Animal Protection Submission: Department of Agriculture Report-Back
Constitutional Review Committee
04 August 2006
Meeting Summary
A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.
Meeting report
JOINT CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
04 August 2006
ANIMAL PROTECTION SUBMISSION: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE REPORT-BACK
Acting Chairperson: Dr E Schoeman (ANC)
Documents handed out:
Letter from the
Humane Education Trust
Performing
Animals Protection Act, No.24 of 1935
Environmental
Protection Laws and the Livestock Sector
Animal Welfare
Issues as Pertains to the Environmental Protection Laws
SUMMARY
The Department of Agriculture briefed the Committee on protection of animal
rights, presently incorporated in a number of different Acts. The
implementation processes, education programmes, and land care programmes were
described. The
Department’s policy on animal rights took into consideration the diversity of
cultures and beliefs regarding animals, and considered different challenges to
animal protection in urban and rural areas. There had been a shift in policy
from “animal welfare” to the concept of “animal care” which concentrated both
on preventing animal abuse and assisting people in obtaining maximum benefit
from their animals. Animal disease in urban areas was a matter of grave
concern, and municipal regulations were widely disparate. Non-governmental
organizations were assisting and setting good examples to the community. It might
however be useful to expand the Department’s control over more animal species
and to put greater emphasis on proper care of animals. Challenges included
increasing the Department’s capacity to deal with animal protection, and to
include animal welfare organizations in the government framework. The
Department believed that it might be helpful to consolidate some of the
legislation. The Department proposed that a national animal welfare committee
be created to deal with a number of issues, to make more stringent regulations
and to expand more into rural areas.
Questions posed by members included the need for new legislation and the proper
enforcement of existing legislation, whether there was a need for
constitutional amendments to balance the possible conflict between human and
animal rights, branding and dehorning, and the number and capacity of
veterinary services in the country. It was also stressed that there was a need
for policy and legislation to reflect local conditions. The possible
incorporation of several pieces of legislation needed to be resolved urgently.
MINUTES
The Chair reported that during last year the Committee had received submissions
requesting that animal rights be added to the Constitution. The Committee had
examined other countries’ constitutions and consulted with the Department of
Environmental Affairs and the Department of Tourism. The Department of
Agriculture was responsible for the Animal Protection Act, and that Department
had then also shared their views with the Committee. The Committee had also
received submissions regarding abuses of animals that have taken place in
traditional ceremonies. The Committee now had to consider whether the existing
legislation was adequate to address animal abuse, whether existing legislation
required amendment and whether there needed to be an amendment to the
Constitution.
Department of Agriculture Briefing
Dr Sizwe Mkhize (Assistant
Director-General, Department of Agriculture) explained that a variety of
legislation for the protection of animals already existed, including the
Performance Animal Protection Act of 1935, the Animals Protection Act of 1962,
the Animal Diseases Act of 1984, the Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals Act of 1993, and the 1998 Animal Improvement Act. Implementation took
the form of incentives such as training programmes in communities,
capacity-building programmes, public education campaigns and land care
programmes. Local inspectors worked throughout the country, especially in areas
where the Department of Agriculture was displeased with the level of compliance
with animal protection laws. Most of the work of the Department was implemented
through its provincial offices, which worked closely with municipalities.
Mr
K Ramsay (Senior
Livestock Specialist, Department of Agriculture) outlined the Department’s
policy with regard to animal rights, and reported that it took into
consideration South Africa’s diversity of cultures and beliefs regarding
animals, and considered different challenges to animal protection in urban and
rural areas. Mr Ramsay emphasized the fact that there had been a shift in
policy from a focus on the concept of “animal welfare” to the concept of
“animal care.” The concept of “animal care” was oriented towards preventing
animal abuse and assisting people in getting the most benefit from their
animals, as opposed to simply punishing those engaging in animal abuse. The
Department presently focused on animals in urban areas and the problem of
animal disease, which was “a potential time bomb.” Although most municipalities
had ordinances regarding animals, they differed widely. The Department would
shortly be publishing a document containing a model for local government on
animal care.
Mr Ramsay added that it might be helpful to consolidate two acts into one,
though he acknowledged that that would involve a lengthy process. Although the
current acts did not focus on animal care, the Department could manage to
implement the existing legislation, with some changes. Some non-governmental
organizations, such as a local carthorse association, were setting an example
that the government could follow by promoting animal care. Mr Ramsey also
described the concept of “community kraals,” whereby urban communities could
collectively care for their animals, and reduce the risk of animal disease.
The Department was working on guidelines that affected every species and class
of animal in the country, including draft animals, “backyard breeding,” and
campaigns to promote goats. The Department could effectively control a larger
portion of the population and should consider renaming animal right legislation
to reflect the emphasis on animal care.
Mr Motseki Hlatshwayo (Directorate:
Animal and Aqua Production Systems, Department of Agriculture) noted the importance of
animals being used for cultural and ceremonial purposes, as well as for
research. The Department needed to increase its capacity to deal with animal
protection, and to include animal welfare organisations in working within the
framework set by government. The Department proposed the creation of a national
animal welfare committee to develop proposals on how to manage animal care,
which would include housing and handling facilities for animals; management
issues such as dehorning, castration and transport of animals; and
slaughtering. The Department also had to consider the different situations of
companion animals, sport animals, zoo animals, and animals in kennels. Mr
Hlatshwayo reported that the Department was continuing to expand its base of stakeholders,
to identify globally accepted principles for animal welfare, and to work on
disaster management plans, in particular for poor weather. Improvements in
animal welfare would lead to improvements in productivity. The Department still
needed to make more stringent regulations and to expand them into rural areas.
