English summary

Summary: The Revision of EC Directive 86/609

The European Commission has proposed a new Directive to replace the 22-year-old EC Directive 86/609/EC governing the use of animals in research. The new directive is to be discussed in the European Parliament’s Agriculture and Rural Development Committee in early 2009. It will then go before the full Parliament, followed by the Council of Ministers. This is the first major revision in over 20 years and provides an important opportunity to advance animal protection and European science.

Written Declaration 40/2007

In 2007 a group of respected MEPs, Jens HOLM (Sweden, European United Left), Rebecca HARMS (Germany, Greens), John BOWIS (UK, former Health Minister, European People’s Party), Martine ROURE (France, VP of EP, Party of European Socialists) and Mojca DRCAR MURKO (Slovenia, Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe) tabled Written Declaration 40/2007. 433 Members of the European Parliament (55%) signed, and every Member State and political persuasion was represented, including many prominent Europeans: Michel ROCARD, former French Prime Minister; Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, former Finnish Prime Minister; Luigi COCILOVO, Gerard ONESTA, Edward McMILLAN-SCOTT, Miguel Angel MARTINEZ MARTINEZ, Mechtild ROTHE and Luisa MORGANTINI, Vice-Presidents of the European Parliament; Joseph DAUL, President of the EPP-ED Group; Monica FRASSONI, co-President of the Green/EFA Group; Francis WURTZ, President of the GUE/NGL Group; Cristiana MUSCARDINI, co-President of the UEN Group; Linda McAVAN and Pasqualina NAPOLETANO, Vice-Presidents of the PES Group.

Written Declaration 40/2007 urges the Commission, the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament to use the revision process of Directive 86/609/EC as an opportunity to:
(a) make ending the use of apes and wild-caught monkeys in scientific experiments an urgent priority,
(b) establish a timetable for replacing the use of all primates in scientific experiments with alternatives.

Although the Declaration took a cautious approach to outlining exactly how primates should be replaced, it is widely acknowledged that for the Cosmetics Directive and action on CO2 emissions, it proved necessary to set targets in order to achieve the objectives.

It is of great concern that the Commission has chosen to ignore such a mandate, which is backed by 80% of European citizens who, in a Commission survey, said that they felt that primate experiments were “not acceptable”.

The Commission Proposals on Primates

The proposed Directive does not phase out a single primate experiment. There is no mechanism that would establish a formal review process which could consult, investigate and set timetables for the replacement of primates. Several well intentioned Articles are undermined by loopholes: A ban on the use of great apes in experiments is undermined by spurious “exceptions”. A ban on the use of wild-caught monkeys and the phase out of F1 monkeys (those born of wild caught parents) both allow for unjustified “exceptions”.

Proposals to Save Primates

The following would achieve the goals of Written Declaration 40/2007 and meet with public and European Parliament approval:

A prohibition on the use of great apes (without exceptions).
A prohibition on the use of wild-caught monkeys (without exceptions).
Full implementation of a phase out of F1 monkeys (offspring of wild-caught parents) (although we favour earlier than the 7 years phase-out suggested in the draft).
Arrangements to replace the use of primates to be established during bi-annual, themati reviews setting timetables or objectives for replacement in specific areas.

Proposals to protect all animals:

Bi-annual reviews of the use of animals in specific tests, implementation of advanced replacements and other key issues – review every twenty years is too long – it means that the legislation does not keep up with developments in science and technology.
Improved transparency and public and scientific scrutiny of experiments.
Improved regulatory testing scrutiny by governments.
Compulsory data sharing to prevent duplication (as already implemented under REACH).
Retrospective review of experiments so that the actual impacts of the experiments are judged, and any unforeseen suffering is reported.
Independent ethical, scientific and replacement review of proposals to use animals – before authorisation is given.