During a much-anticipated parliamentary debate yesterday, the four independent Muslim MPs defended halal slaughter and exposed the Islamophobic agenda behind the public controversy.
MPs Iqbal Mohamed, Adnan Hussain, Shockat Adam and Ayoub Khan put up a robust defence of regulated religious slaughter practices while warning of xenophobic undertones.
In contrast, Rupert Lowe MP passionately argued for a ban, framing non-stun slaughter as inhumane.
The debate was prompted by a public e-petition titled “Ban non-stun slaughter in the UK” which garnered 109,018 signatures, surpassing the 100,000-signature threshold required to trigger a parliamentary debate.
The petition argued that non-stun slaughter is “barbaric” and incompatible with “modern-day values,” calling for a ban similar to those in some EU nations, citing concerns over animal welfare and the treatment of livestock during slaughter.
The debate addressed the exemption in current UK law that allows non-stun slaughter for religious purposes, specifically for halal and shechita (Jewish) practices.
‘Dog whistle for xenophobia’
Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest news and updates from around the Muslim world!
Iqbal Mohamed MP opened with a pointed critique, expressing alarm at the debate’s framing.
“The rhetoric around non-stun slaughter and how this debate is being framed in Parliament today is deeply concerning. Not just to me, but to other members, organisations, and many of my constituents. Yes, I care about animal welfare, that’s the supposed topic here, but I’m equally disturbed by the undertone. A title dressed as a welfare concern but sounding like a dog whistle for xenophobia, targeting religious practices, particularly Jewish and Muslim communities.”
He emphasised that existing regulations already ensure animal welfare, noting: “Previous governments have ensured safeguards are in place to protect animal welfare during religious slaughter. So why are we having this conversation again, if not to stigmatise kosher and halal traditions?”
Mohamed defended the humanity of these practices, explaining: “Many may not realise that both halal and kosher slaughter practices are centred around minimising suffering. They require the animal to be alive and healthy at the time of slaughter. Animals must not be shown the implement with which they will be slaughtered. Animals should not be in the presence of other animals being slaughtered. If this is not humane, I don’t know what is.”
Adnan Hussain MP intensified the debate with a historical warning, drawing parallels to Nazi Germany’s policies.
“We once saw Nazi Germany put forward into place, into law, similar policies. The justification then was to animal welfare, but in context this was a thin pretext for antisemitism. The ban was part of a broader programme to marginalise and dehumanise Jewish people, stripping away their rights and religious freedoms.”
Hussain urged MPs to recognise the potential for a ban to alienate minorities, asking: “Will the Member agree that a ban on this nature threatens to have similar effect on Britain’s Muslim and Jewish communities?”
‘Economic consequences’
Shockat Adam MP called for a broader perspective on animal welfare, arguing that the focus on slaughter methods ignores systemic issues.
“Chair, let me begin by saying… that we are a nation of animal lovers. In fact, in the words of Immanuel Kant, we can judge the heart of a man in his treatment of animals. But to truly protect animals, we must look at their entire lives and not just their final moments.”
He acknowledged scientific concerns, stating: “Yes, scientific studies, including those from the European Food Safety Authority and Massey University in New Zealand, suggest that methods like kosher and non-stun halal slaughter may cause more pain than pre-stunning. But even scientists concede that pain can only be inferred, not definitively measured, through behavior and EEG data.”
Adam highlighted flaws in stunning, noting: “The EFSA found that 4% of cattle are not rendered unconscious after that bolt of electricity at the first attempt. And the non-penetrative method, where the bolt strikes but doesn’t penetrate the skull, has a failure rate of up to 30%, causing skull fractures and distress.”
He concluded: “Let’s be honest, no method is entirely pain-free. The idea that one is humane and the other is completely barbaric, really, when you look at it under scrutiny, does not hold.”
And Ayoub Khan MP warned of the debate’s exploitation by divisive forces and its economic consequences.
“There are also those looking to make use of this debate to stoke hatred along cultural divides. And while the petition in question makes no reference to halal or kosher slaughter, it has been welcomed in right-wing echo chambers as an opportunity to marginalise and discriminate against the Muslim and Jewish communities.”
He emphasised the economic stakes, noting: “We are looking at a sector which brings two billion pounds of trade within the UK economy every year. The demand for non-stun halal and kosher meat is not going to cease, because for many it is a matter of profound unwavering religious conviction.”
Khan cautioned that a ban would harm farmers and increase imports, stating: “British farmers, the very people many of these campaigners claim to support, will be the first to suffer. In the blink of an eye, they would lose vital domestic and export markets to overseas competitors. What’s more, many of the abattoirs shipping these products to Britain’s shores will not observe animal welfare regulations as stringently as we do here in the United Kingdom.”
In stark contrast, Rupert Lowe MP, a farmer, argued vehemently for a ban, framing non-stun slaughter as inhumane.
“One of the greatest joys of being a farmer is raising livestock. You see them born, you feed them, you watch them grow, you care for them. And when their time comes, you want that end to be swift, calm, dignified and painless.”
He described non-stun slaughter vividly, stating, “No bolt to the brain, no stunning, no anaesthetic, a blade, a deep crushing cut across the throat. The animal does not die instantly. It thrashes, it gasps, it panics, it feels everything. That’s a minute of pure agony while the blood pours from its body.”
Lowe criticized the lack of transparency, noting: “Millions of Brits are eating halal meat against their will and without their knowledge due to our deceitful labelling system.”
He called for an outright ban, arguing: “We should ban non-stun slaughter, we should ban halal slaughter, and we should ban kosher slaughter,” insisting that religious exemptions enable “state-endorsed butchery.”
The petition was rejected by the MPs present for the debate.
Watch Robert Carter’s short film on halal slaughter here.
