Kelvin Thomson (Wills, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Cosmetic testing on animals might sound harmless enough. People might imagine someone in a lab coat applying lipstick to a pig; but in fact it is a bit less benign than that. The tests used to ascertain the safety of cosmetic ingredients often subject animals to pain and distress, without pain relief, due to potential interference with test results.

Testing includes testing for skin irritation, dripping ingredients into the eyes of animals, testing for allergies and so on. Animal testing is carried out on rabbits, guinea pigs, mice, rats and other animals. The RSPCA estimates that tens of thousands of animals are tested each year. Animals Australia says animal experimentation and the invasive use of animals for teaching is inherently wrong. The use of animals in research and teaching is more about tradition and history than it is about science. Australia and the world should be investing in the research and development of innovative and cruelty-free testing procedures. There is now the ability to print 3D prosthetic limbs and organs on chips. Animal testing is completely outdated.

Approximately 95 per cent of drugs tested 'successfully' on animals fail when they are translated to humans. Research and teaching using animals cover wide areas of activity. The public perception that animal based research primarily takes place in the field of medicine is false. Animal based research is widely used in agriculture and basic scientific research, in relation to which the argument that 'animal research saves human lives' does not apply. Many, though not all, of those animals are subjected to some degree of pain or stress during the experimental procedure or as a result of the environment in which they are kept prior to or after the procedures.

Animals should not be viewed as mere tools for research and education. A commitment by governments, research and educational institutions and the community is required to bring about a radical change in methodology in research and teaching to reduce and subsequently eliminate the use of animals in these areas.

The European Union has introduced a ban on cosmetics tested on animals which came fully into effect in 2013. The ban applies to both the testing of substances on animals and the marketing of substances that have been the subject of animal testing elsewhere. Israel has introduced a similar ban.

During the 2013 federal election campaign, Labor committed to undertake a national consultation on the manufacture, importation, sale and marketing of cosmetics which have been tested on animals. This consultation was conducted in 2014. Over 13,000 public submissions were received, indicating a very high level of public interest in this issue, and over 90 per cent of those submissions favoured a ban on animal testing, stating that the practice is unnecessary and inhuman Labor acknowledged this public concern by inserting words to this effect in its national platform last year. The member for Throsby, who is in the House, and the member for Hotham have developed a private member's bill to give effect to this position, and I congratulate them on this work.

At present, animal testing of cosmetic products is legal in Australia, but in practice it is rarely conducted here. However, the large majority of cosmetics that sit on our shelves contain an ingredient, or ingredients, that at some point have been tested on animals. Mostly, these ingredients have been tested overseas. Often, results from animal tests are used to verify products so they can be brought into the Australian market.

The Labor bill creates offences for importing into Australia any new cosmetics, or existing cosmetics featuring new ingredients, that have been tested on animals. It also creates offences for testing cosmetics on animals within Australia. The bill will phase in prevention of animal testing, as was done in Europe. Animal testing that has already occurred is not subject to the bill, and cosmetics that are already available in Australia will continue to be available.

The registration process for new chemicals will be amended so that, in the case of a new cosmetic ingredient, the National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme must be notified of a substance's animal testing history during the application process. If animal testing has occurred it cannot be registered. This will be phased in over three years.

This is a very reasonable and measured approach to an important issue. I cannot see any reason why members of the House and the Senate would not support it. I urge the government to support this bill. If they want to take it over and introduce it as government legislation, I dare say that my Labor colleagues would not be too upset by that. We just want to see action to put into effect an idea whose time has come.

See this speech in context