Ruth Jones MP on need to ban fur imports and sales
Twenty-five years ago, we did the same with the Fur Farming (Prohibition) Act, raising the bar and setting an example for our neighbours to follow. Countries like Austria (2005), France (2021) and even Norway (2025) have all implemented 'fur bans' of their own, showing we were ahead of the curve.
I am proud of our record on animal welfare. But before we absolve ourselves of being complicit in the fur trade, there is another step we can and must take: banning imports and sales.
Two decades ago, we were right to ban fur farming on moral grounds – but still it is legal to import fur from beautiful, intelligent animals like foxes, mink and chinchilla.
I have seen footage from a fur farm in Finland showing foxes with raw wounds, deformed feet and infected eyes. Then there were the obese, 'monster foxes' which were the result of selective breeding to increase their yield. Make no mistake – our ancestors may have used fur to survive the winter, but there is nothing natural about the fur industry today.
Five years after covid, experts are warning us the next pandemic might come from one of these farms, where conditions are appalling for animals but perfect for viruses to mutate and make the leap to humans. This issue is urgent as the risk of a zoonotic outbreak looms large.
I have been pushing for this change with my own piece of legislation, called the Fur (Import and Sale) Bill. If passed, it would ban the import of real fur products into Britain.
Last week I carried a petition to Downing Street for the Fur Free Britain campaign with more than a million signatures and support from singer Will Young and TOWIE star Pete Wicks.
Carrying the signatures to the famous black door, we were greeted by Chief Mouser, Larry, who showed great interest in our box. Afterwards an X account belonging to 'Larry the Cat' shared our photos, asking his nearly 900,000 followers to 'leave the fur wearing to the professionals'.
I know Argus readers will agree that if an animal product like fur is too cruel to make in Britain, it's also too cruel to import from overseas. It is cruel and unnecessary, and high time we put the fur trade out of fashion.
Ruth Jones is MP for Newport West and Islwyn.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Imported dogs could carry disease or behaviour risk, RSPCA warns
RSPCA spokesman David Bowles likened the process to 'Deliveroo for dogs' and called on the Government to tighten regulations on animal rescues. He told the BBC: 'The RSPCA's major concern is these dogs are essentially ticking time bombs – coming over, not being health tested. 'Diseases are now coming in through these dogs. They're affecting not just the dogs that are being imported, they could also affect the dogs already in this country and their owners. 'They've almost set up a Deliveroo for dogs and that is a real problem.' There is no requirement for rescue organisations to be licensed in England, Wales or Northern Ireland. It comes weeks after a bill that aims to stop animal smuggling and cruelty cleared the Commons with cross-party support. Legislation put forward by Liberal Democrat MP Dr Danny Chambers will reduce the number of animals for non-commercial entry into the UK, ban the import of puppies and kittens under six months old or heavily pregnant dogs and cats, and introduce a halt on the import of dogs and cats who have been 'mutilated', including having their ears docked. The MP for Winchester's Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill was supported by the Government, and will now proceed to the House of Lords on its passage to becoming law. Dr Chambers said: 'As a vet, I've seen the devastating consequences of puppy smuggling. It's unimaginably cruel to separate puppies and kittens from their mothers at a very young age, and then bring them across borders in substandard conditions where they're then sold for maximum profit by unscrupulous traders who prioritise profit over welfare.' He added: 'Careful consideration has been given to setting these limits, balancing the need to disrupt illegal trade with minimising impact on genuine pet owners. To underpin this, only an owner, not an authorised person, will be permitted to sign and declare that the movement of a dog or cat is non-commercial. He criticised the influence of social media on the increased demand for dogs with docked ears, and a party colleague hit out at the platforms' role in publishing animal abuse. He said: 'One reason that there is such an interest in dogs with cropped ears is that a lot of influencers on Instagram and other social media platforms pose with these dogs or show they have these new dogs with cropped ears. Many people aren't aware that this is a mutilation. 'They think it's how the dogs' ears normally look, and it drives a demand for dogs that look like this.'
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Young Australians have much higher student debt than generations before them, data shows
The government is about to cut student debt by 20% across the board – so how much debt do young Australians have, and how much has it changed? Labor's student debt relief bill is likely to pass with bipartisan support and will slash the Hecs/Help debt for about 3 million graduates by an average of $5,500, according to the government. Data from the tax office shows that the average Hecs/Help debt held by younger Australians increased by a third between 2009 and 2024, even with inflation taken into account. This coincides with a consistent increase in the time it will take to pay off the debt – now almost a decade. Some economists say Labor's 20% cut isn't the fairest way to relieve student debt, while higher education expert Prof Andrew Norton says 'more graduates will be caught on a debt treadmill, repaying less than the annual indexation on their Help balance'. Sign up: AU Breaking News email On Wednesday, ACT senator David Pocock fronted the media alongside five other independent MPs and a string of peak bodies calling for structural reform to higher education – including student tertiary fees. Under the Coalition's Job-Ready Graduates package (JRG), introduced in 2021, the student contribution for degrees including arts, law and business drastically increased, with students now accruing debts of about $17,000 per year of study. The federal government has deferred reforming the widely panned scheme to an independent tertiary commission, established this year in its interim phase. 'Labor want another review into something that we knew was broken when it was introduced,' Pocock said on Wednesday. 'Where is the courage from this government to embrace hard reform?' The independent member for Kooyong, Dr Monique Ryan, will this week table an amendment to the student debt bill to reverse the JRG package and change the timing of Hecs/Help indexation until after prepayments are made. (Student debts are indexed every year before the ATO takes into account the payments made on them, meaning the interest doesn't take into account the repayments.) 'If the government truly values education, it must find the capacity to fund it properly,' she said. The National Union of Students is on her side. Its president, Ashlyn Horton, said cutting debt was a 'long overdue move' that indicated Canberra 'might finally be listening' to concern about the rising cost of degrees. But she said it 'doesn't come close to fixing the structural mess that got us here'. In the meantime, the $50,000 arts degree is here, and dying with your debt is a real possibility.
