| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
'(6) The appropriate national authority shall issue guidance about the exercise by a court of powers under subsection (1).
(7) In determining how to exercise its powers under this section, the court shall have primary regard to the welfare of the animal.'.
Amendment No. 20, in page 10, line 38, at end insert—
'(9) The Legal Aid Act 1988 shall have effect in relation to an application under this section as if those proceedings had been included in the definition of criminal proceedings under the Access to Justice Act 1999.'.
Amendment No. 21, in clause 22, page 11, line 41, at end insert—
'(1A) For the purposes of subsection (1), an inspector shall only be able to require the licence holder to produce records relevant to the previous 12 months.'.
Amendment No. 22, in clause 28, page 13, line 25, leave out 'this Act' and insert
'sections 8, 10, 11 or 30(9)'.
Amendment No. 23, in page 13, line 26, leave out 'three years' and insert 'twelve months'.
Amendment No. 24, in clause 29, page 14, line 3, leave out from 'liable' to end of line 7 and insert—
'(a) on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks, or a fine not exceeding £20,000, or to both;
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or a fine not exceeding £20,000, or to both.'.
Amendment No. 26, in clause 30, page 15, line 5, at end insert—
'(4A) A person appointed under subsection (4)(a) must be a veterinary surgeon or other person who the court is satisfied has the appropriate training and qualifications in, and experience of, animal welfare.'.
Amendment No. 119, in page 15, line 22, at end insert
',where it is appropriate so to do in the interests of the animal.'.
Amendment No. 120, in clause 32, page 17, line 4, at end insert
',where it is appropriate so to do in the interests of the animal.'.
Amendment No. 121, in clause 33, page 17, line 26, at end insert—
'(c) whether it is appropriate so to do in the interests of the animal.'.
Amendment No. 133, in clause 42, page 22, line 15, at end insert
'in accordance with its interests'
14 Mar 2006 : Column 1384
Amendment No. 109, in clause 57, page 30, line 19, at end insert—
'(3A) Subsection (3) does not apply to a yard or garden where an animal is in the open and can clearly be seen from public land.'.
Amendment No. 1, in schedule 3, page 42, line 25, at end add—
15(1) In section 25 of the Gambling Act 2005 after subsection (3) insert—
"(3A) The Commission shall publish guidance under subsection (1) to the appropriate local authorities for the provision of the welfare of greyhounds, including—
(a) independent veterinary attendance at race meetings,
(b) the provision of welfare protection for retiring greyhounds,
(c) the identification of greyhounds,
(d) the licensing of kennels, and
(e) track layout and condition.".'.
Mark Pritchard: The new clause is intended to end the sale of endangered animals on the internet. It follows on from my ten-minute Bill, which was presented to the House on 31 January. Hon. Members will know that it is illegal to buy and sell endangered animals, but the fact is that that trade goes on every single day and is growing. It is increasingly being used by serious criminals to raise revenue for other activities that they are involved with.
The new clause would introduce third party responsibility, not least in relation to those who are involved on the internet through internet service providers. ISPs increasingly say to us that the volume of traffic and chatter on the internet is too great. I was in my office in the House of Commons some weeks ago and went online. Hon. Members will be astonished to know that I could have purchased a leopard, an American bald eagle, an alligator, a chimpanzee, a dromedary camel and many other endangered animals.
It is not good enough any more for internet service providers to say that they do not know what is going on through their infrastructure systems. As I said, they say that there is too much chatter and that the volume of traffic is too great to monitor such things. However, we know that internet service providers have been very successful in working with the police and law enforcement agencies to deal with child pornography through the work of the Internet Watch Foundation. I congratulate the Internet Watch Foundation on the good work that it does. If we can regulate—rightly so—child pornography on the internet, which is clearly illegal, internet service providers could do more to stop the sale of endangered animals on the internet. Some of those animals may well be extinct in a decade. The Government and the House have a responsibility to play their part to ensure that that does not happen. Hon. Members may have seen the new BBC series, "Planet Earth", featuring David Attenborough, at the weekend. There were some marvellous animals on display in that programme, including the mountain leopard.
Sir Patrick Cormack : It was a snow leopard.
Mark Pritchard:
It was, and I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. In fact, the mountain leopard is
14 Mar 2006 : Column 1385
also an endangered species. Whether we are talking about a snow leopard or a mountain leopard, the fact is that they are endangered and it is incumbent on us all, as Members of Parliament who value the natural environment, to use this opportunity to ensure that internet service providers do far more to protect them.
Norman Baker : I welcome the new clause and agree that the proposal is important. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the Home Office has shown that action can be taken on child pornography and that therefore the mechanism is already in place to achieve what he wants to achieve, which I support? Does he agree that the Home Office ought to do rather more than it is doing at present on the matter?
