---

Ms Hewitt: My hon. Friend is, of course, right about the importance of democracy, but let us not forget that the WTO is itself based on the principle of one country, one vote. That is why the developing countries have such a strong voice within it.

17 Sept 2003 : Column 877

BILL PRESENTED

European Parliamentary and Local Elections (Pilots)

Mr. Christopher Leslie presented a Bill to make provision for piloting in certain regions different methods of voting at the European Parliamentary general election in 2004 and at certain local elections held at the same time; and to enable consequential alterations to be made to voting procedures at local elections. And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time tomorrow; and to be printed. Explanatory notes to be printed [Bill 160].

17 Sept 2003 : Column 878

Stray Animals

1.27 pm

Mr. David Amess (Southend, West): I beg to move,

That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision for stray animals and for their ownership; and for connected purposes.

In all our constituencies, as we walk up and down the streets visiting people, we often see pinned to trees notices advertising various animals that have been lost and found. I wonder whether the House has any idea that re-homing animals is in no sense a straightforward matter. Sadly, we live in an increasingly litigious society. Not a week goes by without a new story of individuals suing someone for what most right-thinking people would regard as trivial or malicious reasons. Although one would not think so, that happens even in the world of animal welfare and care. Unfortunately, the excellent work that individuals and organisations such as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals undertake in re-homing stray animals is threatened by the lack of legal certainty in this area.

The Bill that I seek to persuade the House to accept would clear up the anomalies and introduce some common sense into an area of law that has been neglected for too long. In moving the Bill, I hope to achieve two clear objectives. First, the Bill would assist individuals and organisations to re-home animals more quickly, thereby improving animal welfare. Secondly, it would update our nation's legislation and raise it to the standard enjoyed by many other modern democracies.

Under the current position, literally thousands of individuals, along with large and small charities, regularly re-home stray animals—and I join all hon. Members in paying tribute to those people. In very many cases, the animal is reunited with its owner. Just as often, a new owner is found and the animal goes off to a new, loving home—a happy ending in all senses. That frees up space in the re-homing centre for more strays to be taken in. However—and this is where our law is insufficient—those hard-working individuals have to go to inordinate lengths to prove that they have sought to identify the original owner. If they do not, there is currently no defence to any future civil action by a person claiming to be the owner of the animal.

I recently spoke to a senior RSPCA inspector from the east of England who told me that all too often he and his colleagues get stuck in the middle when owners seek to reclaim animals they believe to be theirs. Only last week, he had to mediate between an aggressive individual trying to take back a cat more than a month after it had been re-homed. Along with all the other excellent work the RSPCA inspectorate undertakes, we should not expect it to have the wisdom of Solomon.

My Bill would strike a balance between trying to reunite an animal with its owner and dealing with animals efficiently, so that capacity is available for more stray animals to be re-homed. Fortunately, there is an excellent precedent that proves that such a change is not just possible in theory, but actually works in practice. It is the New Zealand Animal Welfare Act 1999, and I hope that the Government will study it closely.

17 Sept 2003 : Column 879

In New Zealand, a section of the 1999 Act deals exclusively with the "disposal" of animals in custody. It states:

"Where a person (other than the owner of an animal) gives that animal into the custody of an approved organisation and that approved organisation accepts custody of that animal, or where an approved organisation takes any animal into its custody, that approved organisation . . . Must take reasonable steps to identify the owner of the animal; and . . . May take such steps as it considers necessary or desirable to prevent or mitigate any suffering of the animal."

Furthermore, it states:

"Where the approved organisation cannot identify the owner of the animal, an inspector or auxiliary officer acting for the approved organisation may . . . After the animal has been in the custody of the organisation for at least 7 days . . . Sell the animal; or . . . Find a home for the animal; or . . . Destroy or otherwise dispose of the animal in such manner as the inspector or auxiliary officer thinks fit."

The Act also states that if the organisation or individual has made every effort to locate the owner, it may then re-home the animal, without fear that the original owner, at some point in the future, can come and claim their animal. That may seem harsh, but it is a practical solution according to all the advice that I have been given.

The effect of such a change would be that more stray animals could be re-homed more quickly, and more animals could be received into re-homing centres. That would lead to a decrease in the number of animals that tragically have to be destroyed through lack of space. It would also certainly lead to a saving in time and money for animal centres that encounter the problem. We should not forget that many of those wonderful homes depend on charitable giving. People who give money do not want it to disappear into the bottomless pit of litigation.

17 Sept 2003 : Column 880

I understand that some people may be concerned by the Bill and may say that seven days is too short a period before strays can be re-homed. However, the provision is in line with the local authority obligation created in respect of stray dogs by the Environmental Protection Act 1991. Some may be of the view that 14 days might be appropriate to allow for owners who are away on holiday when their animal is found. I say loud and clear that anyone who owns a pet should be responsible in how they care for it. Responsible pet ownership dictates that proper arrangements should be made for pets while people go away on holiday, so that the animals do not stray. Those left in charge should be responsible enough to carry out all reasonable efforts to find the animal, in the event that it does stray.

I am grateful for the support that I have received for this modest measure from both sides of the House. As a result of the Bill, I hope that my phone will not ring endlessly, and that people will not visit my house, to ask me to mediate in such matters or to find homes for stray animals. I gently say to the Government, given that we do not have much time left in this Session, that I hope that I am pushing at an open door and that the Government will seek to take this modest measure forward when they finalise the arrangements for the Gracious Speech. I commend the Bill to the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. David Amess, Mr. David Atkinson, Mr. Tony Banks, Mr. Keith Bradley, Mr. Ian Cawsey, Mrs. Helen Clark, Mr. David Drew, Mr. Andrew Rosindell, Bob Russell, Bob Spink, Angela Watkinson and Miss Ann Widdecombe.

Stray Animals

Mr. Amess accordingly presented a Bill to make provision for stray animals and for their ownership; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 21 November, and to be printed [Bill 161].

17 Sept 2003 : Column 879

17 Sept 2003 : Column 881

Northern Ireland (Monitoring Commission etc.) Bill (Allocation of Time)

1.37 pm

The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr. Paul Murphy): I beg to move,

That the following provisions shall apply to the proceedings on the Northern Ireland (Monitoring Commission etc.) Bill [Lords]—


Timetable


1. Proceedings on Second Reading, in Committee, on consideration and on Third Reading shall be completed at this day's sitting and shall be brought to a conclusion, if not previously concluded, nine hours after the commencement of proceedings on the Motion for this Order.


Timing of proceedings and Questions to be put


2. When the Bill has been read a second time—


(a) it shall, notwithstanding Standing Order No. 63 (Committal of bills), stand committed to a Committee of the whole House without any Question being put;


(b) proceedings on the Bill shall stand postponed while the Question is put, in accordance with paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 52 (Money resolutions, and Ways and Means resolutions, in connection with bills), on any financial resolutions relating to the Bill;


(c) on the conclusion of proceedings on any financial resolutions relating to the Bill, proceedings on the Bill shall be resumed and the Speaker shall leave the Chair whether or not notice of an Instruction has been given.


3. On the conclusion of proceedings in Committee the Chairman shall report the Bill to the House without putting any Question and, if the Bill is reported with amendments, the House shall proceed to consider the Bill as amended without any Question being put.


4. For the purpose of bringing any proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with paragraph 1 the Speaker or Chairman shall forthwith put the following Questions (but no others)—


(a) any Question already proposed from the Chair;


(b) any Question necessary to bring to a decision a Question so proposed;


(c) the Question on any amendment moved, or Motion made, by a Minister of the Crown;


(d) any other Question necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded.


5. On a Motion so made for a new Clause or a new Schedule, the Chairman or Speaker shall put only the Question that the Clause or Schedule be added to the Bill.


Subsequent stages


6.—(1) Any further Message from the Lords on the Bill shall be considered forthwith without any Question being put.


(2) Proceedings on any further Message from the Lords shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement.


7.—(1) This paragraph applies for the purpose of bringing any proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with paragraph 6.


(2) The Speaker shall first put forthwith any Question which has already been proposed from the Chair and not yet decided.


(3) The Speaker shall then put forthwith the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown which is related to the Question already proposed from the Chair.


(4) The Speaker shall then put forthwith the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown on, or relevant to, any of the remaining items in the Lords Message.


(5) The Speaker shall then put forthwith the Question, That this House agrees with the Lords in all the remaining Lords Proposals.

