Bill
Wiggin: As I said earlier, I support proper punishment for
genuine cruelty. Obviously, we cannot amend a statutory instrument.
However, it is odd that although a fine could go to level 5 for
cruelty, that is not included. Why was that not incorporated during the
drafting process? I should be grateful if the Minister looked into
that, if necessary, and if he could write to me that would be
great.
Jonathan
Shaw: I confirm that we could use level 5 under the 2006
Act. I think I got my words round the wrong way. I can assure the hon.
Gentleman that that is
so. The hon. Gentleman
and the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnorshire, the Liberal Democrat
spokesman, both mentioned the review of common land. Our maps of common
land date back to the 1960s. We look forward to the implementation of
the Commons Act 2006, so we can have proper detailed information on the
common land in our country. I assure the Committee that there will be a
review in two years. My noble friend Lord Rooker gave that undertaking
in the House of Lords yesterday
evening.
Mr.
Williams: When we considered the then Commons Bill, we
were not aware that there would be an extension of the duty to people
who keep animals on commons, allowing them to be dealt with under the
same regulation. That places a duty on people who keep animals that
become ill to keep them isolated or in a situation where they can be
treated. Obviously, that is not easy on a common. There is a
presumption in the 2006 Act that buildings should not be put on
commons. There seems to be a bit of a problem there. Will the Minister,
in considering any regulation advanced under that Act, take that into
account?
Jonathan
Shaw: We will certainly take that into account. We cannot
regard animals that are grazed on common land as second class or
consider their welfare differently from those grazed on normal
pastures. I think that the hon. Gentleman accepts that, but he raises
an important issue. I will consider that matter and write to him and
other Committee
members. On the
European directive and the review of the scientific evidence, we were
reviewed by the European Commission according to advice from the animal
welfare committee of the European Food Safety Authority. A timetable
for the review was set by the
Commission. The hon.
Member for Leominster asked, “Why only cattle, hens and
pigs?” Schedule 1 covers animals, such as goats, for which there
is no specific European welfare
directive. Does
the rule on popholes in schedule 2 apply to all henhouses? Schedule 2
only applies to laying hens in establishments with 350 or more laying
hens. My hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West said that
a flock of 350 hens is protected by a duty of care under the Animal
Welfare Act 2006. The obligation is to avoid causing suffering. So far
as schedule 1 applies, everyone has the duty of
care. The
hon. Member for Brecon and Radnorshire mentioned including animal
welfare in WTO negotiations and referred to the level playing field
and, importantly,
the principle involved. He will understand that we would not be alone:
it would not be a UK position, but a European position. We continue to
argue in Europe for improving animal welfare, as the Conservatives did
in respect of pigs. I have acknowledged that work, which we have
continued. I think that the British public will be pleased to hear that
there is consensus on animal
welfare. Bill
Wiggin: We talked about laying hens. I
have heard rumour—nothing more than that—that in Europe
there may be a desire to delay the implementation of the cage ban in
2012. Will the Minister give an assurance that he will do all he can to
ensure that it takes place in 2012? Will he also confirm that the
relevant provisions will apply to city farms and that type of
establishment as well as to ordinary rural
farms?
Jonathan
Shaw: I am grateful for that question. We will certainly
do everything to ensure that the 2012 target is adhered to. We do not
want any rowing back on improvements to animal welfare. It is
reasonable that farmers tell us about the level playing field, which is
critical. We will continue in that
vein.
Mr.
Williams: I am pleased that the Minister said that
WTO negotiations could or should be carried out at a European level,
because that would add more weight to the representations made.
However, that does not apply just to animal welfare issues. Those
points should also be made on environmental and human rights issues in
respect of employment in agriculture. I should be grateful if the
Minister spoke to me about that on another
occasion.
Jonathan
Shaw: The hon. Member for Leominster asked whether other
European countries will row back on the 2012 ban in respect of
chickens. We have to forge our alliance with other member states in
Europe so we can have a powerful voice at the WTO. I have taken that
point on board. It is right to raise that issue. I would love to
announce that all the other European states will agree with us, and
sign up and take that matter to the WTO. Trade, employment and animal
welfare issues are essential, but so is reform of the common
agricultural policy, not just for animal welfare reasons but for
developing countries to develop their markets so that there is a more
level playing field. That means a level playing field not just for
animal welfare, but for farmers in this country, the rest of Europe and
the developing world as
well. Hon.
