New Zealanders have high expectations of how animals are treated – whether they are native birds, animals on farms, or companion animals in our homes. Unfortunately, our animal welfare system is failing the animals it was designed to protect.
The welfare of animals is currently overshadowed by the interests of the agriculture, trade, and entertainment sectors. Animals deserve better. They need independent representation at parliamentary level. Aotearoa New Zealand needs a Commissioner for Animals.
New Zealanders have high expectations of how animals are treated – whether they are native birds, animals on farms, or companion animals in our homes. Unfortunately, our animal welfare system is failing the animals it was designed to protect.
The welfare of animals is currently overshadowed by the interests of the agriculture, trade, and entertainment sectors. Animals deserve better. They need independent representation at parliamentary level. Aotearoa New Zealand needs a Commissioner for Animals.
FAQs
Our animal welfare system is broken and allows for animals to be the victims of severe cruelty, exploitation, and neglect. In the current framework, the government ministers responsible for increasing productivity across the animal agriculture sector are also responsible for the welfare of the animals being exploited by those systems.
Without independent oversight or accountability, the pursuit of profit often overrides the welfare of animals.
A Commissioner for Animals would change this. An independent commissioner would act on behalf of animals, without bias and free from industry pressure. They would help ensure that laws, policies, and enforcement genuinely uphold the Animal Welfare Act.
New Zealand’s Animal Welfare Act is legislation that sets out the obligations of animal owners or people in charge of animals.
The two key areas of focus of the Animal Welfare Act are:
- Care of animals
- Conduct towards animals
The framework of the Animal Welfare Act includes:
- Establishing a duty of care for animals
- Setting out the obligations of animal owners or people in charge of animals; they are required to meet an animal’s physical, health, and behavioural needs, and must alleviate pain or distress.
- Provisions to prevent ill treatment and inadequate care of animals.
Originally enacted in 1999 the Act is updated through amendments as needed. For example:
- 2015 – updated to recognise animals as sentient beings
- 2015 – updated to incorporate the ban on animal testing for cosmetic products and ingredients
- 2022 – updated to incorporate the ban on live animal exports
You can find out more about the Animal Welfare Act here
There are several issues with the current system which lead to the welfare of animals being abused or ignored:
The key issues are
- Lack of independent oversight
- Conflicts of interest
- Poor enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act
- Insufficient resourcing
Codes of Welfare
Developed by the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC), codes of welfare set minimum standards and recommended best practice. They provide guidance on how to comply with the Animal Welfare Act, and failure to meet a minimum standard in a code may be used as evidence to support a prosecution.
Unfortunately, codes of welfare often dilute the intention of the Animal Welfare Act – for example many codes permit practices that are illegal under the Act, and some codes have gone decades without a comprehensive review.
Examples
- For farmed animals, the Animal Welfare Act is routinely undermined by its own supporting codes of welfare. These codes permit practices that would be considered unacceptable under the Act’s principles – including the use of cages for hens and fish, and farrowing crates for pigs.
- Animal entertainment industries such as rodeo and horse racing also operate in ways that violate the intent of the Animal Welfare Act. Most standard rodeo practices breach the Act’s protections, yet the industry continues due to a deeply flawed code of welfare that enables harmful practices to persist. Similarly, the horse racing industry is largely self‑regulated, with MPI and the SPCA lacking the jurisdiction needed to enforce the Act and ensure horses are protected from harm.
You can find out more about the issues associated with our current animal welfare systems here
- Animal welfare currently sits within the Minister of Agriculture’s portfolio. The Minister’s core role is to ‘support the New Zealand food and fibre sector to be productive and prosperous’ and ‘advance New Zealand’s agriculture and export opportunities’. This creates an inherent conflict between promoting agricultural production and safeguarding the animals used within those systems.
- MPI, which ‘operates across the whole supply chain of primary production’ is also charged with administering the Animal Welfare Act. This dual role means that the same agency responsible for promoting agricultural industries is also tasked with regulating them – a structural conflict that enables industry interests to shape animal‑welfare policy.
- Animal‑entertainment industries such as horse and greyhound racing largely self‑regulate, with minimal external oversight. MPI and the SPCA have limited jurisdiction over these sectors, leaving the welfare of racing animals largely in the hands of the industries themselves.
- The two advisory bodies created under the Act – the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) and the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee (NAEAC) – are not fully independent. Conflicts of interest within NAWAC are also a concern. Rather than being comprised primarily of animal welfare experts, the committee includes many members from farming, veterinary, and other animal use industries, raising questions about the independence of the advice it provides.
New Zealand does not have a Ministry for Animals or a Minister of Animal Welfare. Instead, animal welfare sits within the Minister of Agriculture’s office – this minister’s core role being to ‘support the New Zealand food and fibre sector to be productive and prosperous’ and ‘advance New Zealand’s agriculture and export opportunities’. This creates an inherent conflict between promoting animal agricultural and safeguarding the welfare of the animals exploited within those systems.
We have an Associate Minister for Agriculture who has oversight of animal welfare. In the current Coalition Government, that’s ACT MP Andrew Hoggard – a lifelong dairy farmer, former president of Federated Farmers and board member of the International Dairy Federation. Minister Hoggard is not an animal welfare expert, and his track record shows a clear bias toward industry rather than the welfare of animals. Notable examples include his decision to reinstate the ban on live animal exports by sea, ignoring a High Court ruling to ban farrowing crates, and his outspoken support for rodeo.
The welfare of animals cannot be properly protected until there is independent oversight of animal welfare at parliamentary level.
Two committees – the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) and the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee (NAEAC) – advise the government on animal welfare. However, their advice is not binding and ministers are not required to act on their recommendations.
NAWAC develops and reviews the codes of welfare, which set minimum standards and best‑practice guidance for different species and activities. But NAWAC has no accountability for its work programme, resulting in significant delays. Reviews can take four to six years once they begin, leaving outdated codes in place and limiting opportunities for public consultation.
Conflicts of interest within NAWAC are also a concern. Rather than being comprised primarily of animal welfare experts, the committee includes many members from farming, veterinary, and other animal use industries, raising questions about the independence of the advice it provides.
The Commissioner for Animals would act independently on all matters relating to animal welfare whilst upholding the intention of the Animal Welfare Act.
This would include
- Providing impartial oversight to ensure the enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act is upheld equally across all industries and trades.
. - Reviewing the current animal welfare systems and making recommendations for improvements.
. - Reporting to parliamentary select committees on petitions, Bills, and Acts of Parliament that could impact animals.
. - Ensuring committees or agencies with responsibility for animal welfare are formed of experts in animal care and welfare, without personal or professional conflicts of interest.
- Sign the petition (below) calling for a Commissioner for Animals
- Talk to your local MP about the urgent need for independent representation for animals in parliament. We’ve created tips and guidelines for contacting your MP, here.
- Follow our Commissioner for Animals campaign updates through SAFE’s emails and social media
have signed. Let's get to 40,000
As it stands, welfare of animals is overshadowed by the interests of the trade, entertainment, and agriculture sectors.
But there is a simple solution – the animals of Aotearoa New Zealand need independent representation at parliamentary level.
Join us in calling for a Commissioner for Animals by adding your name below.
