Examination of Witnesses (Questions 147-159)
MR CHRIS
NEWMAN, DR
MIKE ALLEN,
MR IAN
ROBINSON AND
MS CORINNE
EVANS
7 SEPTEMBER 2004
Q147 Chairman: May I welcome our next
set of witnesses: the Federation of British Herpetologists, Dr
Mike Allen—yes, you are here, good—and Mr Chris Newman.
Could you just identify for the record, respectively, gentlemen,
what you do or what views you hold in your organisation?
Mr Newman: My name is Chris Newman,
I am actually the Chair of the Federation of British Herpetologists.
I have been involved in reptiles for the last 40 years and I am
currently the editor of The Reptilian magazine as
well.
Dr Allen: I am a member of the
Federation committee but my day-to-day work is infectious diseases.
I have been working in infectious disease and critical care since
1980. I sit on a national surveillance group, I am a member of
various societies and, at the moment, I run a number of clinical
trials, surveillance and intervention, particularly on hospital
superbugs, but I am also working with the University of Warwick
on the effects of environmental contamination with antibiotics
from farms and other sources.
Q148 Chairman: Thank you very much for
those pen pictures. We also have the International Fund for Animal
Welfare, and Ian Robinson, who is described as Emergency Relief
Manager, Wildlife Rescue, Rehabilitation and Sanctuaries Division.
I think that merits, Mr Robinson, the longest title we have had
so far! Thank you very much for coming. You are joined by Corinne
Evans, who has the shortest title, Parliamentary Officer. You
are all very welcome indeed. I think you have heard the, almost
now, standard question that we are asking our witnesses in this
inquiry. If you would like, on behalf of your respective organisations,
to summarise the key feature of the Bill that you think we really
ought not to forget in terms of why you think it is a good idea,
and what is the thing that you would emphasise most of all to
the Committee not to forget in terms of your main area of reservation.
I wonder if, perhaps, in reverse order, we could ask the International
Fund for Animal Welfare to respond first?
Ms Evans: Certainly. We welcome
this draft Bill and very much agree with the duty of care that
has been brought in with this Bill and the general structure of
the Bill. The one concern that we have, that we have submitted
in written evidence, is that exotic pets should be prioritised
under the secondary legislation. We believe that the level of
husbandry that they require is significant and that there are
both conservation and animal welfare concerns with the exotic
pet trade, and we believe that there ought to be a licensing system
for the exotic pet trade in the UK.
Q149 Chairman: Fine. Thank you.
Mr Newman: I have not had time
to think of a response to that. We very much welcome the draft
Bill. The Federation of British Herpetologists has been very proactive
within the Bill, from the inception. We think the duty of care
is an extremely good idea and we are very supportive of the Bill
but there are one or two areas where we do have concerns. None
of us are legal people, so some of this really needs to go down
to lawyers, but on welfare there are one or two issues we have,
which are minor concerns. Our biggest and overall concern is enforcement,
and that is a major issue for us.
Q150 Chairman: I am sure colleagues will
want to probe those aspects carefully. I would just like to begin
the questions, particularly, in terms of the International Fund
for Animal Welfare. You say in your evidence to the Committee
that you remain opposed to pet fairs and you urge the Government
to strengthen existing legislation to ensure that such fairs remain
prohibited. Why?
Ms Evans: We have a number of
concerns about pet fairs: that they are, obviously, temporary;
they involve the transport of animals over, often, quite long
distances; we are concerned about some of the conditions that
they are kept in—in cramped conditions—and we are
concerned, as you referred to earlier, about the potential transfer
of disease. We believe that shows are different to fairs, but
we do not believe that they are necessarily the best way to sell
and buy animals, particularly exotics.
Q151 Chairman: I would like, if I may,
to ask the Federation of British Herpetologists: you take a different
view to that; you welcome, I note from your evidence, the proposal
to clarify the law pertaining to such events. In paragraph 48
of your evidence you point out that these events have taken place
for a considerable amount of time. Just so that we can get a flavour
of the differing arguments, why, effectively, do you favour them,
because you do not ask for any kind of ban, you simply welcome
the proposals to clarify the law? Why do you think that these
fairs are a good thing?
