Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

Earl Peel: I explained at the outset that I recognised that the amendment was defective. None the less, we have had a useful debate.

I am bound to say that if the body appointed by the Secretary of State is to give sensible advice to the registrar, I cannot see how the process of advice will be enhanced if we have extreme bodies from either side arguing throughout his deliberations. I suspect that it would make the situation very difficult. The thrust of my amendment is probably about right, and I think that other noble Lords who have spoken have accepted that.

My noble friend Lord Mancroft raised what I thought was a very interesting point. The tribunal is designed to give advice to the registrar on aspects of cruelty. Who will give the registrar advice on the question of utility? Would that come from the same
 
27 Oct 2004 : Column 1329
 
bodies or from separate ones? Can the Minister explain how he thinks that would work because it would be useful for us to know?

Lord Whitty: In the balanced operation of the tribunal and the advice coming through the system, no doubt the bodies which are broadly speaking hunting-based would have a view on utility and why they hunt. It may be that animal welfare organisations have views on hunting, as would hunting organisations on animal welfare. We do not say that one aspect would come from one side and another aspect from the other side, but that both sorts of organisations should be engaged in the process.

Earl Peel: I am grateful to the Minister, but I still take the view that we do not want extremes from either side of the argument on this advisory body, otherwise the system will not work effectively. However, as I have said, this is a defective amendment and as such I shall not press it.

Amendment No. 19, as an amendment to Amendment No. 18, by leave, withdrawn.

On Question, Amendment No. 18 agreed to.

Lord Mancroft moved Amendment No. 20:


"ADVISORY BODIES
(1) English Nature may provide advice on request to the registrar or the Tribunal about the exercise of a function under this Act in relation to England.
(2) The Countryside Council for Wales may provide advice on request to the registrar or the Tribunal about the exercise of a function under this Act in relation to Wales."

The noble Lord said: In moving this amendment I suspect that I may have answered the question posed by the Minister a few moments ago. It refers to the other advisory bodies which the registrar must consult, one of which is the Countryside Council for Wales while the other is English Nature. I imagine that those bodies would be in an ideal position to advise the registrar on issues of utility, which is perhaps why they were originally included. However, beyond that advisory role, it is not clear why they have been included. I suppose that that is the answer to the rhetorical question put to me by the Minister. I beg to move.

Lord Whitty: Clearly, English Nature and the Countryside Council of Wales would be there to provide advice on a number of issues—principally on biodiversity—in the areas of their expertise.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Baroness Mallalieu moved Amendment No. 21:

"Application for registration


APPLICATION BY INDIVIDUAL
(1) An individual may apply to the registrar to be entered in the register in respect of hunting which he proposes to carry out.
(2) An applicant must be at least 16 years of age.
 
27 Oct 2004 : Column 1330
 

(3) Where an applicant is younger than 18 years of age, his application must be countersigned by a parent or guardian.
(4) An application must—
(a) be in the prescribed form,
(b) contain the prescribed information,
(c) be accompanied by the prescribed documents (if any), and
(d) be accompanied by the prescribed fee.
(5) An application must specify—
(a) the species of wild mammal which it is proposed to hunt, and
(b) the area in which it is proposed to hunt.
(6) An application may specify a condition to be included in the register as a condition of the proposed hunting.
(7) In this section "prescribed" means prescribed by regulations made by the Secretary of State."

The noble Baroness said: In moving Amendment No. 21, I shall speak also to the amendments grouped with it. The amendments all seek to reinstate the parts of the Bill that deal with applications for registration. In view of the exchanges that have taken place, I hope the Committee will not think me discourteous if I take them very shortly; all the amendments are set out clearly on the Marshalled List and are largely self-explanatory.

Amendment No. 21, which deals with applications by individuals, is in the form of the original government Bill as amended in Committee. The amendment there was to lower the age at which an applicant could make an application from 18 to 16; but where an applicant is younger than 18 his application has to be countersigned by a parent or guardian.

