Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Nov 18;8(11):213.
doi: 10.3390/ani8110213.

Brexit and Animal Protection: Legal and Political Context and a Framework to Assess Impacts on Animal Welfare

Affiliations

Brexit and Animal Protection: Legal and Political Context and a Framework to Assess Impacts on Animal Welfare

Steven P McCulloch. Animals (Basel). .

Abstract

The British people voted to leave the European Union (EU) in a 2016 referendum. The United Kingdom (UK) has been a member of the EU since the Maastricht Treaty was signed in 1993 and before that a member of the European Communities (EC) since 1973. EU animal health and welfare regulations and directives have had a major impact on UK animal protection policy. Similarly, the UK has had a substantial impact on EU animal protection. Brexit represents a substantial political upheaval for animal protection policy, with the potential to impact animal welfare in the UK, EU and internationally. Brexit's impact on farmed animals will determine the overall impact of Brexit on animals. A major threat to animal welfare is from importing lower welfare products. A major opportunity is reform of UK agricultural policy to reward high welfare outside the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). A soft Brexit, in which the UK remains in the single market and/or customs union, mitigates the threat of importing lower welfare products. A harder Brexit means threats to animal welfare are more likely to materialise. Whether threats and opportunities do materialise will depend on political considerations including decisions of key political actors. The Conservative Government delivering Brexit has a problematic relationship with animal protection. Furthermore, Brexit represents a shift to the political right, which is not associated with progressive animal protection. There is significant political support in the Conservative Party for a hard Brexit. Further research is required to investigate whether the various threats and opportunities are likely to materialise.

Keywords: Animal health; Brexit; Common Agricultural Policy; Conservative Party; European Union; World Trade Organisation; animal protection; animal welfare.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Wildlife and Countryside Link, and UK Centre for Animal Law . Brexit: Getting the Best Deal for Animals—A Detailed Analysis of Current Legislation, with Recommendations for Enhancing Animal Welfare, British Industries, and Consumer Confidence and Choice in Post-Brexit Britain. Wildlife and Countryside Link, and UK Centre for Animal Law; London, UK: 2018.
    1. McCormick J. The European Superpower. Palgrave Macmillan; London, UK: 2007.
    1. Hodson D., Peterson J. Institutions of the European Union. Oxford University Press; Oxford, UK: 2017.
    1. International Monetary Fund United Kingdom: Staff Concluding Statement of the 2018 Article IV Mission. [(accessed on 21 September 2018)]; Available online: https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2018/09/17/United-Kingdom-Staff-Con....
    1. Nardelli A. This Leaked Government Brexit Analysis Says the UK Will Be Worse off in Every Scenario. BuzzFeed.News. Jan 29, 2018.

LinkOut - more resources