Members mentioned protection from predators. Methods depend on the
deterrents, such as electric fences and providing shelter from birds.
Some predators, such as crows, will be shot. I hope that the crows have
heard that
warning.
Bill
Wiggin: What about
badgers?
Jonathan
Shaw: We are keeping that matter under careful review in
light of the evidence that has been presented by scientists, as the
hon. Gentleman is fully aware.
Farm inspections are important.
They need to be undertaken with a light touch for those farms that
practise good husbandry. Good farmers have nothing to fear from
inspection. Indeed, I hope that inspections are a positive process and
that they confirm good farming. The hon. Gentleman winces, having been
through the process, which I clearly have not. To take a parallel case,
head teachers fear Ofsted inspections—perhaps that is a result
of the climate created some years ago—but they are generally
pleased once they have been carried out. I hope that it is the same for
farmers.
Mr.
Williams: In a previous life I was a schools inspector, so
I know a little about the apprehension that inspections create. As a
farmer, I know that however confident one is in one’s systems,
there will always be a little apprehension. The problem is not so much
one-off inspections. A number of farmers have complained about a series
of inspections that take place over a number of months, but which could
be done together in one big inspection. The fear and apprehension would
have been contained to one or a couple of days rather than being spread
over a longer period. We need to have such co-ordination if the
Minister is to achieve the light touch that he
wants.
Jonathan
Shaw: I give way to the hon.
Gentleman.
Bill
Wiggin: The hon. Member for Brecon and Radnorshire is
absolutely right about inspections. It is another aspect to consider. I
have been inspected four times in the past two years, but I have only a
handful of cattle and sheep. Inspectors are unable to cover everything,
so a vet inspects the health of livestock, someone from the Rural
Payments Agency makes sure that the movement book is correct, and
someone else may come to check ear tags. There are so many different
types of inspection that simply being good at animal welfare or farming
does not produce the feeling that the Minister described. I urge him to
do everything that he can to streamline the inspection process to
ensure that we have success in animal welfare without the persistent
inspections that farmers have to put up with at the
moment.
The
Chairman: Order. It would be helpful if interventions were
much briefer. I have been very tolerant, but I am running out of
patience just a little.
Jonathan
Shaw: You are, of course, ever tolerant, Lady Winterton,
but we know that if we take things too far, you will carry out your own
inspection of our comments and give them an E. Where was
I?
Bill
Wiggin: Your were being
inspected.
Jonathan
Shaw: Yes, thank you.
The hon. Members for Brecon and
Radnorshire and for Leominster made reasonable points. I am reminded
of, I think, a Heineken advert in which all the utility companies put
their pipes in a hole in the ground at the same time. We often have to
wait at traffic lights while the gas people come along and dig up the
road, and a
few weeks later we have to wait while the electricity people do the
same. It is for agencies to use their best endeavours to join up their
actions because that reduces the time taken up and the anxiety caused.
The picture painted for the Committee by the hon. Member for Leominster
was helpful. He is a practising
farmer— Bill
Wiggin: A
smallholder.
Jonathan
Shaw: The hon. Gentleman is a modest man, and I am sure
that inspections showed his holding to be exemplary. He has been in his
post for a considerable period and he has brought to it experience of
the different types of inspections, not only those concerning animal
welfare, and I appreciate his comments.
There will be matters
outstanding from the issues that have been raised, and I undertake to
write to members of the Committee to deal with those points in detail.
We can take from the Committee the pleasure of knowing that there is
consensus on animal welfare. We recognise that there are pressures on
farmers and that we should seek to ensure that there are level playing
fields, but we are proud to lead the way on animal welfare. We can be
proud also of the consensus, which the British people will support
along with the
regulations. Question
put and agreed
to. Resolved, That
the Committee has considered the draft Welfare of Farmed Animals
(England) Regulations 2007.
Committee
rose at twenty-nine minutes to Four
o’clock.
| 