Amendment No. 24 is identical to the original government Bill, as introduced by Mr Alun Michael, as is Amendment No. 34, which deals with the handling of applications. I believe that Amendment No. 35 follows the Government's original wording; I shall be corrected if I am wrong. It is just possible from my briefing that it may include a change made at the Committee stage, but I believe it to be the original wording introduced by Mr Michael with the government Bill in 2002. Amendment No. 37 is identical to the original government Bill, as is Amendment No. 38, which deals with the variation of non-automatic conditions.

If noble Lords have questions about the operation of any of those parts of the Bill, I shall do my best to deal with them, but I will be largely reliant on the Government's Explanatory Notes, which are, in effect, my briefing. I hope that I have not taken the matter too shortly. With those comments and a desire to help anyone who has queries, I beg to move.

Lord Whitty: For the guidance of the Committee, my noble friend is correct that, in general, all the amendments in this group follow the terms of the original Bill with the one exception to which she referred—Amendment No. 21—which was changed in Committee to the form in which it appears in the amendment.

However, there was also an amendment to the ground covered by Amendment No. 24. This relatively simple amendment, which was made in Committee, extended the period in which an unsuccessful application for
 
27 Oct 2004 : Column 1331
 
registration could be made again from the original six months to 12 months. That is not a huge issue of principle, but it shows that we are in a pick-and-mix situation so far as concerns the amendments introduced in Committee in the Commons. Apart from that, my noble friend is correct that the amendments reflect the terms of the so-called Alun Michael Bill.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Mancroft moved Amendment No. 22:


"APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF GROUP
(1) One or more individuals may apply to the registrar to be entered in the register in respect of hunting to be carried out jointly by—
(a) the individual registered or one or more of the individuals registered, and
(b) one or more individuals under the supervision of the individual registered or of one or more of the individuals registered.
(2) Each of the applicants must be at least 16 years of age.
(3) An application must—
(a) be in the prescribed form,
(b) contain the prescribed information,
(c) be accompanied by the prescribed documents (if any), and
(d) be accompanied by the prescribed fee.
(4) An application must specify—
(a) the species of wild mammal which it is proposed to hunt, and
(b) the area in which it is proposed to hunt.
(5) An application may specify a condition to be included in the register as a condition of the proposed hunting.
(6) An application must, in particular, include conditions specifying—
(a) a maximum number of individuals who may hunt at any time,
(b) arrangements to ensure compliance with the condition about records imposed by section (Automatic conditions of group registration)(5), and
(c) arrangements for supervision by the individual or individuals to be registered of non-registered individuals participating in the proposed hunting.
(7) An application may request that one or more of the registered individuals should be registered in respect of hunting to be carried out without the participation of a non-registered individual (as well as in respect of the joint hunting mentioned in subsection (1)).
(8) Section (Registered hunting)(1) shall have effect as if the reference to individual registration included a reference to registration by virtue of subsection (7) above (but section (Registered hunting)(3) shall not apply).
(9) In this section "prescribed" means prescribed by regulations made by the Secretary of State."

The noble Lord said: Amendment No. 22 concerns an application on behalf of a group. It sets out the conditions under which group applications may be made to the registrar. Under this provision, one or more individuals may apply to be registered in respect of hunting to be carried out jointly by one or more of them and other non-registered persons under their supervision. An application for group registration must include conditions specifying, among other
 
27 Oct 2004 : Column 1332
 
things, the arrangements for the supervision of non-registered persons to ensure compliance with the conditions of registration.

Subsection (7) allows applicants for a group registration to apply to be registered to hunt in the absence of non-registered persons, and subsection (8) provides that such registration will be regarded as individual registration for the purposes of the clause on registered hunting. While applications for group registration may be made by persons who are members of any type of formal or informal association in respect of organised hunts, it is expected that the applicants for registration would normally be officials of the hunt. I beg to move.


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page