Dear Constituent,
Thank you for contacting me about animal testing. I am often contacted about a range of issues related to animal testing and scientific research and I have set out my views below in relation to a range of related issues.
I am proud that the UK has consistently led the way on animal welfare, and it is right that we cement our status as a global leader by continuing to raise the bar. I am pleased that the Government's first-of-its-kind Action Plan for Animal Welfare committed to maintaining high standards of protection where procedures are undertaken on live animals for scientific or educational purposes - details of the Action Plan for Animal Welfare can be seen here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/985332/Action_Plan_for_Animal_Welfare.pdf
The use of animals in scientific research remains a vital tool in improving our understanding of how biological systems work in health and disease, and in the development of new medicines, treatments and technologies. I am pleased that ministers have re-confirmed the importance of technology and the 'human-on-a-chip' and 'organ-on-a-chip' technologies that may hold the opportunity for us to remove reliance on animal testing. Animals are only used in research when there are no suitable alternatives, and any tests carried out are under controls that keep suffering to a minimum. This is known as the last-resort principle, which will be retained and strengthened in the Environment Act which has recently passed through Parliament.
Cosmetic testing on animals was banned in the United Kingdom in 1998 and household products have not been tested on animals in the UK since 2011, with such testing formally banned in 2015.
I am strongly opposed to animal tests where alternative approaches can be used.
In addition, I welcome the introduction of the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act. This Act will not only enshrine recognition of animal sentience in domestic law, but will also establish an expert-led Animal Sentience Committee, which will produce reports on the impact of policy decisions on animal welfare.
I have been asked to sign a number of EDMs in relation to this issue. In relation to EDM 175, I do not sign EDMs as they have no prospect of changing the law, are seldom dated and do not raise the profile of an issue with a minister. Specifically in relation to this EDM, animal research still plays a role in providing vital safety information for potential new medicines. It is worth remembering that, as a result of findings from animal studies, a large number of potential new drugs never get as far as being tested in humans. Some aspects of the toxicological assessment of new medicines cannot be adequately assessed in humans, and animal data will be the only kind available. Without animal testing it is highly likely that a large number of potentially dangerous new medicines would be tested in healthy volunteers and patients in clinical trials, and I know Ministers believe that this would be quite unacceptable. However, animals are only used when there are no suitable alternatives, and by encouraging new cutting-edge approaches to science we will ensure that standards of animal welfare are improved.
I would like to reassure you that the UK's rigorous regulatory system ensures that no animal testing or research takes place if there is a non-animal alternative that would achieve the scientific outcomes sought. The National Centre for the 3Rs (NC3Rs) is the UK’s leading scientific based organisation dedicated to replacing, refining and reducing the use of animals in scientific research and testing. The NC3Rs supports the research community to use the latest science and technology to replace animal studies, providing new approaches for biomedical research and avoiding the time and cost associated with animal models. Since the NC3Rs was launched in 2004, the Government has invested £77 million in research towards developing new approaches to Replace, Reduce and Refine the use of animals in scientific procedures, and an additional £32 million through its CRACK IT programme for SMEs and universities to work with the pharmaceutical and chemical industries on collaborative 3Rs projects that aim to generate commercial opportunities in this area.
It is important to remember that, existing scientific research methods ensure that, by the time medicines reach clinical trial, risks are significantly reduced. I fully support all steps to establish new methods and to support the life sciences and research industry. Since 2017, the Government has invested around £1 billion through two Life Sciences Sector Deals, helping to generate significant levels of industry investment in the UK. I am committed to making the UK the leading global hub for life sciences. The Life Sciences Investment Programme (LSIP) aims to unlock the potential of the UK’s best health and life science innovations, allowing companies to grow in the UK. This investment programme consists of up to £600 million of joint Government and industry investment.
In relation to EDM 223, I am aware that this calls for the creation of a specific Ministerial responsibility for the eradication of the use of animals in science. For the reasons I have already outlined, I will not be signing this particular EDM as I do not believe it is a desirable course of action on the grounds of public safety. I am, however, reassured that there are stringent measures in place to minimise the suffering of animals in science.
Finally, I have been contacted recently about a debate which has taken place in relation to animal testing and the minister’s response to the debate setting out the steps being taken by the Government can be found here: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-01-16/debates/CE7E0DD2-CD4E-4C47-A58D-983D6E2BC128/CommercialBreedingForLaboratories#
I hope this offers you some reassurance that this Government is committed to maintaining the very highest standards of animal welfare in research.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.
Sincerely,
