Will it save dogs or impede key health research? Two views of Ontario’s Bill 75

Debate over legislation to update animal testing rules will resume next month, with one lawyer fearing it will end important research into cardio-vascular disease without proper debate.

Meanwhile, an animal rights activist group argues the legislation is a move in the right direction after controversial testing involving dogs at London’s Lawson Research Institute came to light last summer in a story by the Investigative Journalism Bureau and Postmedia

The proposed updates to Ontario’s Animals Research Act are included in Bill 75, an omnibus bill with a primary focus on law and order and titled “Keeping Criminals Behind Bars Act.”

The bill is currently in its second reading, which is scheduled to resume when the Legislature returns from its winter break on March 23.

If passed, it would lay a framework to make changes to how animal research can happen in Ontario. Some of the details would come in specific regulations that will follow the legislation.

The key proposed change: The legislation would bar “invasive medical research” on cats and dogs.

There are exemptions, however. In some conditions the research would be allowed if it’s carried out for a veterinary purpose set out in the regulations. Animal research would also be allowed to happen if it’s pre-approved by the animal care committee of an organization.

The proposed legislation also aims to tighten up how animal care committees operate. For example, the new rules would require a veterinarian on each animal care committee. An animal care committee, and a third-party review, each both cleared the work at Lawson after the story broke.

The legislation came after Premier Doug Ford lashed out at the research work at Lawson, even vowing to “hunt down” any researcher who used dogs for medical testing. The program was shut down after the story broke.

Lawyer calls for more robust review

Lawyer Brian Gover has more than 40 years experience and has worked on some high-profile public commissions and inquiries, including the Walkerton tainted water disaster and the Air India bombing. He worries Bill 75 was written hastily in response to the red-hot public outrage to the Lawson study.

“I would urge the Premier to defer legislating in this area until there’s been robust public debate on this issue,” said Gover. “Years ago, we used to have white papers where governments would engage in consultation.”

He believes Lawson’s testing on dogs has led to “demonstrable benefits to human health.”

However because it’s such a divisive issue, he would like the province to step back and convene a panel of experts before moving ahead with legislation.

Gover also questioned why the proposed legislation is wrapped inside an omnibus bus bill, a practice that can limit debate of each piece of legislation.

The legislation has been applauded by Animal Justice, the group that worked with the Postmedia journalist who exposed the testing.

In a news release, Animal Justice said the proposed legislation “lays a strong foundation to end the suffering of dogs and cats in labs here in the province.” The same release called for the province to go further and make it mandatory that dogs and cats used in tests “are released from labs and placed in loving homes.”

The proposed legislation would also bar what critics describe as cosmetic surgery in pets, such as de-clawing in cats and ear-cropping in dogs.

Charu Chandrasekera is with the Canadian Institute for Animal-Free Science. She’s a strong supporter of the legislation because it would force medical researchers to use new testing methods, instead of using dogs and other animals by default.

“I think it would be one of the best things we could do for our province and, and and the country at large over time,” Chandrasekera said.