EFRA Committee Backs Animal Welfare Import Standards in UK-EU SPS Agreement

Parliamentary committee calls for Swiss-style exemptions to avoid undercutting of farmers from products produced abroad where animals may be treated worse than in the UK. 

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Select Committee has released a major report calling on the Government to ensure that the UK-EU Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement, currently being negotiated, protects UK farmers from being undercut by imports produced to lower animal welfare standards. 

The cross-party committee's report, published on the 5th February strongly urges Ministers to seek a Swiss-style carve-out from dynamic alignment with the EU on animal welfare standards - a recommendation that aligns with what animal protection organisations have been advocating since negotiations began in 2025.

Protecting UK Standards from Being Undermined

The committee's key recommendation is that the Government must ensure UK farmers are not undercut by products from EU countries with lower animal welfare standards.

EFRA Committee Chair Alistair Carmichael MP said: 

“Making it easier to trade with our European neighbours should present a feast of benefits for British businesses, farmers and consumers. But there is a lot on the menu for the Government to consider, and our recommendations aim to help Ministers set the table. 

“For starters, we strongly urge the Government to aim for a Swiss-style carve out of dynamic alignment with the EU regarding animal welfare. We must avoid unnecessary burdens and undercutting of farmers from products produced abroad where animals are treated worse than in the UK. This would present a zero-sum game and a threat to our already wary industry. 

This concern connects to broader debates about what animal welfare groups have termed the "cruelty loophole" in UK trade policy. During a recent Westminster Hall debate on 23rd January, MPs discussed how the UK can ban or restrict practices domestically while still importing products made using those same methods. As Green Party MP Adrian Ramsay put it during that debate: "If a practice is too cruel for food produced in Britain, it should be too cruel for food imported into Britain."

Why an Animal Welfare Carve-Out Matters

The UK-EU SPS negotiations seek closer cooperation that can reduce checks and paperwork at the border. However, this raises questions about dynamic alignment – in other words, whether the UK would follow future EU rules over time on agri-food products.

An animal welfare carve-out would provide a clear safeguard: it would make explicit that, whatever form the SPS deal takes, it must not limit the UK's ability to set and strengthen animal welfare rules, including measures affecting imports, even if those go further than EU requirements. Without such an exemption, dynamic alignment with the EU could constrain the UK's regulatory sovereignty on animal welfare.

The committee specifically warns against dynamic alignment that could allow products from countries where "animals are treated worse than in the UK" to enter the British market freely.

This is why Animal Policy International has been urging the Government to secure an explicit animal welfare carve-out in the UK–EU SPS agreement, so that smoother trade does not come at the cost of animals or become a barrier to addressing these concerns.

The Swiss Precedent

The committee's call for a "Swiss-style exemption" references the successful negotiations between Switzerland and the EU in 2025, where Switzerland secured comprehensive animal welfare carve-outs in their Common Food Safety Area Protocol. Article 7 of that agreement allowed Switzerland to maintain higher welfare standards while still benefiting from reduced trade barriers.

During the recent Westminster Hall debate, Labour MP Sam Carling specifically asked the Government to confirm whether it is "seeking similar exemptions for animal welfare in the UK-EU negotiations" to ensure "we retained the ability to restrict imports that do not meet British welfare standards."

Switzerland has since used these protections to ban fur imports from cruel farming methods and to require clear labelling of imported products produced using inhumane methods - all without disrupting broader EU-Swiss trade relations.

Government Must Communicate with the Public

Chair Alistair Carmichael called for a "national conversation on the realities of a future agreement."

This reflects public sentiment: 77% of Britons believe that when the UK bans a farming practice for being too cruel, imports of products produced the same way should also be banned. Among livestock farmers, support for restricting low-welfare imports reaches 92%.

What This Means

The EFRA Committee's report provides significant parliamentary backing for animal welfare exemptions in the SPS Agreement. With negotiations ongoing, the Government now faces clear cross-party pressure to ensure that any trade deal does not compromise the UK's ability to maintain higher animal welfare standards than those required by EU law.

In the recent Westminster Hall debate, Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs Dame Angela Eagle stated that "This Government will not allow that legacy to be undermined through the back door by trade policy" and confirmed the Government would maintain "red lines in our negotiations." However, she did not specify whether those red lines would explicitly protect animal welfare measures, including the UK's ability to restrict low-welfare imports and secure an animal welfare carve-out in the UK–EU SPS agreement.

The committee has made clear it will continue to scrutinise both the negotiations and any eventual agreement. In its response to the report, the Government must now set out the practical measures it will take to protect the UK from lower-welfare imports.

Animal Policy International continues to call for explicit animal welfare exemptions to dynamic alignment in the UK-EU SPS Agreement, modeled on Article 7 of the Swiss Protocol, covering farm animal welfare standards, mandatory labelling requirements, and import restrictions.