Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20-39)
MR BEN
BRADSHAW MP, MR
JOHN BOURNE,
MR GRAHAM
THURLOW AND
MS CAROLINE
CONNELL
7 SEPTEMBER 2004
Q20 Mr Breed: Delegating powers to local
authorities and to devolved parliaments and assemblies is one
thing, delegating powers down to organisations for control and
regulations is an entirely different matter and it is that breadth,
the inclusion of that and the ability for that to go through secondary
legislation that I just think takes us into whole new territory
in the way in which Parliament has some oversight.
Mr Bradshaw: If the implication
of your question was right, I think I would share that concern,
but it is not. There is no suggestion that either central government
or local government is going to give powers to organisations that
are not accountable which they do not already have at the moment
and, in the end of course, it will be the local authority or the
Secretary of State who is ultimately responsible for any powers
that are exercised.
Q21 Mr Breed: Some of the regulations
that will ultimately come out are envisaged to be coming out over
and up to about 2010. Within a five year period, you are going
to have certain organisations, certain commercial interests, we
are talking about perhaps livery yards, pet shops, riding establishments
and everything else, living in a bit of a limbo period. Why is
it so necessary to have such a lengthy period of time during which
of course organisations which might be subject to new regulation
are living in a very difficult period?
Mr Bradshaw: Pet shops and riding
schools are of course already licensed whereas livery yards are
not and what we are trying to do in the way that we are rolling
out the secondary legislation is to again iron out those anomalies.
The simple answer to your question is the capacity problem. There
is a lot to be done here and there are a lot of things that have
not been done that should have been done for a very long time
and it is simply a question of the capacity of Government and
officials and those on the ground to implement these regulations
which means that we cannot do it all at once. We are trying, in
the order that we have given them, to concentrate on those that
are either most urgent or where there is already regulation to
see how it works, but I do not think that the timescale is too
long and also there are things that are happening, for example,
in the greyhound area which are already resulting in improvements
now on a voluntary basis and we would like to see how they work
before moving to regulation as set down in this Bill.
Q22 Mr Breed: So, the policy in terms
of the regulation, in other words the Government's policy which
will then be rolled out in regulation, will be available perhaps
within a year or so, it is just the implementation that is going
to take it over to 2010. You are not going to be bringing out
policy regulations over x-number of years.
Mr Bradshaw: No.
Q23 Mr Breed: They will be fairly defined
in the ultimate bill, in other words.
Mr Bradshaw: No. Those bits of
policy that we intend to implement immediately will be there and
will be published in time but there are other areas which we make
quite clear in this Bill which we do not intend to turn to immediately
where we will not make our intentions clear and that is the whole
point of enabling legislation, that as social morals and attitudes
change, in five or 10 years' time, we may have new scientific
evidence and we may have a different view about something that
gives us the flexibility to introduce regulation that is appropriate
for that particular concern.
Q24 Chairman: Minister, if I can just
follow that on. When you opened the discussion, you outlined to
us the important step that you saw in the taking of reasonable
steps to ensure an animal's welfare as a new dimension and that
is laid out quite clearly in clause 3 of the Bill. It seems to
me that the execution of the powers under clause 3 are determined
by what you do in clause 6 which is the making of a whole series
of powers because it says here, "The appropriate national
authority may by regulation make such provision as the authority
thinks fit for the purpose of promoting the welfare of animals."
Do you not think that this is going to be a recipe for confusion
because part of the Bill gets rid of or consolidates existing
animal welfare legislation but, by definition, you are going to
have to have some of the existing structure in operation during
the period of transition? So, are people going to be entirely
clear as to where they are because, as far as I can see, until
you have enacted a fair chunk of clause 6, what you want to achieve
in clause 3 remains in suspension?