17 Sept 2003 : Column 882

Reasons Committee


8.—(1) The Speaker shall put forthwith the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown for the appointment, nomination and quorum of a Committee to draw up Reasons in relation to the Bill and the appointment of its Chairman.


(2) A Committee appointed to draw up Reasons shall report before the conclusion of the sitting at which it is appointed.


(3) Proceedings in the Committee shall, if not previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion 30 minutes after their commencement.


(4) For the purpose of bringing any proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with sub-paragraph (3) the Chairman shall—


(a) first put forthwith any Question which has been proposed from the Chair but not yet decided, and


(b) then put forthwith successively Questions on motions which may be made by a Minister of the Crown for assigning a Reason for disagreeing with the Lords in any of their Amendments.


(5) The proceedings of the Committee shall be reported without any further Question being put.


Miscellaneous


9. Paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 15 (Exempted business) shall apply to any proceedings to which this Order applies.


10. The proceedings on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown for varying or supplementing the provisions of this Order shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement and paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 15 shall apply to those proceedings.


11. Standing Order No. 82 (Business Committee) shall not apply in relation to any proceedings to which this Order applies.


12. No Motion shall be made to alter the order in which any proceedings on the Bill are taken or to re-commit the Bill.


13. No dilatory Motion shall be made in relation to proceedings to which this Order applies except by a Minister of the Crown; and the Question on any such Motion shall be put forthwith.


14.—(1) This paragraph applies if—


(a) a Motion for the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 24 (Adjournment on specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration) has been stood over to Four o'clock, Three o'clock or Seven o'clock (as the case may be), but


(b) proceedings to which this Order applies have begun before then.


(2) Proceedings on that Motion shall stand postponed until the conclusion of those proceedings.


15. If the House is adjourned, or the sitting is suspended, before the conclusion of any proceedings to which this Order applies, no notice shall be required of a Motion made at the next sitting by a Minister of the Crown for varying or supplementing the provisions of this Order.


16. Proceedings to which this Order applies shall not be interrupted under any Standing Order relating to the sittings of the House.

I would like to take this opportunity to explain to the House the urgency with which the Government seek to progress this Bill, and why it is necessary to take the Bill through all its stages in this House today. It would not be appropriate to dwell in detail on the broader context in the debate on this timetable motion. Members will have an opportunity to debate the Government's analysis, and their policy, more fully on Second Reading, and I intend to address those issues in my speech in that debate. However, I should like to say a few short words now about the context to explain clearly why the Government consider that the Bill before the House today merits urgent consideration.

On 1 May this year, the Government published a series of proposals for the full implementation of the Good Friday agreement and the restoration of the

17 Sept 2003 : Column 883

devolved institutions on a stable and inclusive basis. Those had been drawn up in the light of our earlier discussions with the Irish Government and political parties at Hillsborough. As the House well knows, we were unable to proceed with the implementation of all those proposals in the absence of satisfactory commitments on an end to paramilitary activity.

We have proceeded, with the Irish Government, to take forward certain elements of those proposals as a contribution to building trust and confidence, and the Taoiseach and Prime Minister, on 2 July, reaffirmed the importance of that commitment.

Among those proposals that we have committed to implement is the agreement between the two Governments on monitoring and compliance. In that text, we undertook to establish an independent body to monitor commitments given regarding the implementation of the Good Friday agreement and the restoration of stable institutions. The Government also undertook to seek to amend the Northern Ireland Act 1998 to broaden the range of measures available to the Northern Ireland Assembly, and ultimately to the British Government, to respond to the commission's recommendations.

Of course, those are complex proposals, in a completely new field. They required a good deal of working up. Apart from which, the practical side of setting up the commission also required a good deal of work—in particular in the search for people of the highest ability and authority to become members of the commission. I am happy to say that I believe we were successful in that search. The result of this was that it was not possible to bring forward our plans before the summer.

We all recognise the urgency now of early political advance in Northern Ireland. As I shall outline in my speech on Second Reading, it is our ambition as a Government, quite as much it is everybody else's, that there should be elections at the earliest possible stage to the Northern Ireland Assembly, and also that they should be successful elections, in the sense that they will carry with them a real prospect of a return to devolved Government.

---