Much has been made of the work done by the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, but the Government have ignored many of its recommendations, one of which concerns suffering. It said that the whole clause on suffering is unclear in its intent and application. We would not need to discuss primates if the definition of suffering was clear. Part of the reason why it is not is that the Government have merely taken some clauses from case law going back to the 1880s. I hope that in Committee the Government will be more minded to listen to some of the recommendations made by the EFRA Committee than they were previously.
Animal Welfare Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Tony Baldry
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 10 January 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Animal Welfare Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
441 c179 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 20:36:33 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_289592
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_289592
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_289592