Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker Southcott, and I congratulate you on your retirement and service to the country. I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that the:

(a) majority of Australians believe the use of animal testing to evaluate the safety of cosmetic products and ingredients is unnecessary; and

(b) regulatory framework in Australia for chemicals, including cosmetics, is complex; and

(2) moves to phase out the unnecessary developing, manufacturing, selling, advertising or importing into Australia of cosmetics, or ingredients in cosmetics, which have been tested on live animals to evaluate the safety of those products and ingredients.

Cosmetic testing on animals is wrong, it is barbaric, it is cruel and it is no longer necessary. As Abraham Lincoln once said:

I am in favour of animal rights as well as human rights. That is the way of a whole human being.

It is time for modernisation and increased global harmonisation of Australia's cosmetic-testing regulations through the implementation of a cosmetics animal-testing ban. This private member's motion highlights the need to prohibit new animal testing for cosmetic products or their ingredients and the manufacture and sale of cosmetics newly tested on animals or containing newly animal tested ingredients. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Hannah Stuart from Humane Research Australia and the Choose Cruelty Free campaigners, as well as Bruce Poon from the Animal Justice Party, for bringing this issues to me and for being so passionate about protecting animals.

Testing the ingredients of cosmetics like mascara and shampoo on living creatures is completely unnecessary cruelty and it is time Australia joined the growing number of countries around the world which have banned this practice. There are already testing bans on importation and sales in place in the European Union, Norway, India and Israel. Also, a ban has recently been put in place in New Zealand and now there is consideration for legislation in the United States, Canada, Taiwan, Brazil, Vietnam and other countries. Without a comprehensive legal ban, there is nothing to prevent cosmetic animal testing taking place here in Australia or overseas during the development of products which are to be sold in Australian stores.

A ban in Australia would be good for animals, consumers and science, and it is what the overwhelming majority of Australian citizens want. A majority of Australians oppose animal testing on cosmetics and support banning the sale of newly animal tested cosmetics. Polling conducted in May 2013 by Nexus Research on behalf of Humane Research Australia found the following. An overwhelming majority of Australia—85 per cent—oppose using animals in the development of cosmetics. A large majority support a national ban on the sale of cosmetics tested on animals—that is, four out of five Australians who support a national ban. A recent opinion poll from July 2014 by Roy Morgan Research also showed a significant level of consumer concern about animal testing of cosmetics. The data revealed that there is now a strong shift towards cruelty-free beauty products, with 'not tested on animals' being one of the top three features that Australian consumers look for when buying cosmetics, ranking higher than anti-ageing benefits and sun protection factors.

Prohibiting cosmetic animal testing and the sale of newly animal-tested cosmetics in Australia would reflect both the growing global trend to end cosmetics testing and the will of the Australians who oppose using animals for the development of cosmetics. Currently, hundreds of companies, including Lush, Nature's Organics, Natio, Australis and many others, such as those listed in the CCF list, have sworn off animal testing yet still produce new, safe and fabulous beauty products. They do so by using existing ingredients with established histories of safe, state-of-the-art, non-animal tests that can produce faster, cheaper and more relevant test results. Many animal tests are decades old and have inherent, well-known scientific weaknesses due to species differences that make regulation based on animal tests highly questionable.

I will just describe some of the tests and the results. In the acute toxicity test, the test substance is forced down a rat's throat using a syringe. Animals may experience diarrhoea, convulsions, bleeding from the mouth, seizures, paralysis and, ultimately, death. In repeated dose toxicity tests, rats and mice are force-fed a substance every day for 28 to 90 days. At the end of the experiment, the animals are killed and their organs are then examined. In the skin allergy test, the test substance is applied to the surface of the skin, or it is injected into the ears of guinea pigs or applied to the ears of mice. They end up getting ulcers, scaling, inflammation and itchiness.

This must stop. It must stop now, and I strongly encourage the Australian government to end this practice.

See this speech in context