Memorandum submitted by Passports for
Pets
You drew my attention to the Government's draft
Animal Welfare Bill. Despite my earlier comments on the Defra
consultation paper there is still ambiguity on one important point:
does the draft legislation apply to quarantine kennels or not?
In terms of the draft Bill a quarantine owner
is clearly the keeper of the animals in his care; he is responsible
for them and in charge of them.
The draft Bill specifies that boarding kennels
are covered. This might be taken to include quarantine kennels,
which perform a similar function, but there should be no ambiguity.
Welfare in quarantine kennels has long been
a matter of public concern because the animals are kept in confined
conditions for up to six months. The Ministry of Agriculture used
to argue that it had no powers over welfare matters in these kennels
and that its sole responsibility was for security. This omission
was corrected by legislation in 1998 "The animal Health (amendment)
Act 1998", known originally as the Flynn Bill, which empowered
the Ministry to impose welfare standards for quarantine kennels,
but no statutory orders have been made. It would be extraordinary
if quarantine kennels were now to fall outside the excellent welfare
principles embodied in the new draft Bill.
The numbers of animals subjected to quarantine
has roughly speaking halved since the initiation of the Pet Travel
scheme in February 2000, but there are still some thousands which
go through the system every year with no welfare protection. Many
are badly affected—a matter of acute concern to their owners—and
some do not survive the six months. I believe that this is the
moment to put their welfare status beyond doubt by including them
explicitly in the new legislation.
Lady Fretwell
Chairman of Passports for Pets
28 July 2004
| 
