1 / 17

THE ECONOMIC AND TRADE IMPLICATIONS OF POLICY RESPONSES TO SOCIETAL CONCERNS OECD WORKSHOP 2-3/NOVEMBER 2009

Animal welfare - - Making of Public Policy and The Role of The Supreme Court - The Israeli Experience Eran Ettinger, Legal Advisor, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Israel.

mairi
Download Presentation

THE ECONOMIC AND TRADE IMPLICATIONS OF POLICY RESPONSES TO SOCIETAL CONCERNS OECD WORKSHOP 2-3/NOVEMBER 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Animal welfare - - Making of Public Policy and The Role of The Supreme Court - The Israeli Experience Eran Ettinger, Legal Advisor, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Israel THE ECONOMIC AND TRADE IMPLICATIONS OF POLICY RESPONSES TO SOCIETAL CONCERNSOECD WORKSHOP 2-3/NOVEMBER 2009

  2. Animal Welfare (Protection of Animals) Act – 1994 • Article 2(a): A person shall not torture an animal, be cruel to an animal or abuse an animal in any way; • Article 19: when issuing regulations, the Minister of Agriculture shall take “agricultural needs” into account;

  3. 1997 - The Case of "fights" Between a Man and an Alligator Supreme court: Article 2(a) of the Animal Welfare Act include three components: • factual - causing suffering to animals; • mental - awareness of the nature of the actions; • legal - absence of necessity. Check is based on 3 components: The purpose, the mean, proportionality between purpose and mean;

  4. The Supreme Court Ruled: "Fights" between a man and an alligator for amusement purpose are prohibited The purpose – amusement - doesn’t justify the suffering (even it’s not severe);

  5. 2003 - The Case of force-feeding of geese and ducks • Raising animals, including Long accepted agricultural practices, falls under the provisions of the Animal Welfare law; • In every given case, the relevant “agricultural needs” should be weighed against the suffering inflicted on the animal, as well as the type of suffering and its severity.

  6. The Supreme Court Ruled: • The Force-Feeding Geese Regulations deviate significantly from the purpose of the law. It has given excessive importance to the interest of “agricultural needs” and too little importance to animal welfare. Therefore the regulations are annulled;

  7. 2009 - The Case of Laying Hen The egg-laying industry – • Covered by an overall planning framework [quotas, guaranteed price for farmers, regulated price for consumers]; • High percentage of small & not efficient enough growers; • Mostly long-standing enclosures with insufficient veterinary, health and environmentalstandards.

  8. Investment support for relocating and rebuilding eggs enclosures Began in 2009.Original purposes are: • Wide-ranging adjustment of veterinary, health and environmental requirements; • A significant enlargement of egg-production units; • Relocation of farms at new areas out of the villages in order to enable farmers to develop other sources of employment;

  9. Original purposes [continuation] • Subsidy will be reduced gradually and will come to an end in 2012; • Reduction of the regulated price for the farmers; Total investment in the reform is estimated to be  145  million EUR (USD 214 million), of which the government will cover  70 millionEUR

  10. And what about animal welfare? • The original reform has take into account the animal welfare aspect only marginally; • NGO’S forced the government to consider and check seriously the necessity of an improvement on the farm level;

  11. Animal welfare at the laying-hen industry A professional committee learned and checked the common growing systems through 6 major considerations –

  12. Major considerations • Welfare of the hens at different growing systems; • Veterinary aspects - disease prevention; • Health requirements - eggs pollution; • Environmental – pollution of soil & water; • Area size needed; • Economic aspects - investment needed and influence on consumer price;

  13. Government decision Base on the recommendations of the committee, government decided: • To see the EU Directive as a guideline and reference; • Not to prohibit the use of battery-cages system, but to enlarge the hen’s space and add other facilities;

  14. Government decision [continuation] • First stage of the improvement plan would be implement through incentives (investment support); • Only Second stage by compelling regulations; • To wait and learn from the European experience of implementation the EU directive;

  15. New NGO’S Petition to the Supreme Court • NGO’S applied to the Supreme Court and request to stop the reform till the parliament will force the government to legislate regulations that will prohibit battery-cage system. The petition is being arbitrated in these days.

  16. Comments and Questions The Issue is a typical societal concern: • Bottom-up process; • Strongly moved by lobbing groups; • Different ethical views; • Lack of agreed scientific knowledge;

  17. Some major Questions • What are the pro’s&con’s of each way: improvement of the laying-hen industry by government incentives or by compelling regulations? [Or maybe we have to let the market talk?] • What Is the right arena to take the decisions? The Government? The parliament? • What is the right role of the court in policy making? Process control? Ruling among values?

More Related