Times
3 hours ago
- Times
How to make Great British Railways a success
Before Labour ministers choose slick slogans for their new state-run trains they should recall Henry Ford's words: 'Nothing happens until somebody sells something.' Contrary to what some in the rail sector and Whitehall seem to think, rail services cannot exist without their passengers — what they want and what they are prepared to pay. A herculean effort to win more customers from the airlines and road users is essential. Britain's railways are at a watershed. Under privatisation, passenger journeys almost doubled. By the 2010s, private franchises were running three times as many trains between London and Manchester as the old British Rail (BR) had in the early 1990s. During the two decades between privatisation and the pandemic, passenger journeys increased by 107 per cent and services by 32 per cent. Passenger satisfaction in Britain was higher than for any other major European railway. Revenue increased by 145 per cent in real terms, compared with only a 16 per cent rise in operating costs, and £14 billion of private investment went into improving the train fleet. • Ministers heading for union clash in bid for hi-tech rail travel Privatisation introduced innovations in marketing, ticketing and operational efficiency. The volume of rail travel in Britain rose to a level not seen since the 1930s, on a network half the size and with a very good safety record. The pandemic was devastating for rail. It wasn't just that train travel collapsed during the lockdowns, requiring subsidies of £20.5 billion in 2023-24 prices) to cover losses. People's travel and working behaviour changed, probably for ever. Traditional flows of revenue from business travel, first class and five-day commuter season tickets, particularly in London and the southeast, have fallen away. In the year to March only 13 per cent of journeys were made using season tickets, compared with 34 per cent before the pandemic. Even though passenger numbers are close to 100 per cent of pre-pandemic levels, revenue is still down by £1.4 billion, at 89.1 per cent. Passengers are paying less to travel outside the old peaks. The taxpayer continues to cover an unacceptably high annual subsidy of £12 billion for a sector that only delivers 2 per cent of all journeys taken by the public. Consequently, ministers must now prioritise growth as they prepare to introduce the bill to create the state-owned Great British Railways (GBR), almost 80 years after Clement Attlee first nationalised rail. Without a ruthless focus on what passengers want alongside a demand-led model, a spiral of decline — higher subsidy and fares — could easily take root. GBR risks being a solution in search of a problem and morphing into the ghost of BR unless ministers develop a viable long-term vision. New research from the Centre for Policy Studies highlights four key areas which, if supported, would deliver more passengers, more income and better services for passengers. • Great British Railways 'won't be run by civil servants' First, ministers should support a mixed model across the intercity high-speed network so GBR trains faces competition from non-subsidised 'open access' operators. For 25 years this model has successfully delivered passenger growth and satisfaction on the East Coast Main Line between London, the northeast and Scotland. It has meant better services, more routes, faster trains and cheaper tickets while also bringing more passengers to the route. This has led to new, popular rail operators entering the market, which has pushed the dominant, government-run train operator, LNER, to deliver better services for its customers. European railways that have copied this successful model have seen a 40 per cent increase in passengers and fare reductions of between 20 and 60 per cent. Second, GBR should not regulate itself, especially as the white paper proposes taking key sector powers away from the independent Office of Rail and Road. In no other regulated sector does the dominant market operator also control and deliver key elements of its own regulation, such as decisions on market access and charging. This could have huge implications for growth, open access and more rail freight. Only last week the environment secretary slammed the water companies for 'marking their own homework' and pledged to end 'operator self-monitoring'. But there is a risk that this will become the case on the railways. Third, GBR must adopt an unforgiving focus on making train travel as easy, cheap and user-friendly as possible, not least when designing a new GBR ticketing app to replace those of existing train companies. In addition to competing with popular ticketing sites it must be designed by the world's leading retail software companies rather than civil servants. GBR should deliver a 'Rail Miles' loyalty scheme, which is years overdue and could be linked with purchases made in the hospitality and retail sectors. • The Times View: Prejudice against private train operators is misguided Fourth, the vast 52,000-hectare railway estate can and must generate much more income. Commercial and residential development, renewable energy generation, light parcel freight, health hubs at stations alongside a higher-quality retail offer are all underused sources of income. We must learn from countries such as Japan, where railways earn at least one third of their revenue from non-ticket sources. Rail can and must be at the centre of Britain's industrial, employment, housing and regeneration strategies. The ghost of BR hangs over GBR. But if the passenger is put first and proven models are embraced then the future could be very different. Rail might not get another chance. Tony Lodge is a research fellow at the Centre for Policy Studies and author of Rail's Last Chance, published today by the CPS
