Worldlog Week 25 – 2012
Last week we continued the debate in the Lower House on my private member's bill to ban unanaesthetised ritual slaughter. To my disappointment, the senators from The Dutch Labour Party (PvdA), People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) and D66 barely touched on the content of the debate. Even my offer to adjust the legislative proposal to meet substantive objections from the senate half way was only embraced by the minority. So that's disappointing, but on the positive side, this debate in the Upper House gives me a lot of energy and inspiration for the up-and-coming election campaign!
Because we want clarity on parties' voting proportions, we have requested voting by roll call on the legislative proposal. A vote by roll call will show which senators believe religion is sufficient reason to continue this unnecessary and avoidable animal suffering. This vote takes place tomorrow, so I'll tell you more about it in the following Worldlog.
Even if the legislative proposal is not accepted, our party shall continue to argue for a ban on unanaesthetised animal slaughter. It's a double standard, as non-religious unanaesthetised slaughter can be punished with time behind bars, whereas a Jewish or Islamic butcher has nothing to fear.
On 2 July, Australian professor Peter Singer spoke in the Upper House on the Party for the Animals and its point of view on the unanaesthetised slaughter legislative proposal. Click here to read his opinion!
Singer is a Bioethics professor at Princeton University, a philosopher and one of the founders of the ideas that surround the concept of animal rights. He has written various books, including the well-known book Animal Liberation. Last week he received Australia's highest honour from Queen Elizabeth.
Marianne Thieme, Peter Singer and Esther Ouwehand
A few months ago, Turkey started up a political party for animals. How wonderful that Turkey is also standing up for animal rights – they have their work cut out for them there, including finding an animal-friendly way to deal with stray animals!
We in the Lower House are arguing for fishing vessels to be excluded from the protected nature reserves in the North Sea. An amendment from my colleague Esther should safeguard the life in these oceanic reserves from the negative consequences of unbridled fishing. Last week the Lower House discussed amending the Nature Conservation Act so these areas can finally enjoy protection. Outgoing State Secretary Bleker, however, wants to exclude fishing from the scope of this act. This would mean that only fishermen may disregard the new rules that are meant to protect vulnerable sea creatures.
Biodiversity in the North Sea is under enormous pressure. The North Sea is one of the most intensively used areas of ocean in the world. Its soil life is disappearing and distinctive species of fish are endangered thanks to the negative influences of fishing, as well as shipping, sand reclamation, dredging, military operations, cable and pipe-laying, oil and gas platforms and windmill parks. We have been hammering away for years on the importance of creating protected oceanic reserves. But an sea reserve can only be a reserve if the area is protected against all negative influences, including fishing! Click here to watch our film Sea the Truth.
See you next week!