Animal tests decision held up by trade fears

Date: 16/01/1997

By Simon Coss

FEARS of another international trade row similar to the current furore over leghold traps is delaying a European Commission decision on the future use of animals to test cosmetic products in the EU.

The Commission's committee on adaptation to technical progress had been due to meet at the end of last year to discuss whether a proposed ban on animal testing should be fully implemented by 1998.

But Commission sources say the group will not be convened until the institution's legal service can come up with a way of ensuring that the committee's expected conclusion that a ban on testing finished products should be implemented but a similar veto on ingredient trials postponed does not fall foul of World Trade Organisation rules.

“We do not want to see another leghold traps scenario over this. If we implement the 1998 ban on finished products, it would obviously also apply to imported products,” said one Commission cosmetics expert.

The Union is currently at odds with the US, Canada and Russia over European calls for an embargo on imported fur from animals caught in leghold traps.

The Commission has negotiated a framework agreement on humane standards with Russia and Canada, but is still locked in talks with the Americans.

Member states have until the end of March to decide whether to ratify the framework. Much will depend on which set of ministers takes the decision. Officials in the 113 Committee would prefer foreign ministers to take the final vote.

In December, a number of environment ministers rejected the framework as too lax.

The three major fur-exporting nations say the proposed ban amounts to a restriction of trade under WTO rules and that the Union does not, in any case, have the right to impose its laws on third countries a somewhat ironic stance on the part of the US, given the current dispute over the American Helms-Burton Act aimed at punishing European firms with business dealings in Cuba.

Similar accusations could be levelled against any ban on cosmetic products tested on animals.

But animal rights groups have attacked the delay and are calling on the Commission to fulfil its responsibilities by ensuring that the ban is implemented.

“We are extremely concerned at this delay. There is overwhelming public support across Europe for the proposed ban to become law. Europe must not allow the WTO to undermine its own legislation and we are extremely concerned that the Commission is using this as a delaying tactic so as not to enforce a ban. It is flying in the face of public opinion,” said a spokeswoman for the European Coalition to End Animal Experiments.

The European Cosmetic, Toiletry and Perfumery Association (Colipa) argues that some sort of international agreement on the issue is needed. Many of the group's members are multinationals which operate both within and beyond the EU.

“It would be a very heavy administrative burden to have to meet differing sets of regulations and would essentially amount to a barrier to trade,” said a Colipa spokeswoman.

Colipa maintains that its members fully support efforts to find alternatives to animal testing and points out that the industry only accounts for 0.03&percent; of animal trials. It says the vast majority of experiments are carried out by the food, armaments, chemical and tobacco industries.

In an attempt to convince sceptics of its good intentions, Colipa will hold an information day at the Conrad Hotel in Brussels on 6 February.

But critics point out that current EU legislation provides no real incentive for the industry to change its ways. Under existing rules, firms will only be obliged to stop animal testing when viable alternatives exist.

“If people know they will only face a ban if there is a developed alternative, the best thing to do is not to develop that alternative,” said German Socialist MEP Dagmar Roth-Behrendt, a member of the European Parliament's environment and consumer affairs committee.

The Commission has already made it clear that the proposed bar on animal testing of ingredients, which was originally due to come into force in 1998, is almost certain to be delayed for at least two years.