Welfare of Animals (Hansard, 15 December 1992)

I beg to move,

That leave be given to bring in a Bill to prohibit the keeping of fur-bearing animals under intensive conditions; to make new provision with regard to the treatment of animals; and for connected purposes. I have chosen to introduce the Bill in an attempt to eliminate the most heinous of farming practices and to modernise the law governing the treatment of animals. My Bill has two aims: first, to end fur farming in this country immediately; secondly, to make the welfare of animals the yardstick by which farming practices should be judged in future.

Hon. Members will remember that, a fortnight ago, the House debated the Mink Keeping Order. Unfortunately, hon. Members were unable to take into account the welfare of mink and Arctic fox in reaching a decision on the future of fur farms. I believe that there is widespread support in the country and on both sides of the House for an end to animal abuse on fur farms.

A recent survey by Lynx showed that 78 per cent. of the population wanted a ban on fur farming. British people believe that fur coats are out of fashion, and they do so for all the right reasons. The fur of animals belongs on their backs, not on ours.

This morning, accompanied by some of my hon. Friends, I had the pleasure of presenting a petition to 10 Downing street, calling on Her Majesty's Government to end the practice of fur farming, with immediate effect. The petition was signed by 500,000 people and was organised by Lynx, Compassion in World Farming, the World Society for the Protection of Animals and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Despite the strength of public opinion on this issue, however, there are still 24 mink factory farms and two Arctic fox farms in the United Kingdom. That is 26 too many.

The conditions in which mink and Arctic fox are kept could not be more unsuitable to the nature of the animals. Mink are semi-aquatic. They spend much of their time in the wild either in the water or patrolling their territory, which can be up to 22 acres wide. They are solitary, and they have a tendency to avoid others of their kind.

Yet on the fur farms, mink are forced to live on top of one another in cage sizes recommended by the Fur Breeders Association of the United Kingdom—just 24 in long by 15 in high by 12 in wide. The cages are so small that the mink cannot rear up on their hind legs, something they do continually in the wild. They are denied access to water, except through a drip, and are deprived of the opportunity to perform even the most basic of functions written deep into their genetic code.

This leads to chronic stress, resulting in what animal behaviourists describe as stereotyped behaviour patterns. Mink and foxes kept in these conditions mutilate themselves, and cases of infanticide and cannibalism are widely reported. From birth to death, mink and Arctic foxes are incarcerated in conditions that drive them mad. Born in May, taken from their mothers and caged in groups, they are killed in November at the age of six or seven months when their first winter coats emerge.

The fur trade likes to describe these places as farms, but that is the last thing they are. They are factories—wildlife hellholes where animals are mass produced and treated as pieces of machinery for making skins for coats that 313 nobody needs. Each year, 250,000 mink are killed in these factories, usually by gassing in large killing boxes linked to the exhaust of a tractor or car.

It takes 65 mink and 24 foxes to make just one full-length fur coat. Ironically, since fur sales in this country are in rapid decline, most of the pelts are shipped to Scandinavia, where they are auctioned. This is one export trade of which I hope all hon. Members will agree this country should be ashamed.

The conditions in which mink and Arctic fox are kept in Britain's fur factory farms have been universally condemned by animal welfarists, by vets, by animal behaviourists and by zoologists. They have all concluded that it is impossible to rear and kill these animals for fur without causing undue suffering. Indeed, the Government's Farm Animal Welfare Council will not issue a welfare code for fur farming in case that gives the factories a stamp of approval.

Fur farming also contravenes article 3 of the European convention on the protection of animals kept for farming purposes, which states: animals shall be housed and provided with food, water and care which … is appropriate to their physiological and ethnological needs". This requirement is echoed by the Farm Animal Welfare Council in its list of freedoms which encompass the fulfillment of an animals basic needs: freedom from discomfort, by providing a suitable environment; freedom to express normal behaviour, by providing sufficient space and proper facilities; and freedom from fear and distress, by ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering.

Unfortunately, the current law—by ignoring those freedoms—allows the Government to license people to keep a range of animals in appalling conditions. There is widespread public concern about battery cage hen production, the de-beaking of poultry, and multi-tier pig cages. There is also public abhorrence of the international trade in primates. Those naturally wild animals are kept in cages no larger than a filing cabinet.

Right hon. and hon. Members may know of a recent case at Shamrock (GB) Ltd. where primates were kept 314 with no bedding and exercise, and their treatment breached Home Office guidelines—yet that place remains open for business, licensed by the Government, licensed to torture, and licensed to kill.

All those practices should be ended. None of us needs a coat made of mink or fox, and we do not need to keep hens in battery cages to fulfil our lives. In fact, most people in this country and right hon. and hon. Members would have the quality of their lives dramatically improved by the ending of fur farming and the intensive rearing of animals in overcrowded and inappropriate factory farms.

Thankfully, public opinion is ahead of the law when it comes to concerns about animal welfare. Wearing a fur coat is no longer seen as a status symbol: it is regarded instead as a badge of cruelty and shame. Just as the trade in elephant ivory and in baby seal skins was ended by public outrage, it is time that the law caught up with public opinion and banned the trade in fur.

My Bill will do precisely that. It will also update the Protection of Animals Act 1911 to incorporate the FAWC freedoms, so that the conditions in which animals are kept will meet their behavioural requirements. The Bill will ensure that farming takes place without inflicting unnecessary cruelty, will give a new meaning to animal welfare, and will make society that much richer as a result. I commend the Bill to the House.