Despite measures to improve welfare and the efforts of those like Temple Grandin,1 the slaughter process, particularly large volume slaughter, is hugely stressful. In recent years, there has been a lot of publicity about the growth of ‘non-stun' slaughter in Britain, in which a blade is used to cut the throat of the animal, which then ‘bleeds out’ until it dies. Non-stun slaughter is illegal in Britain, with an exemption on religious grounds. A public petition to ban non-stun slaughter attracted almost 110,000 signatures and was debated in Parliament in June. The Government rejected the tenet of the petition.
Food Standard Agency (FSA) figures show that around 30.1m animals were slaughtered without pre-stunning in England in 2024, including 26.7m meat chickens, 3.1m sheep and 35,000 cattle. By comparison, in 2018, these numbers stood at 90.8m meat chickens, 3.1m sheep and 22,000 cattle, totalling 94m animals. The drop in the number of chickens being slaughtered without pre-stunning over six years is down to improvements in technology (Low Atmospheric Pressure Stunning (LAPS) is now available for chickens and acceptable by religious consumers as being compatible with halal slaughter) and a decline in exports, particularly to the EU. However, over the same period, the number of cattle slaughtered without pre-stunning has risen by more than 50%, and the total has been growing year-on year, due to increased domestic demand.
However, even with the lower overall figures, the volume is considerably more than is required for the religious groups.2, 3 and, however you look at it, an enormous number of animals.
The British Veterinary Association (BVA) has called on the Government to end the religious exemption to 'humane' slaughter. Scientific evidence shows that animals killed in this way feel the pain of their neck being cut, experience a delay in loss of consciousness for up to 2 minutes and are likely to suffer immense pain and distress during the process.4
The issue is contentious. While Muslim groups agree that non-stun slaughter is not necessary for halal and is a misinterpretation of religious scriptures,5, 6, 7 Jews are divided. Reform and conservative Jews (16% in the UK) do not consider non-stun to be necessary,8, 9 while Orthodox Jews (32%) insist on ‘shechita’, in which they say the sharp knife delivers slaughter with an “integral stun”.10, 11 Supporting science over religious opinion, a handful of European countries and regions have banned non-stun slaughter.12, 13, 14, 15
The issue is compounded because wholesalers and retailers routinely source non-stun meat as a way to reduce costs in the supply chain and avoid further complexities at the point of sale. Studies have shown - and are supported by the reported volumes - that millions of consumers are buying non-stun meat without realising it.16
Legislating in this area needs to be realistic. An all-out ban would most likely fail, especially if put to a free vote, because of the potential for damage to hard-fought political relations with religious communities..17 Britain prides itself in supporting and respecting religious freedoms. A few factions, disinterested in animal welfare more generally, bang the drum of outlawing non-stun slaughter to disguise subcutaneous racism.
Secondly, a ban would create friction with initiatives to cease the import of animal products made under lower welfare conditions than our own: Denmark imports non-stun meat, essentially outsourcing suffering. While there is a market for animals slaughtered in this way, then better to satisfy that market in Britain, where we can control the supply chain, set our own standards and monitor welfare.
In terms of net suffering, volume is as important as method. More animals are killed in this way than are required for religious groups. We should therefore adopt the German quota system, limiting shechitah and non-stun halal to a handful of small abattoirs licensed with a monthly cap representing the size of the religious communities who require it, defining the number of animals to meet local demand only.
Germany’s Animal Welfare Act (Tierschutzgesetz) mandates that where exceptions for religious slaughter are sought, an abattoir or butcher must:-
a. belong to a religious community whose mandatory religious rules require slaughter without stunning, or which prohibit consumption of meat from animals not slaughtered in that non-stunned way.
b. demonstrate that non-stun slaughter is necessary to meet the needs of that religious community in Germany. The licensing authority will assess whether the request is proportionate, i.e. that the number of animals requested to be slaughtered without stunning is not larger than needed. If there are other acceptable practices (for example reversible or head-only stunning, or other slaughter methods permitted under religious law), the authorities may refuse or limit the permit.
c. satisfy certain technical and professional standards, including having staff with the “certificate of competence” for slaughtering, and ensuring that animal welfare and hygiene rules are met. A veterinarian or competent state veterinary authority oversees the process.
An applicant then receives a permit to slaughter via non-stun methods only to meet the local domestic demand.
The process is not without controversy. Religious communities can find it difficult to document and evidence precisely how many animals are required for non-stun slaughter, and there are variations in implementation and precise protocols between states, since it is a devolved matter.
However, the volumes involved are tiny. It appears that since 2014-15, the German government has kept the figures a secret, but for that entire year just 180 sheep and goats and 186 poultry were slaughtered without pre-stunning,18 a tiny fraction of those killed in the same way in the UK.
British policy-makers would do well to inspect the model of their German counterparts closely. Structurally and legally there are few differences between the two countries that would make implementing a similar policy unviable in Britain.
Campaigners have also called for better labelling - it is not a requirement for non-stun meat to be labelled as such. Both Muslim and Jewish groups are supportive and there are voluntary certification bodies that have their own labels to reassure religious communities, but the industry claims that a wider roll-out would come at an enormous cost. The UK's labelling laws are largely adopted from the EU and unchanged since Brexit - the Government has reviewed the status frequently, but stopped short of bringing forward a Bill, perhaps because of fears over import and export costs.
Policy-makers must begin to take the issue of non-stun slaughter seriously, because it is not going away. As domestic demand increases, so the issue will become more divisive.
Political parties should consult the industry, veterinarians, scientists and Muslim and Jewish communities to develop practical policies, while animal welfare campaigners should hold their noses and support a quota system, which, should it come to Parliament and succeed would mean a small win - better than no win at all.
- 1
Making Slaughterhouses more Humane for Cattle, Pigs, and Sheep, Temple Grandin
- 2
- 3
Parliamentary Debate Hansard 9th June 2025
- 4
Non-stun slaughterBritish Veterinary Association
- 5
The true meaning of halalThe Guardian 22nd March 2010
- 6
FAQsHalal Food Authority (see section entitled ‘Does Halal Food Authority allow stunning of birds and animals?)
- 7
The perception and acceptability of pre-slaughter and post-slaughter stunning for halal production: The views of UK Islamic scholars and halal consumers A Fuseini et al, Meat Science January 2017
- 8
Returning to the Garden to Eat the Way God IntendedReform Judaism 22nd November 2016
- 9
Conservative JudaismHumane Society of the United States
- 10
What’s Wrong with Stunning?Chabad.org
- 11
F.A.Q.Shechita UK
- 12
Legal Restrictions on Religious Slaughter in EuropeLibrary of Congress (last updated September 2019)
- 13
Denmark bans kosher and halal slaughter as minister says ‘animal rights come before religion’Independent 18th February 2014
- 14
Polish parliament votes to ban £1.4bn industry of kosher, halal meat for exportJewish News 21st September 2020
- 15
Denmark 'Insulted' by Claim Kosher Slaughter Ban Is Anti-SemiticForward 17th February 2014
- 16
Big brand shops and restaurants face being forced to label halal food as row grows over ritually slaughtered meat on sale in UKDaily Mail 7th May 2014
- 17
US anti-Semitism envoy: Europe’s kosher meat bans ‘forced expulsion’ for JewsThe Times of Israel 15th May 2019
- 18
Animal welfare in the EU: closing the gap between ambitious goals and practical implementationEuropean Court of Auditors 2018