Mr Newman: "Fairs" or
"shows"—it is a very difficult label. What do
we put on it? I chaired the deputy working group set up on this
and a very great part of our deliberations were to try to quantify
what was a fair and what was a show, and it is quite difficult
because there is a mixture within all of them. I think the gentleman
earlier said they are a hybrid—well, virtually all of them
are. There are relatively few what you would call pure shows.
Perhaps in dogs—I do not know. Cats and dogs were the only
shows I did not investigate but during the course of our work
we looked at everything else from rabbits, guinea pigs, budgies,
pigeons—everything you could think of, and there is a certain
amount of sales element within all of them. What we have to try
to do is quantify what was the main purpose.
Q152 Chairman: Can I be very rude and
interrupt because you raise a very interesting point there? In
your deliberations did you look at things like Smithfield, the
Royal Show—the whole variety of agricultural shows which
occur around the country in which case all kinds of animals turn
up in various guises either for exhibition or sale or whatever?
Did that come into the considerations as well?
Mr Newman: It did not. We were
seeking direction from Defra; we did not go down that route; that
has emerged as an issue subsequent to us handing in our report
and I would hope that within the group we may get the opportunity
to refute that, because we were not aware at that time. I come
from a reptile background, and although I keep all sorts of animals
my main interest is reptiles and my main knowledge is reptile
shows. I covered fish, birds and mammals. We missed the agricultural
side of it which is quite a large percentage. This year we had
one in Portsmouth not far from where I live which has been going
on for 90 years at which animals in terms of pigeons, rabbits
and guinea pigs had all been sold after showing, but the local
authority banned that this year. So that is an issue that we need
to look at again.
Q153 Chairman: Just before I bring in
Mr Simpson who wants to continue this line of questioning, can
I go back to our first witness and ask this? You say very clearly
you are opposed to pet fairs. Do you make a distinction between
pets, in my layman's terms small animals, as opposed to agricultural
shows of various sizes where animals of lots of different species
will come together temporarily for the purpose of participating
in the show for various reasons? Do you make any distinction between
the two?
Ms Evans: Our focus was certainly
on exotic pets, or pets and exotic pets in particular.
Q154 Alan Simpson: I am uneasy about
what started out as a desire in welcoming that we clarify the
distinction between pets and shows and fairs. I am uncomfortable
that we are drifting into a confusion about that. People have
said, "Well, it is hard to draw the distinction because a
show becomes a fair and a car park afterwards", and one of
the options must surely be to say, "Well, you prosecute the
people in the car park afterwards", because those who wish
to show are clearly coming with a different view about the care
of the animals that they have from those who wish to sell. I do
not keep animals for show or for sale but I do understand the
difference between a market and a display, and is that not what
has to be reflected clearly in the legislation?
Mr Newman: May I ask a question?
Q155 Chairman: I cannot guarantee we
will give you the answer!
Mr Newman: Have you been to any
of these events to determine how they are worked?
Q156 Alan Simpson: I have not because
I do not have an interest in that part of the process. I can understand
people who wish to take part in events that show how they have
bred animals as pets, and in a sense I can understand the pride
in that. I can also understand those who wish to breed for commercial
purposes but that for me is a market and ought to be treated as
a market, and I wonder whether we are creating more problems for
ourselves if we allow representations to muddy the distinction
between a show and a market.
Mr Newman: You have asked a very
complex question which will take a long time to answer because
it is very muddy and it is very unclear. Our deliberations were
to try to distinguish what was meant by what. The RSPCA who were
heavily involved in our working group equally have problems as
to what constitutes a market, and none of us could answer that.
The commercial test is almost impossible to answer. So we concluded
that anywhere that animals are sold, whether it be just one or
a multitude of animals, would constitute the fair that should
be regulated and licensed. Most of these events are hybrid; I
am not aware of an event where you specifically set up a market
to sell animals. There is always another purpose within that.