Mark Pritchard: The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right, but I would not wish to be adversarial today. I know that the Government wish to do all that they can through the Bill to safeguard the welfare of all animals. The relationship between the Opposition and the Government has been constructive throughout all the Bill's stages and I am sure that the Minister would wish that to continue today—specifically in relation to my new clause, of course.
8.45 pm
The Government are considering filtering, monitoring and regulating violent pornography on the internet and the Home Office is holding discussions on the matter. I welcome the fact that filtering on the internet will be extended in that regard. Internet service providers need to be careful that they are not viewed as aiding and abetting an illegal trade that is growing and being used more and more by serious criminals. If ISPs can regulate political thought in China, given the amount of chatter and volume of traffic produced by a population of such a size, the very least that they can do is to filter and monitor, and to assist law enforcement agencies and wildlife crime officers in constabularies—super-constabularies—throughout the nation to try to track down people who peddle such an evil crime.
Internet service providers have the opportunity to use animal welfare to give them a legitimate competitive advantage. They could differentiate their product by marketing themselves, as Marks and Spencer has successfully done in the past few weeks and months, as an animal welfare company. Given the choice, many of my constituents would prefer to give their business to an ISP that cares about the problem than to an ISP that does not give two hoots about the sale of endangered animals on the internet—perhaps that is fitting because one can even get owls on the internet. Rather than ISPs saying that the requirement would be an affront to their business models or an assault on their bottom-line profit margins, they should see the situation in the round and realise that they could get a competitive advantage for their business.
Of course, ISPs could take immediate action. I hope that the Government will support my new clause and move swiftly within the 12-month period set out in subsection (1) to get regulations in place. ISPs should make it clearer in their terms and conditions that those who sign up as customers should not partake in any illegal activity, including such sales. I am relaxed about the activity being specified and stipulated in the terms and conditions and set out as a distinct illegal activity.
14 Mar 2006 : Column 1386
The reporting of illegal activity should be made much easier. If one sees any illegal activity on some ISPs, one must dig deep in the small print to find out how to report it. I asked ISPs several months ago how many staff responded to any illegal activity that is brought to their attention vis-à-vis the sale of endangered animals on the internet and how quickly they responded. I was horrified to hear that often only a handful of people filter through a lot of reports of all sorts of illegal activity late at night. I am afraid that the sale of endangered animals on the internet was pretty much at the bottom of the pile. With the Government's assistance, I hope that new clause 2 will ensure that the illegal activity is taken more seriously by ISPs and the Government.
I hope that the Government's actions under subsection (1) will include a public awareness campaign. I have long called for a national animal welfare day, but we have not yet had a response from the Minister on that. I am happy for him to take all the credit and glory for the idea—let us just have it. I was also hoping to hear about a legal helpdesk at DEFRA. Many people are not sure about what is and what is not illegal, and it would be helpful to have one desk officer who is an expert on the internet.
As I said in the House some weeks ago when I introduced my ten-minute Bill, the Home Office should set targets for prosecutions of people who have been caught selling endangered animals on the internet. This Government are very keen on targets, and rightly so in many respects. It will horrify Members that last year there were only two successful prosecutions of people involved in this trade, and they were for dead endangered animals, not live ones. The trade in live endangered animals continues. We do not know where they have come from, whether they have been snatched from their mothers' arms, whether they have been transported in an animal welfare-friendly way—I doubt it—or where they are going to reside, whether it be in a small box room at the back of some tower block or in a cage in somebody's cellar. However, we can interdict these evil crimes given the political will.
If the Government are not prepared to support the new clause, that will make a mockery of the whole Bill, which would be a great shame given their commitments on this issue. We have waited a very long time for this Bill, which brings together many other pieces of legislation. We have not seen such a Bill for many decades, and we may not see another such for many decades. The Government say that they are the iPod generation, and that they are committed to information technology and the internet age. If so, this is a window of opportunity for them to show that they are committed in terms of animal welfare as well.
There is dispute in the courts about the downloading of music on the internet, and I understand that the judge has demanded information about the people concerned. I will not mention the case for obvious reasons. The principle of the courts saying, "We want ISPs to give us the information about alleged illegal activity" has now been established. A similar legal wrangle is going on in the United States, where the authorities are asking for information from ISPs about people who have searched for particular words or phrases—"terrorism", "chemical attack", or whatever it might be. That battle is going on.
14 Mar 2006 : Column 1387
I should like to make a prediction, although that is a dangerous thing for politicians to do. I predict that unless the Government catch up with the will of the people and with consumer discernment about differentiating which ISPs are animal-friendly and which are not, and unless they act swiftly, they will be left behind where the courts and consumers have led. That is not something that the Government would want to be seen to be neglecting, and I am therefore positive that the Minister will be supportive of the new clause.
In conclusion, the objectives of the new clause are to ensure that Her Majesty's Government commit to a timetable, that ISPs take responsibility for aiding and abetting the growing crime, and that ending the sale of endangered animals on the internet has statutory force. The new clause provides a genuine opportunity—it is now down to you, Minister.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |