Proposition 53K2512

Projet de loi portant des dispositions diverses en matière de bien-être animal, CITES, santé des animaux et protection de la santé des consommateurs.

General information ¶

Submitted by

PS | SP the Di Rupo government

Submission date

Nov. 21, 2012

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

EC Directive protection of animals human nutrition motherhood animal experimentation food policy public health animal welfare scientific research

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V Vooruit LE PS | SP Open Vld N-VA LDD MR

Abstained from voting

Groen Ecolo VB

Party dissidents ¶

• Olivier Maingain (MR) abstained from voting.
• Damien Thiéry (MR) abstained from voting.

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

Dec. 19, 2012 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Most articles of the present bill amend or supplement the Act of 1986 on the protection and welfare of animals. Some of the provisions provide for the partial transposition into Belgian law of the European Directive on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. Other articles aim at better protection of horses and pets. One of those measures, especially relevant since the winter has arrived, stipulates the obligation to provide shelter for equine animals.

A signal is given to malicious individuals who sometimes commit crimes against peaceful pasture animals and to careless owners. In this regard, the fines are doubled, which leaves Belgium behind the other Member States in terms of penalty size.

The bill also reinforces social control, which is useful in, for example, the sale of animals over the Internet, and that by publishing the recognition data of the operators. In this way, the consumer can make sure that a trader is officially recognized.

Finally, the controls will be made more effective by providing for sanctions, so that violations of European rules can be prosecuted.

The draft law also provides for an adaptation of the 1981 Law on International Trade in Endangered Wildlife and Plant Species. This will improve the monitoring and application of the CITES Agreement. Furthermore, in connection with the rules for seizure, the fines are also raised.

The Animal Health Act of 1987 is adjusted with the present bill in order to improve the application of the checks in an extended system of administrative fines. It also provides for the possibility of prosecuting violations of European rules.

From now on, the German-speaking Community will also be represented in the Federal Breastfeeding Committee.

In addition, a legal basis is provided for the subsidies granted by the Public Health Fund for contractual research.

Finally, amendments are made to the law of 1977. A more realistic sanctions regime will be introduced for violations of the ban on the sale of tobacco and alcohol to minors under sixteen years of age.

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Minister, colleagues, in general, the Vlaams Belang is happy with the draft law submitted, which, among other things, adjusts the existing legislation on the protection and welfare of animals, dated from 1986, on a number of important points. This adjustment does not come too early.

We find it a missed chance that one has not taken advantage of this opportunity to tackle a few other hot hangers. I think more specifically of a few cases which have been regularly discussed in Parliament and on which there is a large consensus both among the various political groups and among the public.

I think of the dossier about the untouched ritual of slaughter, which comes to the attention in the period of the Islamic Sacrifice with terrible images. Mrs. Minister, you said in the previous legislature that you also want to abolish this exception to the untoxicated slaughter, but that this must be regarded separately from religious holidays. The submission of a bill containing various provisions on animal welfare would have been a suitable time for this. A recent poll showed that 89 % of the Belgian population is of the opinion that the exception allowing ritual slaughter without anesthetizing the animals should be removed from the law.

Another so-called hanging iron that we have already talked about in the previous legislature is the dossier related to animal testing. You have talked about this issue in this bill in Article 6, but that goes not far enough for us. We must no longer leave it to the King today to allow or prohibit certain animal testing. Today, with the support of the population, but above all with the support of scientific progress, we can bring our legislation in that area into line with the values of a modern Western society and completely abolish animal testing on primates by law.

Furthermore, we can only allow experiments on vertebrate animals if they are to be carried out in the context of scientific research for the benefit of public health.

I have submitted an amendment for the Flemish Interest in the committee to amend several provisions of this law in a simple way in this sense.

The public is ⁇ sensitive to animal testing on higher species. Increasingly, these trials are considered unethical even apart from the intended objectives.

In the meantime, there are new, innovative animal-friendly research methods. As an alternative to the in vivo tests, there is a whole range of ex vivo tests and in vitro tests, tests on tissues and cell cultures outside the animal body. Recently, there were also alternative in-silicate tests with artificial intelligence.

In this regard, the Minister has promised for years to establish a Centre for Alternatives, but so far not much has come into use and the necessary resources have not yet been released.

Animal testing on human monkeys was banned in principle in 2009, in particular on chimpanzees, bonobos, orang-oetans and gorillas. It was a principled decision. Although such trials are no longer taking place in our country, exceptions can still be requested and the ban does not apply to other species of monkeys.

The prohibition of subjecting primates to any animal testing is justified by the existence of advanced non-animal research methods in various fields of research which make the exploitation of monkeys completely superfluous.

As a result of the repeated protests against the unnecessary use of monkeys for experiments, the Minister established a think-tank within the deontological advisory committee. In my opinion, this was to stretch the time, because, as Michel Vandenbosch states, this is nothing more than a façade in which the conclusion of continuing trials on monkeys is already established in advance.

The majority of politicians are in principle opposed to this, but they did not have the courage to support our amendment in this regard.

An ethical committee should ensure that no unnecessary animal testing is carried out. These are unnecessary tests or tests that have already taken place elsewhere. This is obviously positive and we support that too.

The fact that these are the same committees that exist with the laboratories themselves to grant the permission for the projects and which now also have to monitor compliance with the law and the implementing decisions of the European directive can, as the State Council claims, lead to confusion and even laxity.

It is indeed deserving of a recommendation, as recommended by the Council of State, to designate a public service or institution as the competent authority and as the authorising authority for projects. However, this proposal of the State Council was not followed.

The Flemish Interest is partially satisfied with the amendment of the Act of 14 August 1986 on the protection and welfare of animals to the extent that it is a step in the right direction towards a better protection as appropriate in a civilized world. However, the adjustments are not sufficient. After 25 years, we find it a missed opportunity to cut through the knots. We will therefore abstain from voting on this bill.