Signed by 100,640 New Zealanders, presented to Parliament on 24 April 1989:
Progress of its manipulation, censorship and suppression by the Chemi-Medi-Vivi syndicate in collaboration with the news-media.

On 20 June 1991 Christchurch Coordinator Mrs Sands upon making enquiries to Parliament about the progress of NZAVS Petition was informed that between 24 April and 5 June 1991 there had been a series of hearings of the submissions of the pro-vivisection alliance. Though these hearings were supposedly "open to the public" neither the principal petitioner, Bette Overell, or any member of NZAVS had been informed of them.

When NZAVS wrote to the Clerk of the Primary Production Select Committee expressing alarm and astonishment that the Society had not been invited to these meetings, and asking for copies of the transcripts of what went on at them, it was informed that:

"Hearing of evidence is not generally recorded, so there is no record of the meetings available."

That being so, NZAVS assumes that there is no record of the Hearing of 20 March 1991 when evidence supporting the Petition was presented to the Committee, (refer Mobilise! No. 30) (http://www.nzavs.org.nz/mobilise/30/index.html).

NZAVS subsequently managed to get copies of the submissions of the pro-vivisection alliance, extracts of which are as follows:

NZ Department of Health

The Department believes that:

"animals suitable for scientific work are those that are well cared for, healthy, comfortable and contented."

It concludes that:

"it recommends the Primary Production Committee allow the appropriate use of animals for teaching, research and other technical procedures to continue with an emphasis on the development of alternative methodologies, controlled by the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries' National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee."

Department of Conservation

"In order to control and manage introduced species of animals it is necessary to conduct experiments, trials and investigative procedures to determine various aspects of their biology."

The Department of Conservation, therefore, opposes this Petition.

The Department of Scientific and Industrial Research

This submission, referring to one point in the prayer of the petition asks: "What is a health disaster?" (Had representatives from DSIR attended the Hearing of 20 March they could have been educated - NZAVS)

"It would not be possible to train health professionals without the use of animals."

The submission espouses the great benefits achieved from vivisection and encloses four lists of examples of diseases which have been "virtually eliminated, controlled, or still to be solved... by the use of experimental animals." Another section deals with the value of ethics committees and the submission concludes:

"The DSIR most strongly recommends that the petition No. 1987/110 of Bette Overell and 100,640 others, representing the NZAVS, be rejected and that the use of animals in research, teaching and other practices be continued under the cover of existing legislation."

The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries

This submission says it:

"does not believe that the NZAVS represents the average viewpoint..."

That it is regarded by MAF as:

"an extreme group, which, we understand, eschews the use of animals for food and all farming. It is thought that the Society does not believe in modern medicine or prescription drugs either... NZAVS was given the opportunity to nominate people for appointment to animal ethics committees. They declined and indeed stated that any member who participated in such a committee would be expelled from the Society."

The submission outlines the ethics committee system and its composition which is sanitised by the inclusion of the RNZSPCA.

"The petition", says MAF

"offers no valid grounds for the abolition of vivisection."

Had MAF read our submissions and been interested enough to attend the Hearing of 20 March 1991 they would have heard plenty of valid grounds to substantiate the Petition (NZAVS).

The submission concludes that:

"The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries recommends that no action be taken on this petition."

The Medical Research Council of New Zealand

Basically this submission wishes the committee to disregard the petition as being unworthy of serious comment. (Since the Medical Research Council of NZ received $12.5 million of the tax-payers money in 1989, the year the Petition was lodged, it is hardly likely to approve of it - NZAVS.) It then refers the Committee to enclosed literature espousing vivisection from the Foundation for Biomedical Research in Washington DC. After stating the importance of animal-based research in which is hoped to find a cure for AIDS it concludes:

"The Council recommends that the Parliamentary Committee disregard the petition to abolish vivisection in NZ."

(Continued next page)