The federal government has indicated it is intent on pushing through Parliament this winter new cruelty-to-animals legislation, despite objections that it will leave farmers open to legal harassment from animal rights activists.
The bill may get through the House of Commons and into the Senate before MPs leave Parliament Hill for their six-week Christmas break next week.
After harsh industry criticism during committee hearings, justice minister Anne McLellan approved amendments that would make sure farmers could not be charged unless negligence could be proven.
It satisfied rural Liberal MPs that the new legislation will not make it “open season” for animal rights activists who object to animals being penned, branded or kept in cages.
Read Also
Going beyond “Resistant” on crop seed labels
Variety resistance is getting more specific on crop disease pathogens, but that information must be conveyed in a way that actually helps producers make rotation decisions.
“That which is lawful will continue to be lawful and I hope I have established my bona fides in relation to understanding first-hand the nature of the agricultural sector and intensive livestock practices based on my own personal experience,” McLellan said at the House of Commons justice committee meeting.
Canadian Alliance agriculture critic Howard Hilstrom said later the minister’s performance seemed to satisfy rural Liberal MPs who had been under pressure from their farm constituents to make sure normal farming practices were not a target of the bill.
“They seemed to be mollified and I guess they’ll be supporting it, but as an opposition member, I think the bill should be a lot more clear and straightforward on the issue of agricultural practices,” Hilstrom said.
In the House of Commons Dec. 6, Alliance justice critic Vic Toews said there is more to the strengthened cruelty-to-animals bill than meets the eye.
“I think there is a hidden agenda,” said the former Manitoba attorney general. “There is a lack of frankness with the Canadian people about the true intent of what the bill is to accomplish.”
He said animal rights groups will bring frivolous prosecutions, dragging farmers into court to defend their animal handling practices.
“We know that animal rights interests groups have indicated they will prosecute and take this law to the limit,” he said. “Those are their words.”
Some critics of the government and McLellan noted that in a letter to rural Liberal MPs, the activist group Environment Voters vowed to organize environmentalists to work in the next election against any MP who voted against the government bill.
In the October letter, Stephen Best, founder of Environment Voters, took credit for helping to re-elect McLellan in her Edmonton riding in 2000, largely because of her promise to toughen animal cruelty laws.
“Anne McLellan likely owes her 1.5 percent 733 vote plurality to the Environment Voters campaign in her electoral district,” he wrote. “Environment Voters was the only third party campaigning on her behalf.”
When she appeared before the Commons justice committee in late November, Hilstrom asked the Edmonton lawyer and former law professor if she’d ever been in a hog barn.
She told the Manitoba cattle producer that she was raised on a Nova Scotia chicken farm and her brother used to produce hogs as well as run a Nova Scotia dairy farm.
“So I understand a lot about the agricultural industry and my brother has no problem with these provisions,” she said.
