The Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson famously said that a week was a long time in politics. In that case 10 years must seem an eternity for anyone who desires the end of animal experimentation.
In 2004 the movement was riding the crest of a wave. Several laboratory animal breeders had recently closed down, Huntingdon Life Sciences had been brought to its knees, a proposed laboratory at Cambridge University had been vetoed by the council fearing protests and the construction of a new lab at Oxford University was at a standstill.
At the time the movement appeared unstoppable but not only has all that momentum been lost, it has been replaced by a deep slump. Repression, lengthy sentences, loss of confidence, infighting – the anti-vivisection wing is unrecognisable as the force it was a decade ago.
Then it was reported that investment in companies carrying out animal testing had fallen by about £100million. Bosses of leading drug companies issued warnings that they might relocate overseas where the climate was less hostile. Fast forward to 2014 and there’s news of Pfizer’s proposed takeover of AstraZeneca and HLS’s acquisition of Harlan Laboratories to create “a leading global organization”. The impression could not be more different.
And as if to rub salt in the wounds, the vivisection industry is now crowing. Yesterday a Concordat on Openness on Animal Research was announced with 72 signatories from “all sections of the Bioscience community”. This list reads like a who’s-who of vivisection and includes leading drugs companies, laboratories, universities and charities that fund animal torture, such as GlaxoSmithkline, HLS, Harlan, Sequani, Oxford and Cambridge Universities, Cancer Research UK and the British Heart Foundation.
The Concordat was immediately criticised by the BUAV as “transparency on their terms with researchers having complete control over what the public gets to see”. But what it signifies is a move to make animal testing appear not just necessary but desirable, another step in the propaganda war which began 10 years ago with the labelling of campaigners as “domestic extremists”.
As well as the upfront repression of new laws which targeted anti-vivisectionists, a dirty war was fought by the secret state – the National Extremism Tactical Co-ordination Unit – to vilify grassroots protesters and groups like SHAC and Speak. When cat breeder Hillgrove Farm closed down in 1999, the Mirror newspaper said: “the campaigners who fought so hard deserve their moment of triumph. It is a victory for humanity.”
But in the last 10 years animal rights has usually been likened in the media to terrorism as the state has waged its propaganda offensive. When 32 SHAC activists were arrested in May 2007 as part of Operation Achilles, NETCU staged a press conference to present a rolling news story that dangerous extremists were being rounded up.
Since then 14 people involved in SHAC have been sentenced to up to 11 years. Three members of the Save the Newchurch Guinea Pigs campaign were gaoled for 12 years each in 2006 for conspiracy to blackmail and Mel Broughton, the co-founder of Speak, received 10 years for conspiracy to commit arson.
These lengthy sentences have had a chilling effect, but equally disturbing is the number of people locked up for not doing anything serious at all. Take Luke Steele as an example. He has risen to prominence since repression kicked in and typifies the new breed of campaigner. In 2009 he pleaded guilty to breaking section 145 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005.
This is one of two new laws targeting anti-vivisectionists which mean even a trivial transgression can result in up to five years behind bars. In Steele’s case he didn’t even commit a criminal offence – only the civil tort of trespass – but he ended up serving about six months. After his release he formed the National Anti-Vivisection Alliance and let it be known he wanted to be the movement’s new figurehead. Privately he compared himself to Greg Avery, co-founder of SHAC.
That comparison proved apt but not in the way he wanted as he was locked up again in 2012 for harassing workers at Harlan Laboratories. He stood near the entrance speaking on a megaphone and holding placards – in other words protesting in a normal way as thousands of others had done before – but he chose not to fight the charge and was gaoled for 18 months!
This and other sentences gave the impression that animal rights was on a hiding to nothing – especially if against animal testing – which was exactly what the state intended. To make matters worse certain defendants chose not to contest the charges in the hope of remission (with a few even grovelling to the judge) thus giving the impression the movement was based on criminality not political resistance. There were no defence campaigns, no updates or press releases, and precious little publicity until the trials themselves when reports were of extremists getting their comeuppance.
The reality of activism today means that the confrontational campaigning of the past is very risky. After his release Steele set up a new group called the Anti-Vivisection Coalition (AVC). It’s method of operation consists mainly of one-off demonstrations outside labs in which its supporters turn up in red overalls for a photo-shoot and stay a couple of hours. Such actions can receive media attention and the lab may get bad publicity but this is short lived and can be shrugged off. Save the Harlan Beagles is another group set up since NAVA’s demise. It has organised marches and vigils but not in the vicinity of the laboratory itself.
Following the conviction of Debbie Vincent for conspiracy to blackmail, SHAC has effectively ceased to exist. Seven activists involved in the group (including Debbie) are charged with conspiracy to commit section 145 SOCPA and face trial in London beginning in September. The defendants are alleged to have participated in 23 protests and two incidents of direct action, where criminal damage occurred. There is no evidence that the defendants took part in or had knowledge of the direct action.
As the SOCPA7 website says: “The UK authorities are so desperate to stop people campaigning against vivisection, especially at HLS, that attending protests has led to these campaigners facing prison on criminal conspiracy charges.”
The last time Mel Broughton spoke at a Speak rally before his arrest in 2007 he said the state wanted to crush grassroots anti-vivisection groups, leaving just national societies like BUAV and NAVS who’ve been around for over 100 years and achieved little. If anyone had any doubts at the time, they must be convinced now.
Nevertheless opposition to animal torture remains. Last year a large protest was held when beagles where flown over to AstraZeneca’s lab in Cheshire. Most of those who took part were alerted by social media and had not been active before. There have also been actions against Air France, the last remaining airline to transport lab animals, and just two weeks ago a national day of action was held against the British Heart Foundation with demonstrations outside 35 of its charity shops. The flame of resistance remains alive and is still flickering – for now.
I’d be interested to know what AF is. Anarchist Federation perhaps?
As for repression, i don’t think it can work indefinitely. I always think of water flowing downhill. You can dam it but eventually it will flow over the top or burst out the sides.
The force for change will express itself in one way or another. Perhaps this repression is why there is now such a lot of emphasis on vegan campaigning (ie promoting veganism) which is also important.
But that force for change expresses itself in other issues also, not directly related to the animal cause, coming under the general heading of an-archy i suppose – without hierarchy.
So, as this blog is set up to do, we need to see anti-vivisection and animal liberation within a wider context, and then perhaps we can avoid being isolated and targeted so easily.
AF stands for Air France, Geoff. They’re the last major airline to transport lab animals. Some campaigners think shutting off this supply chain will spell the end of vivisection but I think they’re mistaken.
You’re right about repression leading to resistance. That usually happens and there is a lot of resistance around at the moment. Capitalism always produces that as it’s inherently unjust and a certain number of people will fight back. Most just go along for the ride though – capitalism is a bit like a roller coaster.
Anti-vivisection and AR do have to be seen in the broader context. I didn’t have time to go into this but mistakes were made by groups like SHAC, tactical errors based on the assumption that focusing on targets like HLS would inevitably lead to victory. This was politically naïve. Seeing the wider context, building bridges, etc, is essential to fighting animal abuse.
Why focus on the negative? Only AF left so why not focus on that??