Q157 Joan Ruddock: I understand exactly
when you say that the RSPCA made that distinction, but I was trying
to think through some of the issues that were suggested which
were about the transportation, the condition of transportation,
the distances, the way animals are kept and so on and so forth.
Is it that in a show people are trying to show the excellence
of their animal, and does it therefore follow that they are going
to be in the best condition, that they are not going to take them
huge distances where they might end up half dead when they got
there? I have not visited these shows either except as a child,
so is it in practice that you are talking about the different
aspirations, as it were, of people who were at the show and those
who were going to sell, and is it more likely that the welfare
issues are amongst those who seek to produce many more animals
for the point of sale as opposed to the excellence with which
they present their animal at a show?
Mr Newman: The shows themselves
are run usually by enthusiasts. The welfare is the prime concern.
When the event is set up the shows will be inspected. We always
recommend, and the Federation's guideline is, that there should
be a vet present; we always invite the RSPCA to be present. I
have yet in the ten years I have been heavily involved with this
been shown an issue of animal welfare at a show. We would ask,
"If those are issues, bring them to us and let us see them".
We have not seen them. Even commercially the implication seems
to be that if you are selling animals you do not care about the
animals; you only care about the sale. I am sorry but that is
entirely untrue because if you do not care for that animal and
you do not care for the welfare of that animal you are going to
lose that animal, it is going to die and you are not going to
be able to sell it and make a profit. So the concern of everybody
is in the welfare of those animals, and those shows are inspected.
In the last two years when we have had the RSPCA attend our shows
they have yet to report a problem. They may ask for them to be
in bigger boxes but then when you explain to them that the animal
itself is much more comfortable for a short time in a much more
contained environment they understand that, and those are not
issues.
Q158 Joan Ruddock: If the enthusiasts
who would like to breed animals could not sell them through shows
and fairs, why could they not sell them to pet shops?
Mr Newman: They do. Equally they
can sell them on the Internet, they can sell them in the local
newspaper or through an advert in the shop corner. Everybody who
has been involved with this in the enforcement side from the RSPCA,
the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health, LACoRS, have
all said that it would be much more preferable that these events
could be licensed and regulated so you could check what is going
on, and it is a great opportunity. There is a suggestion that
these animals are transported huge distances. In the reptile circle
most of the events are quite regional, so it would be rare for
somebody to travel more than 100 miles to get to an event. Maybe
they do but that in itself does not matter if the animal is packed
accordingly and its transport is an appropriate mix and we do
inspect the animals when they arrive and we do give out guidelines
how the animals should be transported—we produce a very
strong code of practice for shows and that is what we ask people
to abide by and that is checked. We do not see the issues. There
would be an issue if perhaps an animal is going one week to an
event and then next week to another event; ten years ago that
may well have been true but the whole point of today's events
is that they are much bigger and there are less of them, so there
would be a greater length of time in between so you are not going
to get this transport of animals.
Q159 Chairman: Mr Robinson, do you want
to make a comment on any of that?
Mr Robinson: I would, yes. We
do have concerns about the welfare of animals at pet fairs; we
have concerns about the transport to pet fairs, and we have concerns
about the conditions in which animals are kept during pet fairs.
There the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health, for instance,
in 2001 stated their belief that the welfare of animals is put
at risk at temporary pet fairs, and they believe they are illegal
events and should not be licenced In 2003 at the National Cage
and Aviary Bird exhibition a bird was found to have psittacosis
which is a disease highly infectious to both birds and people,
and this does show that there is evidence that there are welfare
problems at these shows and health problems at these shows. I
think if somebody wanted to go and buy an animal at one of these
shows they would be seeing not the best of conditions to either
transport them or to maintain them. Also, if they bought and took
away that animal, they would have difficulty in maintaining the
sort of aftercare and contact with the vendor which really should
be there to make sure that there is after sales support.
|
