting and dealing with abuses in a timely manner is of paramount importance. It is also important that meaningful sanctions are applied to persons responsible for animals who do not meet the required standards.

I am aware that the UK introduced a ban on fur farming from 2003. Likewise, I am aware of the views of bodies such as Compassion in World Farming and Respect for Animals. My colleague, the Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Coughlan, recently met representatives of both organisations and had detailed presentations and an exchange of views with them on fur farming and other animal welfare issues.

In considering the approach to fur farming, the following considerations arise. While fur farming has been banned in the UK and Austria, most other member states currently allow farming of some animals for fur production, although some ban farming of certain species; fur farming is a legitimate business activity and provides employment in disadvantaged rural areas where alternative employment prospects are minimal; the industry does not receive any State support; the fur industry is fully aware of animal welfare requirements; the Department monitors fur farms to ensure compliance with the relevant standards; the IFBA monitors fur farms; fur farms in Ireland have displayed a willingness to comply with the requirements of the Department; and a ban on fur farming would mean that Ireland's market share would be taken up by another fur producing country and, therefore, the ban would not serve any practical purpose.

I am aware that the scientific committee on animal health and animal welfare produced a report on the welfare of animals kept for farming purposes in response to a request from the European Commission. The report contains scientifically based recommendations on how the welfare of fur animals can be improved. It presents a list of areas where future research is desirable. While there is a recognition in the European context that there is room for improvement in certain areas of animal welfare in fur farming, ongoing research is required to assist the development of enhanced welfare standards. The Department will fulfil its role in monitoring the implementation of these advances and expects the industry to play its part in moving forward and meeting its obligations.

While I note the points made by the proponents of this Bill, I am not favourable to the approach being adopted in terms of an outright ban. The correct approach is that of appropriate licensing and control procedures. What we are talking about here is an intensive farming activity. The animals farmed on Irish mink farms represent in some cases 80 generations of breeding and accordingly they are not typical of the mink one would find in the wild. The enterprises engaged in mink farming in this country are subject to various inspections carried out by the agricultural inspectorate and the veterinary inspectorate of my Department on an annual basis. The findings of these inspections indicate that these animals are housed in secure conditions, they are well cared for and disease is not a problem. The methods of slaughter employed by these licensed fur farms comply with European requirements.

Whether we like it, fur is a product that is much in demand. It is a product for which a premium price is achievable, depending on the quality of product. The proposed ban would result in an annual loss of almost €2 million in export earnings to the Irish economy. Inevitably, a ban on fur farming in Ireland would mean that Ireland's market share would be rapidly taken up by another fur producing country, most likely within the European Union. This shows that a prohibition as proposed in this Bill, even if deemed meritorious in its own right, would serve no practical or useful purpose.

In light of the foregoing and given that licensed fur farms operating in this country meet current national and EU requirements, there is no reason that what is a legitimate farming activity, which is permitted in the vast majority of EU member states, should be banned. Accordingly, I am not prepared to proceed to ban fur farming at this time. I am, however, prepared to keep the position under ongoing review in light of developments. In particular, I will consider introducing a provision in the forthcoming legislation on animal health and welfare which would require the extending of a licensing requirement to all enterprises engaged in farming animals for their fur.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.