Discussion
Mr F Beukman (ANC) was pleased to hear the Department of Agriculture’s
emphasis on caring for animals and asked if this affected an individual’s duty
to care for his animals.
Mr A Guam (ANC) noted that the Department seemed to have implemented animal
protection to a certain degree, but asked if, in the light of Mr Ramsay’s
comment that he “could live with the existing legislation”, new legislation was
not required.
Dr Hlatshwayo agreed that the current legislation was problematic, and that the
government needed to consider whether it reflected the current policy of animal
care. Many of the old acts lacked appropriate enforcement mechanisms. He said
that the Department had conducted sub-sector analyses of rural areas and found
that capacity was still a real problem.
Mr C Burgess (ANC) pointed out that when Constitutional rights conflicted with
animal rights, human constitutional rights would prevail. He asked if it was
necessary to amend the Constitution or whether a simple amendment of existing
legislation would suffice.
The Chairperson pointed out that additional legislation in itself would not be
effective; it was proper enforcement that mattered. Because of the realities of
the South African situation the animal rights criteria could not be the same as
New Zealand or the United States, citing the example of traditional ceremonies
that have been acknowledged by the government. He enquired if oversight between
the different national, provincial and local authorities was functioning
effectively.
Dr Mkhize reported that the Department was not fully enforcing the legislation
that already existed, and that the current legislation could be far more
effective if it was properly enforced. However, the legislation was old and
outdated and required updating at the very least. He pointed out that any Act
written prior to 1994 should be reexamined, and that the current or new
legislation must ensure that the standards set for animal protection were
relevant to the present situation. Mr Ramsay added that the Department was
mindful of the lengthy process to change legislation, and added that the
Department would delay improvements in animal care policy pending new
legislation. However, it was important to incorporate the Department’s ethical
codes into law so that they could be more effectively enforced. There were
already several proposals ready for public consultation.
Dr Hlatshwayo commended the Chairperson’s comment that there was a need for
policies to reflect the African context. He described a new programme where the
Department was planning to make use of community livestock officers who would
be trained to properly perform functions such as dehorning for people in their
area. He added the programme still needed to be implemented, but that it
reflected the Department’s developmental agenda.
Ms R Ndzanga (ANC) indicated that
animals in her local rural area were generally well cared for. Branding animals
remained vital to the poor population’s livelihood. She enquired whether the
Department of Agriculture was aware of a less painful alternative to branding
and if there were humane ways to cut the horns of cattle.
Mr Ramsay explained that branding was not as painful as it appeared and remained
one of the only methods of identification that could clearly be seen. The
Department had yet to find a less-painful alternative, although it had been
looking at freeze branding. The Animal Identification Act regulated branding,
because it posed serious problems if it was improperly done. He reported that
the Department was investigating new methods. He added that the introduction of
community livestock officers would provide people to humanely perform functions
such as branding and dehorning. Since animals were so important to people with
limited resources, it was vital to protect them.
Dr Hlatshwayo added that the concept of animal welfare was also designed to
increase small farmer competitiveness by improving the quality of their
livestock. The availability of veterinarians remained very important. There was
a system with both provincial and national veterinarians that should be
consolidated. There were currently not enough qualified veterinarians
graduating and many of those who did graduate either left the country or went
to work for private companies.
Mr Burgess suggested that perhaps veterinarians should be moved from Schedule
Five of the Constitution, which listed issues under the jurisdiction of the
provinces, to Schedule Four of the Constitution, which listed issues that the
provinces and the national government handled concurrently.
The Chairperson pointed out that the debate on whether provincial services such
as veterinary services should become a concurrent national competence has been
ongoing since 1995. He agreed that the issue of veterinarians could help solve
local problems. He asked whether the Department of Agriculture saw the current
Constitution as an impediment to enforcing animal rights - for example, the
Constitution recognised traditional rights but not animal rights. He believed
there needed to be guidelines for African practices regarding animals.
Mr Burgess commented that even if the Constitution was amended the existing
laws would still have to be altered and enforced. Only the German Constitution
included the issue of animal rights. He asked whether there had been any
dialogue with non-governmental organizations about law reform and the capacity
to implement animal protection. He wanted to know how the issue under discussion
had been brought to the attention of the committee.
Mr J Jeffery (ANC) asked whether the delegation thought a Constitutional
amendment was the appropriate course of action.
The Chairperson commented that a very strong case would need to be made out
before Constitutional amendment could be done.
Dr Hlatshwayo said that the Department did not think that the Constitution had
to be amended. It had not in any way obstructed their work. He added that he
was not aware of any meeting in which the Department of Agriculture had
consulted with non-governmental organizations on the issue. He commented that
the might be a lesson for the Department.
Dr Hlatshwayo added that there were simply not enough trained people on the
ground to ensure that government policies and views were shared throughout the
country. He added however, that the Department of Agriculture strove to
implement only those policies that were socially acceptable to everyone in
South Africa.
Ms Ndzanga asked why the Constitution should be altered to exclude the
traditional practice of slaughtering animals.
The Chairperson replied that certain procedures for customary slaughtering were
laid down.
The Chairperson commented that the internal debate in the Department of
Agriculture regarding the need to combine the various pieces of animal rights
legislation should proceed speedily.
The meeting was adjourned.
Audio
No related
Documents
No related documents
Present
- We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting
Download as PDF
You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.
See detailed instructions for your browser here.