The Australian government, responding both to public pressure
and a Humane Society International investigation, announced on
May 21 that it would immediately ban dog and cat fur and skins.
Australia's decisive reaction to the controversy stands in
sharp contrast to the foot-dragging by a European Union
commissioner who insists the EU has no authority to institute a
ban—although a recent legal opinion to the contrary may force
the issue again in Europe.
Australian Justice and Customs Minister Chris Ellison said
the government's decision to ban the import and export of dog
and cat fur and skins came after receiving more than 9,000
"representations" from a broad spectrum of citizens who
supported the ban. Ellison called it "the largest volume of
correspondence I have received on a single issue in almost four
years as minister."
What's more, the ban comes less than a year after HSI
Australia announced that two items for sale down under
contained toxic levels
of chromium, a chemical routinely used in the tanning
process of dog and cat fur on Asian farms, where an estimated
two million animals are killed every year for the trade.
Chromium can damage DNA, particularly in children, as well as
cause genetic mutation and cancer.
HSI Australia also launched a massive signature campaign in
which 70,000 citizens signed a petition calling on the prime
minister to institute a ban. HSI Australia says it was one of
the largest petitions ever presented to the Australian
parliament.
"HSI congratulates the Coalition Government for taking a
clear stand against the trade," says HSI Australia spokesperson
Nicola Beynon. "Australian consumers certainly don't want to
buy cat and dog fur, and Australian retailers don't want to be
at risk of selling it."
The Australian ban will allow, with written permission,
limited cat and dog fur imports for the taxidermy of pets, for
fur historical displays, and for research purposes, among other
things. The ban clearly targets Asian producers who use cat and
dog fur in items ranging from full-length coats to pompons on
sweaters. What's more, these items are often fraudulently
labeled, not labeled at all or dyed to look like faux fur.
With the Australian pipeline now shut down, Asian producers
will have to turn to other markets. They likely will increase
their imports into Europe, one of the remaining areas that
permits these items.
"Australia's decision to ban dog and cat fur practically
requires the European Union to follow suit," says HSI Executive
Director Neil Trent. "Otherwise, Asian traders will merely step
up their imports to those countries in Europe that still allow
dog and cat fur products. To end this brutal trade once and for
all, the EU must step up and do the right thing."
Five EU countries, in some form or another, have already
banned the import of dog and cat fur. They include Belgium, Italy, France,
Greece, and Denmark. But the EU as a whole still has not banned
these products. To date, EU Commissioner for Consumer Affairs,
David Byrne, has adamantly argued the EU has no authority to
ban dog and cat fur in Europe.
Byrne may have to change his tune soon, however. At the
request of HSI's European office, internationally recognized
lawyer Philippe Sands and fellow EU legal specialist Kate Cook,
both with the London-based law firm Matrix Chambers, reviewed
European law to challenge Byrne's position.
Sands and Cook found that Article 95 of the European
Community's treaty would justify a ban in the production and
sale of dog and cat fur on the basis that "… such a measure is
necessary to remove an obstacle to the functioning of the
internal market," Sands noted. The EU also has authority under
Article 133 (ex. 113) to ban exports, he added. The lawyers
also provided case law that indicates the European Union does
not need to wait until a certain number of EU countries ban dog
and cat fur before the European Commission takes action.
On Wednesday, May 26, only days after Sands' and Cook's
legal opinion, British Member of Parliament Struan Stevenson
praised Australia's decision and chastised Byrne for his
obstructionist ways.
"Despite following due parliamentary process and securing the support of the
majority of the European Parliament, the Brussels
bureaucrats still flaunt the rules by refusing to bring into
force legislation outlawing this barbaric practice," said
Stevenson at the Edinburgh Dog & Cat Home, an animal
welfare group where he displayed a German-bought coat made from
42 pup skins. "Australia has followed America's bold lead in
stamping out this unwanted and unnecessary trade."
"It pains me to think of the millions of domestic animals
who are reared, rounded up and then mercilessly and brutally
butchered purely for their skins," added Stevenson, who has worked closely with HSI on
this issue for several years. "The only way to stop this
vile trade is to take away the markets which support these
so-called businesses. Other parts of the world are making a
stance and banning the goods from their markets. I am urging
the European Commission to do likewise and bring an immediate
halt to the unnecessary suffering of the animals we refer to as
pets."
"All of this clearly pushes Byrne more into a corner," HSI's
Trent says. "Given Australia's ban and the recent legal
opinion, Byrne would seem to have no choice but to start the
process for an EU-wide ban on dog and cat fur. It can't come
soon enough."
