Podcast: Failing our animals? Canada’s D grade on welfare explained

How does Canada stack up against other countries’ animal protection policies?

This month’s episode of the Informed Animal Ally welcomes Melissa Matlow of World Animal Protection to discuss the Animal Protection Index (API). The API ranks 50 countries around the globe based on their animal protection policies, giving them a letter grade from A to G.

Note: This written discussion has been edited for length.

Chantelle: This month we’re so excited to introduce Melissa Matlow, the campaign Director of World Animal Protection, to talk about her organization’s Animal Protection Index. Melissa, thank you so much for joining us.

To start off, I would love to hear more about your role at World Animal Protection and what led you to get involved in animal advocacy and your history in this work.

Melissa: Sure. So I’m the Campaign Director. I oversee our wildlife and farming campaigns in Canada. We’re an international organization, so our Canadian campaigns align with our international strategy.

What led me to animal advocacy was that I grew up in the Niagara region not far from a place called Marineland, and that was my first place that I picked up a placard and protested.

I met a local grassroots organization called Niagara Action for Animals. And I started volunteering with them. I invited them into my classroom in high school to start talking about animal welfare issues, and I thought they were gonna talk about circuses and zoos and all the issues I understood as a young, compassionate animal lover. They talked about farming and that transformed me. Everything that I did with them really led to where I am today.

Amy: I was expecting you to say they talked about like, cats and dogs or shelters. That’s pretty amazing that they did talk about farming and you got to learn about those issues at that time.

Melissa: It was quite interesting. I was not expecting it. I thought we’d talk about cosmetic testing. I remember not eating my lunch that day at school. I remember feeling very uncomfortable about what I was learning as well.

I should add that my parents came from farming backgrounds, so it was difficult in our home to talk about this. I think that’s how I started learning how to advocate and lobby is through my family, because it was a very uncomfortable conversation for all of us and I had to figure out how not to offend them, but to see it the way I did and they of course shared how they saw it.

And, you know, farming was very different when they were on the farm than it is today.

Amy: That resonates with me as well. My family’s not in farming, but the experience of learning to be an advocate at a young age through conversations and still loving your family. Thank you for sharing that.

Amy: So today we’re going to talk about the Animal Protection Index. I understand it to be an ambitious project that evaluates the laws and policy commitments of 50 different countries. Can you tell us more about this initiative and why it’s so important?

Melissa: Yeah, it ranked 50 countries, as you said, from A to G: A being the highest score to G being the weakest. It was on government policy and legislation that protects animals and improves their welfare.

There were a number of categories covered: farm animals, wildlife, companion animals, animals used for work and recreation, and scientific research.

The first ranking was done in 2014. We produced a second edition in 2020 with the methodology refined slightly. And it was really meant to be a tool to inspire conversations and influence countries to improve their animal protection legislation.

It is an ambitious project. It took a while just to do the report and to ensure that there was enough in-depth information about each country, but also consistent and fair for the ranking.

And we also sent the reports before we launched them to the Chief Veterinary Officers for all the countries to invite their feedback as well, which did help us tweak the methodology in the second edition. So it was meant as well to start a conversation with them about how we should be measuring progress on animal welfare.

Amy: That’s amazing. I’m curious how many different people ended up reviewing the laws.

Melissa: For the 50 countries, I do know that we actually had great legal support pro bono from DLA Piper. And then the country campaign teams would review and provide feedback and other information that they wouldn’t necessarily know. Because sometimes you don’t know about policy commitments from reading legislation as well, or the intention behind it. And there’s other things we wanted to raise.

I know there was one project manager for all 50 and then DLA Piper and then all our offices in 12 countries. And probably some consultants in other countries where we don’t have staff.

Amy: That’s an amazing undertaking.

Melissa: It was, and I should say while World Animal Protection led on this, there was a steering group of other animal protection organizations that helped. IFAW and HSI, which is now Humane World for Animals, Compassion in World Farming, and RSPCA were part of this advisory group that helped us with the methodology to begin with in 2014, and then we took it forward.

Chantelle: What an amazing project. I was going through this report and there’s so much incredible data to sift through and explore. I was thinking we could just go over some important highlights for people today.

Which countries scored the highest in terms of animal welfare?

