Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to rise to speak in favour of Motion No. 354. The motion calls on the government to support the development of the universal declaration on animal welfare and to promote its adoption at the United Nations and in other global fora.
Before I begin, I would like to thank my colleague from the Liberal Party, the hon. member for Scarborough Southwest, for bringing the motion forward. I would also like to acknowledge the work done on behalf of this issue by my hon. colleague from Burnaby—Douglas. He has introduced motions on this subject in previous parliaments. He is a man of great compassion and a strong sense of justice. I know his concern for animal welfare stems from these deeply held convictions.
The universal declaration on animal welfare was first conceived back in the year 2000. Three years later, at the Manila Conference on Animal Welfare, the draft text for the declaration was adopted. Since then, the declaration has been endorsed by the governments of 13 states, including the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, India and the Philippines. The World Organization for Animal Health and the World Veterinary Association have signed on in support as well.
Therefore, I think it is fair to say that this declaration has been a long time coming. It has the support of a growing and wide number of states around the world and non-state organizations alike.
It is time for Canada to show global leadership on this issue, as we often call on it to show in other issues, and to take a stand against animal cruelty and to support the universal declaration on animal welfare.
I would like to talk a bit about the declaration. The declaration calls for states to take all appropriate steps to prevent cruelty to animals and to reduce their suffering, to treat them humanely. It calls for the development of standards for animal welfare governing the treatment of farm animals, companion animals, animals in scientific research, animals in recreation and wildlife.
The preamble to the declaration sets out what I think is a very important framework for assessing the welfare of animals. It refers to five freedoms: freedom from hunger, thirst and malnutrition; freedom from fear and distress; freedom from physical and thermal discomfort; freedom from pain, injury and disease; and freedom to express normal patterns of behaviour.
I do not think anyone could argue that these five freedoms represent anything but a reasonable, comprehensive, scientifically sound standard for preventing animal cruelty and promoting animal welfare.
For thousands of years, human beings not only coexisted with animals on the planet, they were also interdependent. Animal domestication has been around for 30,000 years since men and women domesticated wolves and turned them into their best friends: dogs. Fifteen-thousand-year-old rock paintings show the earliest evidence of beekeeping. The relationship between humans and animals has developed over thousands of years. It has been mutually beneficial, and humans have treated animals with affection, compassion and respect.
I know of no farmer, no rancher, no animal keeper, no person who would argue with the principle that animals should be treated humanely. In fact, I believe all these groups take great pride in knowing how their animals are treated and they benefit from the treatment of their animals in a humane manner. No one benefits when animals are caused fear and distress or suffer from injury or disease. It is only careless or callous acts that cause these things and neither are worthy of us as human beings.
At the heart of the universal declaration on animal welfare is that animals are sentient. Sentience is the capacity to have feelings, to experience suffering and experience well-being. Sentience implies a certain level of conscious awareness. There are obviously degrees of sentience, but the scientific consensus is that all vertebraed animals and also many forms of aquatic animals possess some degree of sentience.
I know there are many pet owners in the House. I personally am the lucky owner of a four and a half year old yellow Labrador named Zoe. I know I am not the only one who does not need any scientific research to tell us that animals have feelings, that they experience suffering, that they experience well-being and need comfort.
I would like to share with the House some examples of the positive effect when we learn to treat animals with respect.
As the New Democrat public safety critic, I have toured a number of correctional facilities over the past few months. I have seen the challenges that we face in delivering adequate treatment to a prison population that overwhelmingly suffers from addiction, mental health problems and other spiritual maladies that come from isolation and loneliness. I have also seen some very positive examples of how a modern, effective corrections system should be run, with some innovative rehabilitative programs.
One such program I witnessed was during my recent trip to the women's facility in Abbotsford, British Columbia. This program operates in partnership with the local SPCA. It is a great example of the value of community involvement in our corrections system. The SPCA brings in dogs that are in its care and allows them to be kennelled, groomed and taken care of by the women inmates at the facility. There is a wonderful interaction to see between the female inmates and the animals. It is a beautiful thing to see the kind of compassion, warmth and humanity that is expressed when animals and humans come together in such a fashion.
With this program, the women volunteer. They perform a valuable service to a worthy community organization and they learn or relearn the importance and rewards of being caring and compassionate to a fellow living creature. In turn, they get the comfort, the caring and the reward that comes from animals that return that same care and concern. This clearly demonstrates the positive power of dealing humanely with animals.
I can give another example from our corrections system, although this story does not have a happy ending.
Correctional Service Canada operates six prison farms. These prison farms are located at institutions across the country, from Alberta to New Brunswick. These farms employ inmates to produce local organic food for the institutions and for the surrounding community.
We all know the health, economic and environmental benefits of locally produced food. Beyond that, the farms are a setting for inmates to interact with animals in a positive way. Working with animals has a profound rehabilitative effect. That is why animals are regularly used in hospitals and nursing homes and in community programs dealing with autism and other psychological issues.
With rehabilitation programs in short supply in our prisons, these farms are a shining example of what we can achieve. In partnership with the community, when we expose inmates to positive interactions with animals, they learn emotional closeness, they learn caring and they learn compassion. They get to relearn patterns of behaviour that are gentle and that are humane.
Inexplicably though, the government has decided to close these farms. I am proud to join with the National Farmers Union, the Canadian Labour Congress and a number of food security and social justice organizations in calling for the government to reverse this short-sighted decision.
I believe we can tell a lot about a society by how it treats its most vulnerable. Mahatma Gandhi expressed it best, “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated”.
I am proud to support this call for a universal declaration on animal welfare and urge all members of the House to adopt this important motion on behalf of all Canadians.