| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Amendment (b) to new clause 11, after 'act' in subsection (1)(a), insert
Amendment (c) to new clause 11, at end, insert
'(c) "a person with a financial interest" includes a person undertaking any regulated activity or who is an authorised person within the meaning of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (c. 8).'.
Amendment (a) to new clause 11, in subsection (5)(b), leave out
'loss or damage of any description'
and insert 'significant loss or damage'.
Government new clause 12—Penalty for offences under sections (interference with contractual relations so as to harm animal research organisation) and (intimidation of persons connected with animal research organisation).
Government new clause 13—Animal research organisations.
7 Feb 2005 : Column 1248
Government new clause 14—Extension of sections (interference with contractual relations so as to harm animal research organisation) and (intimidation of persons connected with animal research organisation).
New clause 5—Economic damage to companies—
'(1) A person ("person A") commits an offence under this section if by acting in accordance with subsection (2) he causes financial damage to another person ("person B"), with the purpose of representing to person B, or persuading person B—
(i) that he should not do something that he is legally entitled to do; or
(ii) that he should do something that he is not under any legal obligation to do.
(2) A person acts in accordance with this subsection if those actions—
(a) involve the harassment of or violence against person B or a connected person, or
(b) involve damage to property of person B or a connected person.
(3) A connected person, for the purposes of subsection (2) above, means—
(a) a customer of person B;
(b) a shareholder of person B;
(c) an employee of person B;
(d) a director of person B;
(e) where person B is a partnership, its partners;
(f) a supplier of goods or services to person B;
(g) a supplier of goods or services to persons within paragraph (f) above;
(h) an individual normally residing with any individual falling within paragraphs (a) to (g) above.
(4) A constable may arrest without warrant anyone whom he reasonably suspects to be committing an offence within subsection (1) above.
(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both;
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to a fine, or to both.'.
Government amendments Nos. 99 and 100
Amendment No. 8, in title, line 8, after 'orders;', insert
'to make provision in connection with economic damage to companies;'.
Caroline Flint: As with the previous group of amendments, we had extensive discussions in Committee on animal rights extremists and I said that the Government would table amendments on Report to tackle more effectively unlawful campaigns by animal rights extremists that are aimed at causing economic damage to organisations involved in animal research through pressure on third parties to break commercial or other links. I hope that hon. Members on both sides of the House will recognise that these amendments fulfil that commitment. I have met Opposition Front-Bench spokesmen to discuss them in more detail.
We believe that properly regulated research on animals is essential to make progress in treating disease—for example, Alzheimer's disease, which affects more than half of those aged over 85. The abnormalities of Alzheimer's disease have been shown in primates and
7 Feb 2005 : Column 1249
certain strains of mice, and animal studies provide opportunities for understanding Alzheimer's disease and studying potential new treatments. We need animal research if we are ever to discover a cure for Alzheimer's disease.
We have perhaps the most rigorous system of regulation of animal experiments of any country. Licences may be granted only when experts in the animals scientific procedures inspectorate are persuaded that the likely benefits of an experiment outweigh the likely harm to the animals concerned and that no alternatives can replace the use of animals, reduce the number of animals used or refine the procedures to minimise suffering.
Many people believe that animals should not be used for research and I respect that view. They have every right to express it and the great majority of them do so wholly peacefully and properly to try to persuade people to change their minds and to change the law. However, some of those who are opposed to research on animals have not used lawful methods of persuasion. They have sought to impose their views on others through harassment, threats and physical attacks. The purpose of the Government amendments is to tackle those campaigns.
The amendments introduce five new clauses which create two new offences. New clause 10 creates a new offence of a criminal or tortious act against a person that causes loss or damage with the intention of harming an animal research organisation, when the act is likely or intended to cause the person not to perform a contract or similar arrangement, to end a contract or not enter into one.
Mrs. Janet Dean (Burton) (Lab): Can my hon. Friend assure me that "animal research organisation" includes establishments where animals are bred for experimentation? She will know of the problems in my constituency and that of the hon. Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) concerning a guinea pig farm. Many of our constituents have been severely affected. I thank the Minister for this legislation and her hard work, but I would like the assurance that I have requested.
Caroline Flint: I can assure my hon. Friend that the provision extends to breeding establishments. I commend her and others who supported the Hall family at Darley Oaks during many years of terrifying attacks and protests against them. Many hon. Members are aware of the attack on the grave of a family member not so long ago.
Mr. Heath: I would like to associate myself and my hon. Friends with the hon. Lady's comments.
We broadly welcome the new clauses, but new clause 10(3)(a) contains the slightly curious phrase "amounting to a criminal offence", instead of an act which is a criminal offence. There is no such qualification in paragraph (b) in which a tortious act is apparently self-explanatory. Why was that form of words used in paragraph (a)?
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |