I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. We may be talking about only one word, but that word is significant. We are all travelling in the same direction, as we want to try to ensure that the improvement notices are designed to address the problem. Sometimes, however, flexibility on the part of people who are judging the situation can provide a more just solution. We are therefore dependent on the issuing of the notice and on its terms. It is not sensible to adopt a prescriptive approach to the issuing of a notice, insisting on the terminology to be used and the issues to be addressed if the animal is in a dire situation. We must trust the people who will go out and investigate offences. If there is an obvious case of cruelty they will tackle it straight away. There are always borderline cases, however, and people will take a subjective view as to whether bad welfare extends into cruelty. The flexibility provided by the use of the word ““may”” offers that opportunity, so that is my preferred option.
Animal Welfare Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Colin Breed
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 14 March 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Animal Welfare Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
443 c1375 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:47:10 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307820
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307820
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307820