**************************************
Following is a question by the Hon Chan Hak-kan and a written reply by the Secretary for Food and Health, Dr Ko Wing-man, in the Legislative Council today (October 15):
Question:
It has been reported that the authorities world-wide are increasingly concerned about the practice of conducting animal testing in the research and development (R&D) of cosmetic products. The European Union (EU) has promulgated a ban on animal testing for cosmetic products which prohibits, from March last year, the sale in EU of newly manufactured cosmetic products and their ingredients which had been tested on animals. Countries like Japan, India and Brazil have also started to introduce related bans. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the current number of locally registered manufacturers of cosmetic products; whether it knows the number of such manufacturers who have conducted animal testing during the R&D of cosmetic products; whether the authorities will consider introducing legislation to ban such animal testing so as to prohibit cruelty to animals; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(2) whether it will encourage manufacturers and importers of cosmetic products to sign the charter for "cruelty-free cosmetics" and pledge not to sell cosmetic products that have been tested on animals during the R&D process;
(3) whether it will consider introducing a labelling system to require that cosmetic products for sale in Hong Kong must show clearly whether they have been tested on animals during the R&D process, so as to help consumers choose cosmetic products that are animal test free;
(4) whether it will consider introducing legislation to ban the import of cosmetic products that have been tested on animals during the R&D process; if it will, of the legislative timetable; if not, the reasons for that; and
(5) whether it has plans to promote the message of "cruelty-free cosmetics", such as that animal testing during the R&D process of cosmetic products is unnecessary, and to encourage the public to purchase cosmetic products that are animal test free; if it does, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Reply:
President,
Over the years, the Government has been striving to promote in the community a culture of care for animals with a view to protecting animal welfare. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance (Cap. 169) aims at combating acts of cruelty to animals. Under this Ordinance, any person who cruelly beats, kicks, ill-treats, over-rides, over-drives, overloads, tortures, infuriates or terrifies any animal, or by wantonly or unreasonably doing or omitting to do any act, causes any unnecessary suffering to any animal commits an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of $200,000 and imprisonment for three years.
The Consumer Goods Safety Ordinance (Cap. 456) protects consumers by regulating the safety of consumer goods ordinarily sold for private use (including cosmetic products without pharmaceutical ingredients). Under this Ordinance, consumer goods must comply with the "general safety requirement", i.e. be reasonably safe. The Customs and Excise Department, being the enforcement agency for the Ordinance, will primarily consider the relevant safety standards promulgated by standards institutes for determining whether consumer goods comply with the above-mentioned requirement.
My reply to the various parts of the question is as follows:
(1) According to the statistics collated by the Census and Statistics Department (C&SD), in 2013 there were a total of 30 manufacturers of cosmetics, perfumes and toilet preparations in Hong Kong. The Government does not have information on whether these manufacturers conduct animal testing during the research and development (R&D) activities for cosmetic products.
Acts of cruelty to animals in Hong Kong are primarily dealt with through the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance. The Government has no plan for the time being to prohibit by law the possible conduct of animal testing in R&D activities for cosmetic products. That said, we will continue to keep abreast of discussions at the international level on this issue and keep in view the actual situation in Hong Kong, so as to ensure that our policy keeps pace with changes in circumstances.
(2) According to the information that we have collected on overseas practices, the main purpose of conducting animal testing in R&D activities for cosmetics by the manufacturers is to help ascertain whether the products concerned are hypoallergenic and can be used safely on human bodies. However, some advocates for animal rights in overseas economies consider that animal testing may cause harm to animals and that other methods are available to serve the purpose of ascertaining the safety of cosmetics products and their ingredients. They therefore advocate that the manufacturers of cosmetic products should be prohibited from conducting animal testing in the development of new cosmetic ingredients.
To this end, the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV) has established the Cruelty Free International to promote the abolition of animal testing in cosmetic product development and introduced the "Leaping Bunny" certification programme to grant trade mark certification for brands of cosmetic products and personal care products which do not involve animal testing. According to the information available on the website of the Cruelty Free International, there are 29 brands of cosmetic products and personal care products available in Hong Kong which have been given the "Leaping Bunny" mark.
We believe that the "Leaping Bunny" certification programme has helped raise the awareness of the cosmetic industry and the public about animal testing in cosmetics production. The Government does not have any plan to introduce a charter for "cruelty-free cosmetics".
(3) According to the information from C&SD, Hong Kong imports a considerable amount of cosmetic products from other places every year. Introducing a labelling scheme on animal testing in Hong Kong may have implications on the variety and price of cosmetic products available for sale locally. We have to carefully strike a balance among different considerations.
The Government has no plan for the time being to introduce a labelling scheme on cosmetic products for sale in Hong Kong whereby it is a requirement to show whether animal testing was conducted during the R&D process. We note that many exporting countries of cosmetic products have commenced studies on the regulation of animal testing during the R&D process as well as the sale of the relevant cosmetic products. In addition, some players in the cosmetic industry, both local and overseas, have taken the initiative to join the "Leaping Bunny" certification programme. This serves to help enhance public awareness about animal testing in R&D activities for cosmetic products.
(4) As mentioned in paragraph (3) above, many of the cosmetic products available on the local market are imported. Imposing import control on such products would have implications on the variety and price of cosmetic products supplied in the local market. For the time being, the Government has no plan to prohibit the import of cosmetic products that have involved animal testing in the R&D process.
(5) As mentioned in paragraph (2) above, the "Leaping Bunny" certification programme spearheaded by the international community readily serves to raise the awareness of the cosmetic industry and the public about animal testing in R&D activities for cosmetic products. We will closely monitor developments in this respect to facilitate future decision making on whether there is need for introducing appropriate measures in support of the cause of protecting animal welfare.
Ends/Wednesday, October 15, 2014
Issued at HKT 15:15
NNNN