Top countries for animal welfare: UK, Switzerland, Austria, Sweden, Netherlands, and Denmark

Melissa: No country received an A, but the UK, Switzerland, Austria, Sweden, Netherlands, and Denmark, all received a B. So they did the best.

I think A was given in 2014 to New Zealand. I’m not sure why their ranking dropped. But that might have been a refinement of the strategy as well.

And it just shows how difficult and complex it is. It is really a benchmark. There might be things that some countries find unfair. But I think that the increase in number of countries at the B level probably is a good sign of progress.

Animal protection laws aren’t always enforced

Amy: It’s so interesting that you bring up New Zealand because I went to New Zealand in 2016. I went there on purpose because I knew that their laws were quite good and I wanted to see firsthand what it looked like on the farms.

So I ended up doing kind of like workaway or WWOOFing type things, where you work in exchange for room and food.

I was on a number of different farms that were smaller scale. Some of them more commercial than others. And I witnessed harms to animals. Some more than others and varying in type and scale.

And it was really interesting and it stuck with me. I asked one farmer, are you aware of these codes of practice that exist? And, he was like, no, I don’t know what you’re talking about.

So it’s interesting because we have scale of laws, and then there’s also the whole side of implementation, which is a difficult to evaluate.

Melissa: Yeah, enforcement wasn’t ranked in terms of capabilities and implementation. We are ranking the legislation for how they look on paper and how they consider animal sentience, but there’s a whole other level of changing attitudes and enforcement that needs to go along with it.

Amy: What are the key lessons we can learn from the countries that do get high ratings in terms of their policies and best practices?

Canada doesn’t have national animal welfare legislation

Melissa: Well, Sweden I think ranked highly because they have a national animal welfare law, for instance. And I think many listeners might be shocked to know that Canada doesn’t have national animal welfare legislation. We have animal cruelty provisions under the Criminal Code to react to animal cruelty, but no proactive legislation to raise the standards for animal welfare for all animals nationally in a broad sense.

The UK has banned fur farming and has legislation that goes beyond EU requirements for banning sow stalls. And there has been progress a year after we launched the report in 2020, the UK passed legislation formally recognizing sentient beings in domestic law and an action plan for animal welfare.

So these are all types of legal progress that we wanted the Animal Protection Index (API) to inspire.

And then I would say Netherlands is a great example for wildlife because they take a very precautionary approach to mitigating the risk of keeping certain animals, particularly wild animals, as pets through the positive list approach versus a negative list.

So in different categories, different countries really are leading the way. I would say Netherlands and Belgium are leading on the positive list approach to try to phase out the exotic pet trade.

Amy: And for those who are listening who aren’t sure of what Canada has, we certainly do not have a national law declaring the sentience of animals.

And in fact, animals are not protected under our Constitution. They’re protected under other laws, but really there’s this sense that they’re only protected because they fall under the dominion of people and not protected in of their own rights.

And then when it comes to this positive list that the Netherlands has, this is something that we talk about all the time at VHS and we’re advocating at the provincial level because the animal laws are broken up into provinces and so it’s difficult to get this national approach, but it’s even more difficult to even get a provincial approach.

We haven’t made a lot of progress with it, but we keep at it.

Melissa: That’s right. There’s this patchwork of different legislations across municipal bylaws, provincial laws, and we really need the federal leadership to really harmonize and raise the bar.

Chantelle: Absolutely. So as you said, Melissa, there aren’t any countries that have an A score, but I was curious what a country would need to do if we were to work ambitiously to receive an A score on the index.

Melissa: A country would need to:

• Formally recognize animal sentience in national legislation;
• Have one sufficiently resourced, accountable government body leading on animal welfare;
• Have strong laws to prohibit animal suffering, including through neglect and abandonment;
• Have specific laws in animal welfare standards for the various ways animals are used—because those require different standards, whether animals are on farms or in captivity;
• Phase out inhumane and unnecessary industries;
• And be supportive of international animal welfare standards through the World Organization for Animal Health.

So to check off all those boxes would get a country an A. So it’s ambitious, but not impossible. As we see some countries are leading in some areas, showing that it can be done.

Amy: Also very reasonable. We’re not asking for the moon here. I think we’re asking for something that, with all of our technology and knowledge, could be put into place within one season of a political power essentially.

