§ 3.10 p.m.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they approve the ritual slaughter of animals whereby the throats of cattle are cut without any form of anaesthetic having previously been administered.
The MINISTER of STATE, MINISTRY of AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES and FOOD (Earl Ferrers)My Lords, the Slaughterhouses Act 1974 provides that animals shall either be slaughtered instantaneously by means of a mechanically-operated instrument in proper repair, or be subjected to stunning, effected by means of a mechanically-operated instrument or an electrical stunning instrument in proper repair, and instantaneously rendered insensible to pain until death supervenes. The only exemptions from this requirement, which have been granted by Parliament, concern the slaughter of animals by the Jewish and Moslem methods for the food of Jews and Moslems, and this must be without the infliction of unnecessary suffering. These exemptions have featured in our law for a very long time. The position is similar in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Lord DUNLEATHMy Lords, in thanking the noble Earl for his reply, may I ask whether he is aware that the RSPCA have produced a report or statement in which they describe the ritual slaughtering of animals as being horrific and, according to veterinary evidence, have shown that the animal can remain conscious after slaughter for an average of 90 seconds? Is he of the opinion that this suffering is unnecessary, in view of the fact that, according to a statement made in a press report by Dr. Abul Siddiqui, the President of the Ulster Islamic Centre:
Moslems have no objection to an animal being stunned first before its throat is cut"?
§ Would the noble Earl, therefore, urge his right honourable friend in charge of 1302 the Department of Agriculture to make an order that the animals should be electronically stunned before their throats are cut?
Earl FERRERSNo, my Lords; I regret that I cannot do that, because it would require a change in the law in order for that to be done. I am aware that the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has issued statements of its views. They are entirely entitled to hold what views they wish. Parliament has discussed this matter on a number of occasions, but the debate has always been inconclusive, and as a result of that it has been decided by Parliament that these exemptions should be made for the killing of these animals on religious grounds and for religious convictions. That is the law as it stands, and must remain so until Parliament decides to change it.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, may I ask the noble Earl to point out that the Jewish method of slaughter of animals has been very carefully considered? I myself have visited, with a Member of Parliament, a slaughterhouse at which the animals are slaughtered. That Member of Parliament withdrew an objection to the exemption after he had seen it and stated that it was clearly an instantaneous and effective method of killing an animal. In those circumstances, will the noble Earl assure the noble Lord who raised the question that, in so far as the Jewish method is concerned, there is no doubt at all, because there is ample evidence to show that the animal is instantaneously killed?
Earl FERRERSMy Lords, in so far as the noble Lord, Lord Janner, asks me to be a postbox for his views to the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, I am happy to undertake that facility. What I would say to the House is this. I realise that people have many views on this. But this is a religious matter. Parliament has always taken account of people's religious feelings and that is the reason why the situation is as it is. I would tell the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, that my right honourable friend announced on 4th December that the terms of reference of the Farm Animal Welfare Council have been extended to include welfare at the places of slaughter, and I understand 1303 the Council will be turning their attention to this subject and will be considering all slaughtering practices, including religious methods.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, as a member of the delegation appointed by another place to witness these slaughters, may I ask the Minister whether he is aware that I and my colleagues came to the conclusion that the Jewish method was no more cruel than the gentile method? But is it not possible to prevent these cattle from suffering in this way by an anaesthetic before they are turned upside down when their throats are cut?
Earl FERRERSMy Lords, that is a possibility in so far as CO2 has been used, but that only on pigs—and of course that does not help the Moslems. With regard to actually injecting an animal with an anaesthetic, of course that would leave a taint in the meat, which again would not be in accordance with Moslem wishes.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, may I ask the noble Earl to consider again what I have just said? Will he agree that precautions are taken, not only to have an anatomical expert to kill animals by the Jewish method but also in having a casting machine, which gives no anxiety to the animal itself? In those circumstances, will he consider that any creation of attempted difficulties should be avoided?
Earl FERRERSYes, my Lords; the situation as it is is that these animals have to be slaughtered by a method which has to be approved by my right honourable friend.