Hendon MP David Pinto-Duschinsky has attacked the “myths” being pushed by campaigners against halal and kosher slaughter during a debate in Parliament.
“Their advocacy [for stunned slaughter] conjures up pictures of animals gently and humanely put to sleep, shielded from suffering. I am afraid to say that reality does not always conform to that comforting image”, the Labour MP said on Monday.
“Modern industrial methods of stunning often involve significant distress and suffering. Animals are suffocated and slowly asphyxiated by carbon dioxide gas, electrocuted by having metal tongs placed around their heads, or maybe even placed upside down and dipped in baths of electrified water. As we have heard, captive bolts are also used”, he added.
The former adviser to chancellor Alastair Darling also cited a peer reviewed study that suggested that animals lose consciousness very rapidly. “In the case of kosher slaughter, consciousness is lost within 10 seconds,” he explained.
Pinto-Duschinsky, who won his north London marginal by just 15 votes at last year’s general election, said that those calling for a ban on halal and kosher meats have no answer to what observant Jews and Muslims are expected to do.
“They need to be honest about what a ban really means for their Jewish and Muslim friends, colleagues and neighbours,” he said, later adding: “Imposing a ban would curtail the fundamental religious freedoms of my Jewish and Muslim constituents in Hendon, and I fear that it may feed a rising tide of prejudice.”
MPs were debating the topic in Westminster Hall after a petition calling for the banning of non-stun slaughter reached over 100,000 signatories.
Rupert Lowe, independent (formerly Reform UK) MP for Great Yarmouth and opponent of non-stun slaughter, described the practice as “two-tier slaughter”.
“Instead of an instant, painless death, these poor beings are put through the most unimaginable pain, all in the name of religion. This is not farming; it is torture”, he said.
Lowe added: “Millions of Brits are eating halal meat against their will and without their knowledge due to our deceitful labelling system. The two-tier regulatory arbitrage between our abattoirs and halal slaughterhouses means that economic factors foster a more widespread adoption of the cheaper option, which means that halal meat is seeping into the food chain and the consumer is unwittingly eating it.”
Earlier in the debate, Bolton South MP Yasmin Qureshi claimed: “Although the petition talks about ‘non-stun slaughter’ in general, public focus has almost entirely been on halal. Kosher slaughter uses the same method, but is rarely mentioned. That reveals what many of us have known for some time: this debate is less about animals and more about Muslims.”
And pro-Gaza independent MP Iqbal Mohamed warned about the vilification of Jewish and Muslim communities under the guise of animal welfare: “Assuming that there is only one ethical way to slaughter an animal is not science; it is imposition, and it does not reflect the values of a pluralistic society. To claim that halal and kosher practices are outside of ‘our’ culture is a dangerous path”.
Responding for the government, the food security and rural affairs minister, Daniel Zeichner, said that although “it is the government’s preference that all animals should be stunned before slaughter”, “the government respect the right of Jews and Muslims to eat meat prepared in accordance with their beliefs”.
“We therefore intend to continue to allow the religious slaughter of animals for consumption by Muslims and Jews”, he added.
Jamie Stone, the Liberal Democrat chair of the House of Commons Petitions committee said he was pleased the debate was conducted “in a civilised fashion”.
"I think that will give people such as the petitioner and others the reassurance that when a petition comes here for debate, it will not just be put in a bag behind the Speaker’s Chair or put on a dusty shelf; it will be properly looked at”, he added.
