Democracy undelivered? European Commission lambasted as leaked program indicates animal rights failings

17 Oct 2023 --- NGOs are branding the European Commission’s (EC) expected decision to backtrack on animal welfare reforms within this political term as a “democratic failure.” A leaked 2024 work program — set to be presented in the European Parliament plenary today — suggests the EC will only publish one of four promised regulation proposals (Transport Regulation), leaving the Kept Animals, Slaughter and Labelling regulation proposals undelivered.

The leaked document also indicates that the Legislative Framework for Sustainable Food Systems (FSFS), which was also expected by the end of 2023, has been shelved.

Environmental groups warn that postponing this Farm-to-Fork flagship initiative will hinder food system transformation and the alignment of agricultural and food policies with the EU’s climate change objectives.

Meanwhile, the revision of the REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals) regulation under the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability is also notably absent from the program. This regulation has long been discussed as a centerpiece of the EU Green Deal toward achieving a toxic-free environment and is key in promoting a chemical strategy that would advance the phase-out of animal testing for regulatory purposes.

“We are extremely dismayed that the EC did not have the political will to commit to its promise, turning its back on citizens and science. Petitions, European Citizens’ Initiatives (ECIs) and the 2016 special Eurobarometer clearly show that European citizens want more for the animals, and yet, big business continues to have the leading hand,” says Reineke Hameleers, CEO at Eurogroup for Animals.

Lobbying power prevails
In 2020, the EC committed to revising the animal welfare legislation as part of the Farm to Fork Strategy. But, according to the leaked document, the EC will fail to deliver all the proposals, including Kept Animals Regulation, through which it was expected to answer the calls of 1.4 million citizens and ban caged-animal farming.

For Hameleers at Eurogroup for Animals, the EC’s expected decision to push the proposals onto the next Commission demonstrates the continuing prioritization of farming productivity and profit over the well-being of sentient creatures.Animal rights activists say the expected revision delays are further evidence of the Commission prioritizing profitability over the protection of sentient creatures.

“For decades, we have to all effects rewarded food production at the lowest possible cost — no matter what price the animals had to pay. However, this treatment of farmed animals (and other animals) has now become increasingly unacceptable for civil society, and there are countless research studies showing that it is no longer justifiable if we say that animals are sentient,” she tells Food Ingredients First.

“However, raising animals in a manner that is fully compatible with their physical and mental well-being requires not only investments but, crucially, a change in mentality. Farmers feel challenged on their own turf. All of a sudden, what they are doing has become questionable, even controversial — it is not an easy position to be in.”

COPA-COGECA, which describes itself as “the united voice of farmers and agri-cooperatives in the EU,” tells us that animal welfare is crucial for European farmers and cooperatives and that it is committed to ensuring it.

The industry body points out that the EU already has some of the highest levels of animal welfare in the world and insists that any animal welfare legislative reforms must be science-based and “respect economic and social viability.”

“Current legislation has allowed for a continuous process of harmonization, better implementation and an overall improvement in animal welfare conditions,” a spokesperson says.

Level playing fields
However, Eurogroup for Animals argues that adequately updated legislation would create a more level playing field for farmers that have already transitioned to systems with improved animal welfare standards and enable them to benefit from fair competition when placing products on the market.

“Clearly, for any farmer, business must remain viable, and for industrial farmers, even more so. This is why it will be so important that the transition toward higher welfare standards, which we believe is inevitable, is coupled with substantial public financial support,” says Hameleers.

“It will be equally important to protect EU products from unfair competition by imposing the same standards for imported products.”

Ultimately, a delay in the release of updated animal welfare legislation at this time will cost European farmers and food businesses, warns Eurogroup for Animals.

“Farmers need to reinvest in new farming systems — unless they get a clear indication, they might invest in systems that are not future-proof. Just think of the ‘enriched cage’ for laying hens and you have an example of a very expensive and short-sighted patch to a problem that remained,” adds Hameleers.Life in a cage: Despite 1.4 million ECI signatures, the Commission is set to delay the transition to cafe-free farming.

Green Deal backlash
Meanwhile, environmental groups claim that today’s expected FSFS delay will threaten the EU Green Deal at a time of rising climate change fears. The FSFS aims to accelerate the shift to a sustainable food system and mainstream environmental responsibility into all food and farm policies.

“While policies like the Common Agricultural Policy target the production side, the FSFS has the potential to address the consumption side. Since demand influences supply, food consumption cannot be neglected,” explains Hameleers.

“Especially actors in the middle of the chain — like retailers — have large power on both what and how farmers produce and consumers buy and must therefore play their part in the transformation.”

“It seems that the FSFS has fallen prey to the backlash against the EU Green Deal, despite not entailing direct obligations to farmers but setting a direction of travel for agrifood policies. We have now witnessed a debate on food security, where the focus has been on increased production — but that is a very short-sighted view.”

According to Hameleers, the debate should instead be about making sustainable and healthy choices easier for consumers and making sure that sustainable food — either plant-based or with high levels of animal welfare — is the most accessible and affordable.

Animal testing alarms
NGOs have also flagged the absence of the REACH regulation from the EC’s leaked 2024 work program. Personal Care Insights reached out to the EC for comments in response to this speculation.

“The EC work program has not yet been adopted, and it is our practice not to comment on work in progress or on leaked documents,” says Adalbert Jahnz, an EC spokesperson. “When it comes to REACH in general, I would refer you to what EVP Maroš Šefčovič said in his written answers on this question after his hearing at the European Parliament.”

On the question of specific timelines for the adoption of REACH, Šefčovič said: “Preparations will continue on the targeted amendment of the Regulation EC/1907/2006 on the REACH to protect human health and the environment and foster competitiveness and innovation for substitution; on sustainable food systems to ensure their resilience and sustainability; and on multimodal digital mobility services.”

“We will make the most of the strategic dialogue on agriculture to ensure that the voices of our stakeholders are heard on food systems as such and to inform our work on animal welfare and sustainability at large.”Animal protection groups protesting outside the European Commission’s headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, last week.

EU citizens are increasingly opposing animal testing in the personal care and beauty industries, with the “Save Cruelty-free Cosmetics – Commit to a Europe without Animal Testing” ECI gathering more than 1.4 million signatures.

In July, the EC responded to the initiative, announcing plans to “ultimately eliminate” animal testing for chemicals while presenting “longer-term” proposals to reduce and phase out the use of animals in research and education.

The EC targets three main goals in response to the initiative: “protecting and strengthening the cosmetics animal testing ban, transforming EU chemicals legislation and modernizing science in the EU.”

However, campaigners at Cruelty Free International flagged that the EC ignored the fact that ECI centered around a total ban. It also highlights that animal tests are required for chemicals handled by industrial workers or that may be released into the environment under the current REACH regulation.

Public protests
Last week, animal protection groups, MEPs and advocates gathered in front of the EC headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, and publicly called on EC President Ursula von der Leyen to publish the promised full proposals for a revised animal welfare legislation.

Renowned conservationist Dr. Jane Goodall also joined the call and asked von der Leyen to meet with her to discuss the issue.

“We will not give up but keep pushing for the EC to commit to a clear timeline for the other proposals. The time is now — we simply will not accept any more delays,” says Hameleer at Eurogroup for Animals.

By Joshua Poole and Venya Patel

This feature is provided by Personal Care Insights’s sister website, Food Ingredients First.

To contact our editorial team please email us at editorial@cnsmedia.com