Mr Bradshaw: You are right in
a way. The duty of care on the face of the Bill in clause 3 will
be introduced as soon as the Bill is enacted and that will apply
to everything including those areas such as, for example, circuses
or greyhounds which may be dealt with in secondary legislation
later on. The duty of care will enable action to be taken, for
example, from the moment of enactment before the secondary legislation
is in place and the secondary legislation will also call on the
codes of conduct which will take time to draw up but many of these
codes of conduct are already in existence and it will be up to
the courts to make a decision as to whether suffering has taken
place or whether a welfare—
Q25 Chairman: So, we are going to get
the whole of clause 3 whilst you are busy building the bits. It
is a little like putting the roof on the house whilst you are
doing the foundations later.
Mr Bourne: Plainly there is a
lot to do, as the Minister says, but I do not think it is quite
as you describe. The welfare offence will be as defined on the
face of the Bill. Then we are expecting to have under that a small
regulation which partly reflects the current regulation for farmed
animals which will define it and give a slightly broader guidance,
if you like, to people who have to comply with the welfare offence
and we would anticipate that we would get that out at the time
at which the Bill becomes in force. Not only that, but there is
a long list, as you say, of powers under clause 6. Many of the
regulations exist already. We think that they do need amending
and that will be part of the process, but those existing regulations
will still be in place until they are amended. So, the roof of
the house will not be absent but it will not be complete, I agree.
Q26 Paddy Tipping: I was just looking
at clause 6 because it is a catch all. Clause 6(1) gives the appropriate
national authority the power to make regulations. There will be
people who argue that animal welfare is animal welfare and cruelty
is cruelty wherever it occurs in the United Kingdom and that there
should not be separate provisions in Wales and Scotland. Is there
a danger that there is going to be a fragmented approach across
the UK?
Mr Bradshaw: I do not think so.
The appropriate national authority for devolutionary purposes
is the Secretary of State or Parliament and the Assembly for Wales.
This Bill does not apply for Scotland but my understanding is
that the Scottish are intending to produce legislation very similar
if not the same as this.
Q27 Paddy Tipping: If the National Assembly
for Wales took a different view than the Parliament here, it could
be the case that there were different provisions in Wales than
there would be here in England.
Mr Bradshaw: Yes, in theory, it
could.
Q28 Paddy Tipping: Is that a good thing?
Mr Bradshaw: It is devolution!
Q29 Paddy Tipping: It may be devolution
but there is an amount of philosophical work about what defines
cruelty. It is a universal concept.
Mr Bradshaw: I do not have a problem
with devolution.
Q30 Paddy Tipping: But people will have
and this is what I am asking you.
Mr Bradshaw: They might.
Q31 Paddy Tipping: Can I take you to
the codes that are going to come in in 2006, for example, for
riding schools, livery schools and a whole range of things. How
far have those codes progressed? Are they around? Are the things
written down?
Mr Bourne: Again, the picture
is mixed. For certain types of farm animals, the codes exist already.
They do not exist, by and large, for companion animals. In fact,
they do not exist as statutory codes at all because there has
never been a statutory mechanism for producing them. We have started
writing and hope to have before November a code of practice for
cats as a draft, so that people can see the sort of thing that
we are thinking about.
Q32 Paddy Tipping: Presumably, you are
involving organisations in putting those codes together.
Mr Bourne: We have a work stream
on that issue.
Q33 Mr Mitchell: I want to just follow
Paddy's point and the Chairman's point as to whether all the regulations
in the consequent delegated legislation should not be published
and certainly available at the same time as the Bill. It is difficult
to ask Parliament to pass a bill with half the foundations and
half the roof and say, "We don't quite know what is going
to be up there, whether it is going to be asbestos, a corrugated
iron roof or whatever." We need to have the picture of what
is going to happen at the time we pass the Bill. You cannot just
proclaim general principles, sweep away a lot of existing legislation
which has been there and operating since 1900-and-whatever-it-is
and leave a void. We need the full package, however much work
it causes.
Mr Bradshaw: In the annexes, we
do outline in some detail those areas which we intend to introduce
secondary legislation on over the next ten years, but the whole
point of an enabling bill is that it leaves you the option of
doing things differently as attitudes and mores change and the
problem with the existing legislation has been that it has not
given us that flexibility. I come back to this balance that needs
to be struck between legislation that is flexible and responsive
to concerns and legislation that is set in stone which is then
very difficult to change and respond to.