Chantelle: And there’s also organizations working towards all of these things in Canada.

Melissa: Absolutely. It’s a no-brainer that animals should be protected because they think and feel in love and are sentient, and it is a longstanding campaign of many animal organizations to get there.

I think the hardest part has been to get one ministry to lead on this.

And you know, we talked about it in the National Animal Protection debate that we co-hosted with Vancouver Humane Society and other organizations: how do we reconcile the conflict of interest where animal welfare is primarily under the Ministry of Agriculture’s domain federally? Getting that decision and having a different ministry lead on it is probably the hardest thing. And then once we have that, to me that’s a very important incremental step for Canada.

Amy: Absolutely, and I think that feeds into the next question; how does Canada compare to the other countries analyzed?

Melissa: This probably doesn’t surprise you both, but Canada received a D. We sit on the lower half of the ranking. We ranked below India, the Philippines, Brazil, Australia and most of Europe. And we ranked alongside countries like Kenya, South Africa, Columbia, Peru, countries with much lower GDPs. So it means there’s substantial room for improvement.

I think that might have been a surprise for many people who don’t follow animal welfare legislation. People tend to think of Canada as being more progressive on that, maybe because we have been progressive on other issues, but not necessarily on animal welfare.

Amy: And just for context, what does the scale go down to? What’s the lowest grade you can receive?

Melissa: The lowest grade was a G.

Amy: Thank you for sharing that. I certainly we’re lucky we’re not at a G, but that’s still good enough.

Chantelle: Canada has a great reputation for being polite and a kind country, but our laws are really not that kind to animals.

Chantelle: Among the categories the index evaluates, where does Canada perform well? Where do we perform the best?

Melissa: This might surprise you, but in the provincial laws against animal suffering—and I know that’s not good enough and there’s so much room for improvement there—we have seen steady progress with provinces improving their animal cruelty laws.

And I suppose when you think of the public response to an egregious animal cruelty case, it’s understandable that governments would be persuaded to address that better with stronger enforcement and stronger tools to convict people. Again, we lack that forward thinking and raising the bar for animal welfare in the ways that society still finds it acceptable to use animals.

Progress in Canada on animal captivity

Melissa: We have made a lot of progress with the ban on keeping whales in captivity. So, we receive some good marks for that, but it’s only for whales, dolphins, and porpoises. Canada would need to extend that protection to other wildlife species to have a higher grade.

And fortunately we have seen progress in the last Parliament with the Jane Goodall Bill to increase protection for more species. That bill, of course, died when the parliament prorogued and then the election was called.

But we have seen a commitment under Prime Minister Carney and the Liberals to build on that progress, which is great.

Canada bans cosmetic animal testing

Melissa: While we received a failing grade of E in our 2020 report for not protecting animals in scientific research, I have to add that we’re going to have a better mark in the next edition (if there is one, and I hope there is) for banning cosmetic testing.

So a lot of progress actually came after our 2020 report was launched. That ban took effect December, 2023, so we probably will go from worst to first in that category. It just shows how quickly things can evolve.

I would say the strongest area was the animal cruelty laws in provinces. So we did look at provincial jurisdiction where provincial jurisdiction made sense. It wasn’t just federal laws, but of course we wanna see the federal government play a leadership role and strengthening laws where provinces are still falling behind.

Chantelle: Absolutely. That’s so important. And then we can have some consistency.

Amy: So on the flip side of all of that, where would you say Canada has the most room for improvement?

Melissa: I would say farm animal welfare. There’s still not enough legal protections for farm animals on the farm. There are the codes of practice that are voluntary.

There’s been some progress on strengthening transport regulations, but still not enough. Particularly for such a large country like Canada, our regulations still allow animals to be transported long distances before they are required to be fed and given water and rest.

I think there’s still so much more to do for animals caught up in the wildlife trade for exotic pets and zoos.

Canada did show leadership through the whale and dolphin ban through Bill S203, and so that’s a great opportunity for us to expand on that for other species.

Canada should have a Ministry of Animal Welfare

Melissa: Lastly, we need overarching national animal welfare legislation and one ministry to take the leadership role. Whether we can get that Minister of Animal Welfare, or at least make this under a ministry where there is no conflict of interest with objectives for growing the industry, like a Ministry of Agriculture has. And of course there’s so many other species to look at besides farm animals. So it doesn’t really make sense under agriculture either for that reason.

So those would be the biggest areas of improvement, I would say. But there’s plenty of room everywhere.

Amy: I appreciate you bringing that up—the idea that agriculture can’t police itself.

That’s something I’ve noticed at the provincial level. There are a number of bodies that do the work and then there are secondary bodies that observe the work that is done.

And that happens in child welfare; that happens in privacy. And there’s essentially this like intentional role of an ombuds person or ombuds ministry that is making sure that the ministry is accountable.

When I found that out that that was possible, I thought, what a lovely thing to have is checks and balances within a government. Because so often government is this end all be all. And the idea of having accountability built in builds so much more public trust.

Melissa: It’s so important. And also I think the beauty of animal welfare is it’s so intersectional. It’s a solution to so many other issues, whether it’s public health, disease spread, climate change, biodiversity loss, antimicrobial resistance. It deserves its own place because it can support other goals and other ministries related to those issues as well.

And you know, it’s for a long time been neglected in agriculture and really no home elsewhere. Even with the whale bill with that falling under the Ministry of Environment, there was a discomfort with staff because they didn’t see it as an environmental issue and they didn’t see animal welfare as part of their expertise or mandate.

It needs its own place really.

Chantelle: That’s a great point. We’re bringing up animal agriculture so much because that’s one of our main areas of focus as an organization and on this show. It’s got such massive suffering associated with it on an enormous, unimaginable scale of animal lives.

But I do know that now that Canada is moving away from the United States as a trade partner, we have trade opportunities with other countries and we do have trade of products that come from animal bodies. So there might be a natural evolution towards the standards that these other countries have.

Melissa: Yes, that would be a good thing out of all the tension and challenges we have in our country today. We see that from the political parties encouraging this shift towards finding new trading partners, and that could help us raise the bar for animal welfare in order to trade with them to get these markets.

Amy: It’s certainly how New Zealand has put as much attention as they have, is because their ministry related to animals falls within what’s called their Department of Primary Industries. There’s only a few things that fit within that department, and they’re essentially the things that have the most export and bring the country the most money. And then as a result they see the public risk.

They had a few high profile incidences of animals being transported to other countries and it not going well. And so that led to quite a few changes within their ministry.

Chantelle: Melissa, what changes would you like to see in Canada’s animal protection policies?

Reintroduce the Jane Goodall Bill on captivity

Melissa: So many changes, but if I were to think of where we are right now and where we could go next, I would like to see Canada reintroduce the Jane Goodall Bill and really work to end captive wildlife entertainment. There was strong support among animal protection organizations including the top zoos in Canada.

There is an opportunity to really phase out those roadside zoos and raise the bar for zoos to have a purpose.

We have collaborated with the Toronto Zoo. Some people might be surprised by that, because we don’t agree with captivity unless it’s a last resort that serves the animal’s best interest.

And we have to remind people, sanctuaries are still captivity. It’s not the best thing we can hope for for those animals, because they can’t be released in the wild. We support it if you’re rehabilitating and releasing an animal into the wild and it serves a conservation benefit.

That’s what the Jane Goodall Bill is meant to do, it’s meant to raise that bar and really restrict the breeding of these animals unless there is that purpose. And I think that’s really important and it’s really exciting to see Canada actually lead in this area.

If we could ban elephant and great ape captivity, we’d be the first country to do so.

Restrict the wildlife trade

Melissa: And I think we can also build on restrictions to the wildlife trade. We saw that in the Liberal platform that there is a commitment to address the illegal wildlife trade through modernizing our system at the border.

I think we can build on the data we collect at the border through a better system to show where the risks are because the legal trade is massive. It’s not sustainable and we just need to show where all these animals are coming from, what the purpose is.

Another benefit risk analysis, like whose livelihoods are benefiting from this? Where are these animals coming from? Are they at risk of becoming endangered?

We know their animal welfare would be poor in these systems, and there’s a lot of disease risk. So I think that’s another area I’d like to move on. Given the platform commitment, it’s a great opportunity.

