This is really interesting, thanks for sharing it.
In our opinion, most of the problems could have been avoided had Law and Justice consulted with animal advocacy organizations, which they sadly failed to do.
I feel confused about this – who did push the legislation forward, if not animal advocacy organizations? Was it just that Law and Justice MPs personally felt motivated to pass the law?
Yes, exactly as you say. But I don’t think it was clear motivation to do something good. It is possible that this was also attempt to push forward something that the media and the public opinion would value as good thing.
Of course, animal advocacy organizations had indirect impact. Years of campaigning had some impact here. But for instance, no organization in Poland in 2020 campaigned about ritual slaughter. On the other hand, fur farming was part of legislation because of years of work of the animal advocates.
There is also one more nuance in this: Jarosław Kaczyński, long time leader of Law and Justice, honestly cares about animals. You can see him in this video speaking against fur farming. This is unusual because he never does such videos. He also intervened several times behind the scenes to stop initiatives of his own government and party that could be negative for the animals. However, in 2020 he was too politically weak to win.
We and other organizations helped MPs with data about fur farming and we were also trying to provide them basic data and science about ritual slaughter. But at no point organizations were asked about what we think should be part of the legislation. No one asked about what transition time for fur farmers would be good. We fought for the legislation but we didn’t have much say about the details of it.
This is really interesting, thanks for sharing it.
I feel confused about this – who did push the legislation forward, if not animal advocacy organizations? Was it just that Law and Justice MPs personally felt motivated to pass the law?
Yes, exactly as you say. But I don’t think it was clear motivation to do something good. It is possible that this was also attempt to push forward something that the media and the public opinion would value as good thing.
Of course, animal advocacy organizations had indirect impact. Years of campaigning had some impact here. But for instance, no organization in Poland in 2020 campaigned about ritual slaughter. On the other hand, fur farming was part of legislation because of years of work of the animal advocates.
There is also one more nuance in this: Jarosław Kaczyński, long time leader of Law and Justice, honestly cares about animals. You can see him in this video speaking against fur farming. This is unusual because he never does such videos. He also intervened several times behind the scenes to stop initiatives of his own government and party that could be negative for the animals. However, in 2020 he was too politically weak to win.
We and other organizations helped MPs with data about fur farming and we were also trying to provide them basic data and science about ritual slaughter. But at no point organizations were asked about what we think should be part of the legislation. No one asked about what transition time for fur farmers would be good. We fought for the legislation but we didn’t have much say about the details of it.