Is the UK going to end animal testing? Science Minister promises plan for speeding up replacements by summer

The government has pledged to develop and publish a plan in the next few months to speed up replacing live animals in scientific and medical testing.

On Monday evening (19 February), MPs from the Petitions Committee debated on two animal testing-related petitions. One called for an end to the use of dogs in testing and research in the UK, and was signed by more than 30,000 people, while the other called for an end to the use of animals in toxicity tests - and for the government to prioritise non-animal methods - which was signed by nearly 110,000 people.

The announcement, which also included a funding boost for research and development into alternatives to live animals, was made by the UK's Science Minister, and seemed to herald a commitment from government to phase out the controversial practice. Politicians also heard that over 1.5 million experimental procedures involving animals were carried out in 2022, with 4% of them assessed as non-recovery - meaning the animal died - and another 4% were classed as severe.

But what was actually announced - and what does it mean for animal testing in the UK? Here's everything you need to know:

What did MPs say about animal testing?

During the debate on Monday, Andrew Griffith, the UK's Minister for Science, Innovation and Technology, said the number of signatories to the two petitions showed the strength of public feeling on the matter. He said in his view, " the day cannot come quickly enough when we are able to end the practice of animal testing", but despite the UK being one of the world’s leading nations in the development of non-animal methods, "we are not quite at that moment when we can fully replace animal testing".

The UK's National Centre for the 'Three Rs' - which in an animal testing context, stand for replacement, reduction, and refinement - received around £10 million a year in funding, he said, and the UK saw a 10% reduction in the use of animals in research in 2022. But Griffith added: "Despite that funding, I believe that more can be done."

Ahead of the debate, he said he had asked UK Research and Innovation to double its investment in research to achieve the three Rs and develop non-animal alternatives from £10 million to £20 million for the next financial year. "In addition," he continued, "I can announce that this summer, following on from work done by my predecessors and across other departments, the government will publish a plan to accelerate the development, validation and uptake of technologies and methods to reduce reliance on the use of animals in science."

Griffith also said he would restart the public attitudes to animal research survey, which had been paused since the Covid-19 pandemic. The Home Office also had plans to soon increase the fee for licences to "perhaps shift some of the presumption away from defaulting to testing with animals", and planned to review the duration licences were granted for as well, he said.

The announcement was broadly welcomed across the committee, and concerns about both the necessity and efficacy of testing on animals like dogs - as well as the welfare of animals involved in testing - were also echoed by MPs across the political spectrum. Opposition spokesperson in the debate, Labour's Chi Onwurah, said the party's position was "that the unnecessary suffering of defenceless animals is unequivocally wrong".

"From the Hunting Act 2004, which banned the cruel practice of hunting with dogs, to the Animal Welfare Act 2006, which put in place strong domestic protections for pets, livestock and wild animals, we have used the power of government to protect animals," she said. "We introduced the offence of causing unnecessary suffering, mutilation and animal fighting, and we banned the testing of cosmetic products on animals in 1998."

Onwurah said the last Labour government had a record to be proud of in terms of animal welfare and testing, "and, if we are privileged to form the next government, we will build on that legacy".

What has the reaction been so far?

In a post on X - formerly known as Twitter - the RSPCA's animals in science department said it welcomed the announcement. The charity's CEO, Chris Sherwood, said: "For many years, the RSPCA has been leading calls for bolder action to accelerate the transition to non-animal technologies and approaches in science. The announcement of a new plan with this aim is a promising start and we look forward to seeing more detail.

"The UK has the opportunity to place itself at the forefront of innovation and be a leader in the development and use of the next generation of scientific approaches," he continued. "Not only will this reduce impacts on animals and help towards phasing-out their use in research and testing, but it will also advance science and benefit the UK economy."

But Cruelty Free International, an advocacy group calling for an end to animal experimentation, was concerned the announcement did not go far enough. Chief executive Michelle Thew said: “These commitments are welcome but fall short of the necessary government action required to establish the UK as a global leader in the development of the non-animal testing methods.

"A greater increase in funding, in line with the levels for similar ground-breaking technologies in the UK, needs to be accompanied by innovative incentives to encourage scientists and industry to move away from the current use of animals," she continued. "Without taking bold steps forward we will be condemned to a never-ending cycle of small reductions rather than the transformative step forward which is needed to meet the aspirations of the public.”