Introduce minimum welfare standards in legislation

Melissa: And then definitely it’d be great to have minimal animal welfare standards in legislation. The codes of practice have moved the needle a bit on farm animal welfare, but we need legislation to protect these animals too.

Amy: Absolutely, and I think many of our listeners know, right now the way the codes of practice are incorporated into law actually serve as a protection for the farmers rather than a protection for the animals.

So even though we have these standards that are being developed collaboratively—and I would say they’re minimum standards—they still aren’t serving a purpose of protection at this point in time.

Amy: We like to leave our listeners with an action that they take. What can people do to help improve animal protection policies?

Melissa: You know, I think one of the most important things to do is to develop a relationship with your local MLA or Member of Parliament, your provincial or federal representative. Build a relationship, listen to them and their interests, share your interests, but really work together on where you can make a difference.

That is one of the most powerful places of influence we have, is through voting for our MP. And a lot of people don’t know that they’re open to these ideas.

Look at how big the Animal Protection Index is. It covers a range of issues. I would hope that any MP would find something in there they agree with, that they could work towards.

A member of Parliament can introduce a private member’s bill. They can introduce petitions in the House of Commons.That is not only a free PSA in the House of Commons to all MPs when they read it, but the highest performing petitions do stand out to the Ministers responsible and they can act on it.

So I would say that’s number one.

There’s many things you could do, but you really want to use your influence. And so if listeners have other areas of influence; maybe they’re involved in financial investments, they can work that way to change policy. But I think working with local elected officials is a great way to do it.

Chantelle: Absolutely. That’s vadvice. Thank you so for coming here and sharing all of your expertise on this topic. Is there anything else that you would like to share with our audience with regard to this or any of your other work?

Melissa: No, I think we covered so much. Thank you for all the questions that pulled out what I would want to share. Do you have anything that stood out in the Animal Protection Index?

Chantelle: I think it’s just very telling to see how far down on the list Canada really is. I think a lot of people see the laws as protections for animals that are strong enough. And they think, for instance, purchasing animal products doesn’t really make that big of an impact because there are protections in place for the animals that are farms or in slaughterhouses. And really what we end up seeing is that those protections are not really there for animals. One of the biggest impacts we can make is shifting away from purchasing those animal products and consuming them.

Melissa: Definitely.

Amy: I think the other thing is taking this guide and sharing it with your MLA or MP. I think many MLAs and MPs don’t know anything about animal protection laws. And so it can be an eye-opening experience to say, Hey, look, this guide exists and this is how we are ranked. To show that that is a little bit embarrassing for the country.

And I think shame can be a not great tool, but in this case, when you’re not directing it at a person, but you’re directing it at a country, it can be a motivator for politicians to go, we could do better.

I would just really recommend sharing this guide as much as possible with people that you want to influence.

Melissa: That’s a great idea. We’ve seen the Animal Protection Index referenced by MPs when they’ve introduced their own private members’ bills in Parliament. So that’s another thing to raise in your meeting with your MP and inspire them to consider doing a bill.

Even if it doesn’t pass, it still gets on the agenda and facilitates a debate, which is really important.

And the more these issues are discussed in Parliament, the more likely the ministers, the government of the day are likely to move on it with their own bill or regulations.

I am encouraged by how much Canada has done since we launched the Animal Protection Index:

• Banned whale and dolphin captivity;
• Banned the elephant ivory and rhino horn trade;
• Banned cosmetic testing.

I know sometimes we take a few steps forward and then there’s a few steps backward with the ag gag bills and certain provinces. So it’s always a shift forward and a shift backward.

But we are inching forward and I think we can do so much more. I think that comment you made, Chantelle, about farm animals and how many there are and how it’s a focus for Vancouver Humane Society. What if the next Animal Protection Index was ranked according to laws based on the number of animals impacted?

Because where we have seen progress, let’s face it, it is smaller number of animals impacted. And it’s been very hard to move the needle in the industries where massive number of animals are impacted. It’s really systemic cruelty to animals, isn’t it?

Or, you know, it goes under the radar because it’s just seen as generally accepted practices. Business as usual.

Chantelle: Absolutely. Yeah. the hardest places to make changes are where the most people are impacted and the most people, and that is also where the most animal lives are affected.

Please join us again next month as we break down the legislative process in Canada and how you can advocate at each stage.