---

David Taylor : My hon. Friend lists some of the unresolved matters, but as a fellow member of the Select
 
14 Mar 2006 : Column 1424
 
Committee, does he agree by and large that the Bill is a shining example of what can be done with pre-legislative scrutiny in achieving a relatively uncontroversial Bill with the wide consensual support of the House? Does he agree that the Government should use pre-legislative scrutiny much more as the Bill is a classic example of that working at its best?

Mr. Drew: I agree. I took part in the pre-legislative scrutiny of the Bill as well as serving on the Standing Committee. I thank all Members who took part. One of the most interesting things was that Government Members probably talked for as long as Opposition Members, which must be unique. In doing so, I hope that we were able to make our points. No party can claim the monopoly of righteousness on this matter so it is right that Back Benchers should make proposals, even if we did not get them to exactly the point we wanted. However, the Government and my hon. Friend the Minister will want to continue that work in due course, and I hope that the measure makes progress and that a good Bill comes back from the Lords.

11.4 pm

Norman Baker: I thank all members of the Committee and the Minister for his constructive approach to the Bill. At the beginning of its passage, I drew his attention to the way that his colleague, the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the hon. Member for South Dorset (Jim Knight), had dealt with the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill in a constructive and consensual manner, which had improved it. The Minister has followed that path, emulated his colleague and we have a better Bill. I congratulate him on the way he has brought the Bill through Committee and to the House. As I told the Minister's colleague, when Ministers listen and amend Bills, it is a sign of strength, not of weakness. I congratulate the Minister on proposing a Bill that was good to start with, and is better as a consequence of the amendments that have been made in Committee and on Report.

I congratulate the Conservative Front Benchers—the hon. Members for Leominster (Bill Wiggin) and for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice)—on their approach to the Bill, as well as Labour Back Benchers on theirs, to pick up the point made by the hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew). Those hon. Members who have served on many Standing Committees are used to seeing massed ranks of statues behind Ministers—the Labour Back Benchers who say nothing and sit there doing their casework for days on end. On this occasion, without exception, the Labour Back Benchers who served on the Committee took part and made some constructive comments. Generally, the Bill was considered more fully and sensibly as a consequence of their efforts as well, and I hope that Labour Back Benchers will take a lesson from that and apply it elsewhere.

Anne Snelgrove: Labour Back Benchers always make constructive comments; we do not necessarily make them in public.

Norman Baker: On grounds of accountability and democracy, I encourage the hon. Lady to make her comments in public in future—obviously, we could then
 
14 Mar 2006 : Column 1425
 
all hear what was being said and we might even agree with it. The example set by the Bill is one that should be followed in future.

It is a good Bill. It is not perfect, of course. There are issues with which we disagree—it would be extraordinary if we did not—and I hope that some of the issues to which the hon. Member for Stroud referred will be dealt with under secondary legislation. I understand the comments about Christmas trees, but we have taken on trust the Minister's assurance that measures will be introduced on a range of issues that people feel very strongly about—whether electric shock collars, greyhounds or the other issues that hon. Members have raised in the Chamber today and in Committee—and we want the Minister to deliver those assurances under secondary legislation and look forward to that happening.

I draw the Minister's attention to the fact that, under clause 63, there is a commitment to do nothing very much at all in implementing the Bill. We only have his word about that—I am happy to take his word, of course—but we want further action to ensure that this enabling Bill, which we will shortly pass on to the other place, is acted on using statutory instruments in due course.

Of course, I am particularly pleased about clause 8, which introduces the RSPCA's five freedoms and is the cornerstone of the Bill in many ways. It is very important indeed and will go a long way to ensure that some of the awful examples of cruelty, which the RSPCA and others have drawn to hon. Members' attention over many years, will be curtailed and can be properly prosecuted by the appropriate authorities when they are detected, often earlier than has been hitherto possible.

This is the first Animal Welfare Bill for 95 years. Of course, the Protection of Animals Act 1911 was introduced by a Liberal Government. Obviously, animals have had to wait for another Liberal Government, which has not happened since those days, unfortunately—so we have had to rely instead on a Labour Government to introduce another Bill to update that very important 1911 Act. I am pleased that the Government have done so. Animals will be better protected as a consequence of the Bill. I am also pleased that it has been possible to do so in a spirit of consensus and co-operation across all parties—something of which we can be proud.

Lastly, I thank the Minister for his kind comments and assure him that it is my intention that my departure from the Front Bench will be temporary.

11.8 pm

Derek Conway (Old Bexley and Sidcup) (Con): The hour is late and I shall be brief. The House has been genuinely congratulatory of the Minister, and those hon. Members who took part on Second Reading and watched the Committee in progress feel that he has made a particular contribution to the Bill. For those in the animal welfare lobby who have been arguing about bits of the Bill for nine years now, there was some doubt whether it would ever come to fruition. On Second Reading, we spoke about it being a Christmas tree Bill, which is why Conservative Members were always a bit
 
14 Mar 2006 : Column 1426
 
scared of introducing such legislation when we were in power. I am very glad that the Conservative Front-Bench team has welcomed the Bill tonight and has been constructive as well.

What the Minister has achieved is undoubtedly notable, and what the animal welfare charities will look for in the future is what happens with the regulations and how the Government respond. The one word of advice that I urge on him is that, both in the House and particularly among those who advise Ministers, there is the view that the only organisation that has a serious view on animal welfare interests in this country is the RSPCA. It is a really good organisation and, although it has its critics, it does a splendid job. The companion welfare charities, however, such as the Dogs Trust and Cats Protection, with which I have been involved, take an interest in a single species, so their experience and knowledge tends to be much better than that which Ministers will find in the RSPCA. As regulations are introduced, I hope that the Minister will seek a wider input and look beyond that notable charity to charities with a specific interest in different types of animals. The Minister is rightly to be congratulated, and people working in animal welfare on a daily basis will not forget his contribution.

11.10 pm

Mr. Hollobone: I, too, congratulate the Minister on the Bill's passage through the House. I very much enjoyed serving on the Committee, and I am grateful for his comments. He will not be surprised to learn that I am disappointed that he has not taken on board the seriousness with which greyhound welfare charities view the state of the greyhound industry. There are many well-organised greyhound tracks, as he knows, and the British Greyhound Racing Board has a good reputation. However, there are 20 or so unregistered greyhound tracks, and proper regard is not paid to the welfare of thousands of greyhounds. In this country, there are—

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst): Order. I hate to intrude on the benign atmosphere on Third Reading, but I am bound to remind hon. Members, particularly the hon. Gentleman, that on Third Reading one must confine one's remarks, apart from the usual thanks, to the contents of the Bill, rather than the things that are not in the Bill.

Mr. Hollobone: As always, I am grateful for your advice, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It is extraordinarily difficult in the House, especially for a new Member, to advance the cause of greyhound welfare. I have done my level best to try to make the Government listen to my concerns.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I always want to be helpful, particularly to new Members, so may I suggest the device of an Adjournment debate?
 
14 Mar 2006 : Column 1427
 

---