Driven by a desire for justice and progress, the Animalist Party promotes an evolution of society that takes into account the interests of animals and that rethinks the relationship between animals and humans.
The purpose of the Animalist Party is:
to develop perspectives and a program taking into account the interests of animals;
to include in public policies taking into account the interests of animals as well as respect for their resources, their territories, their habitats and their mobility;
to mobilize society and take any action initiative in line with this development;
to present or support in the various elections candidates carrying the values of the party;
to submit to public debate and to electoral ballots its proposals for modifying public policies and to promote them in all institutions.
We decided to create CAP on the basis of an observation: for several years, the animal cause has become a real social issue and public opinion is showing, over the surveys, more and more sensitive to the fate reserved for animals. However, this societal demand has so far not translated into concrete changes in the legislation, as political decision-makers have not really taken up the issue.
However, it seemed to us that the action of animal protection associations at the political level was not always sufficient to allow a real mobilization of political personnel. Few associations developed an action in the direction of this one and those which did it carried out rather an "expert" lobbying work (production of amendments, proposals for laws, reports, participation in technical meetings, etc.), but no “relational” lobbying, aimed at establishing long-term ties with sympathetic elected representatives. Parliamentarians were thus approached on an ad hoc basis, on specific subjects, but without a long-term follow-up capable of forming a network and keeping it alive. Added to this was a lack of consultation among associations, sometimes leading to a lack of clarity of demands for politicians and therefore a brake on action.
What is more, since the animal cause is a somewhat taboo subject and deemed to have little legitimacy in the political sphere (which, thanks to a significant sociological renewal of elected officials at least as far as the National Assembly is concerned, is beginning to change), the parliamentarians wishing to act on these subjects and not necessarily having identified with each other, sometimes felt too isolated to act, fearing to see themselves marginalized. This lacked a facilitator and events allowing them to meet, as organized by our opponents (hunters, promoters of intensive farming, etc.).
Finally, the sympathetic parliamentarians not having for the most part a good knowledge of the animalist associations, they lacked a clearly identified interlocutor, able to put them in contact with associations specializing in the subjects which interested them, or to constitute an intermediary in order to carry out with these associations a work of synthesis at their request.