Chairman: Just to pick you up on that
point, Minister, you are quite right, looking at the back of the
document, on page 82, it lists all the areas that you are going
to be doing some work into, but if I look, for example, in clause
6, it talks, for example, about making provision for ensuring
the provision of suitable diets for animals. That is not listed
in the detailed areas of work in the section, as I say, Annex
A onwards. The production of the parts in clause 6 which underpin
the fundamental new development of the welfare concept in clause
3 do seem to be a little piecemeal. I appreciate that you have
published Annexes A to L, but I think it would be to the benefit
of the Committee if perhaps your department could provide us with
a little more, to use modern parlance, of a roadmap as to how
the existing and the proposed powers are actually going to come
to pass, particularly bearing in mind clause 6(2) and the implementation
of it. Austin, I think you wanted to come back.
Q34 Mr Mitchell: I would agree with that
and it is certainly true, as you say, that attitudes, fashions
and mores can change and the period you are making regulations
over is a fairly extensive period. I do not think they will change
all that substantially over what they are now, but if you are
saying, "We shall be regulating on this, this and this over
this period", it is open to all kinds of interpretation.
I can imagine, say, the Daily Mail saying that Government
will be taking tyrannical powers and the RSPCA will be able to
invade your house at any time of the day or night, look at the
dog's diet sheet and examine it for injuries. We are unleashing
a tyranny here and this is New Labour in power. Draconian legislation,
regulations infringing the freedom of every pet-loving person
in this country. You are opening yourself to that kind of fear
creation machine.
Mr Bradshaw: If that is the case,
then we are doing so on the face of the Bill in clause 3 on welfare
where we talk about the five freedoms, one of which includes the
need for adequate food and water which will apply to all animals.
It is on the face of the Bill as soon as the Bill is enacted.
There may well be more detail when we come to—
Q35 Mr Mitchell: It is the question of
how you enforce it that has to be the problem.
Mr Bradshaw: Sure. When it comes
to drawing up the codes of conduct, there may be more detail on
different species of animals but the need for adequate food and
water is part of the animal welfare requirements on the face of
the Bill and I do not think that is unreasonable.
Q36 Mr Wiggin: As I understand it, with
regard to tail docking, working dogs will be exempted. Is that
right?
Mr Bradshaw: Our intention at
the moment is to have an exemption for types of dog which are
used for working but not for general breeds. There are about 40
breeds of dog that are currently docked fairly routinely for cosmetic
purposes and we do not think that that is any longer acceptable.
For dogs which are actually used as working dogs, we intend for
there to be an exemption, yes.
Q37 Mr Wiggin: If the Welsh Assembly
take a different view to you on which species or breeds or the
definition, how will you prosecute? Will you prosecute the farmer
on the Welsh border who is living in England or will the Welsh
Assembly be responsible if the holding on which he lives and works
crosses the border, like many do in my constituency? You may not
have a problem with devolution, but it does throw up all sorts
of difficulties in terms of definitions.
Ms Connell: I am not sure that
I can give a definite answer to that right away. That is something
we can certainly look into. As far as docking of dogs' tails is
concerned—
Q38 Mr Wiggin: That was just an example.
There will be differences both sides of the border.
Ms Connell: Yes. I think docking
of dogs' tails is possibly not the best example of problems that
might arise with, say, farms that straddle the border because
the docking itself is a mutilation that will happen either this
side or the other side of the border.
Q39 Mr Wiggin: Will it be where the person
lives or will it be where he did the operation?
Ms Connell: I suspect that it
probably would not even be him who did the operation but, whoever
did it, that person would presumably be prosecuted in the jurisdiction
where the act took place. That is certainly a point which is an
important point which needs further consideration because it is
possibly more important where you are looking at something like
welfare standards if they vary from one side of the border to
the other, then you have a farm with potentially two different
welfare standards.
| 
