Scientific and Regulatory Procedures: Use of Dogs

Tony Vaughan Excerpts

Monday 28th April 2025 Westminster Hall

[Tony Vaughan (Folkestone and Hythe) (Lab)]

It is a privilege to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I thank and pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for leading this debate, and for her masterful analysis of this issue. I also thank the petitioner who raised this critical issue and the 235,000 people who signed it.

This is an issue I care about deeply. I have a dog called Harry, a fox-red labrador and an integral part of our family. I thank him for essentially being my personal trainer, because he runs far faster than me and keeps me fit. I agree with everything that others have said about the high intelligence and emotional sensitivity of dogs.

Many of my Folkestone and Hythe constituents are dog lovers and dog owners. We have miles of beautiful coastline to walk dogs along, and 316 of my constituents have signed the petition. I receive many emails from local people deeply concerned about dogs and other animals being used in testing.

Nationally, the use of dogs in scientific research is relatively rare, accounting for about 0.2% of all animal procedures in Britain, yet in 2023 almost 2,500 dogs were used in nearly 3,750 scientific procedures, with over 700 classified as causing moderate or severe harm to them. Although regulations are supposed to protect laboratory animals, and advances are being made to reduce and refine the use of those animals, as this debate has shown there is growing evidence and public sentiment questioning the reliability, necessity and ethics of subjecting dogs to such procedures, especially when alternative methods are being developed.

Like my colleagues, I believe that this country should be a world leader in ensuring the highest standards of animal welfare. We are seeing rapid advances in AI—I am pleased to see the AI Minister present to answer the debate—that offer powerful and humane alternatives to animal testing involving dogs. Today, AI-driven methods can analyse vast amounts of biological and chemical data to predict accurately how new drugs and chemicals will behave in the human body. As hon. Members have said, those technologies are already being used to identify potential risks and to filter out unsafe compounds before they ever reach an animal or a human trial. The use of this technology would spare countless animals from unnecessary suffering and would also accelerate the pace of scientific discovery and reduce costs. By investing in and embracing AI, we have the opportunity to lead the way towards a future where UK science and compassion go hand in hand, and where the use of animals in research is a thing of the past.

I look forward to reading and analysing the Government’s strategy for developing alternative methods for animal testing, which I believe will be published later this year. I urge the Government, when drawing up that strategy, to engage meaningfully with animal protection groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and others, as their experts have played a key role in developing effective and science-driven policies so that we may replace experiments on dogs with superior, humane, non-animal testing here in the UK and across the world.