Animal Welfare Bill

This amendment proposed by the noble Baroness, Lady Miller of Chilthorne Domer, introduces a further power for national authorities to prohibit the keeping of certain animals at certain premises, with the exception of zoos. As the noble Baroness expanded, it refers specifically to primates. I assure Members of the Committee that Clause 12 contains sufficient power to make regulations concerning those matters, should it be considered necessary to do so. Amendment No. 75, new Clause 10, proposes the introduction of a licensing system for the keeping of primates. This new clause would make it an offence to keep a primate without a valid licence, although there would be exemptions for zoos, establishments certified under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, circuses and pet shops. The power to regulate the keeping of certain animals by licence is in Clause 13. We are aware of the views that many people hold, to which the Committee has referred, on the keeping of primates as pets. There are thought to be approximately 3,000 primates kept by individuals in Great Britain. The Government have already acknowledged that problem. The wildlife species conservation division of Defra is considering responses to a public consultation to look at the feasibility of using measures under Article 8.2 of CITES to limit the keeping of primates by private individuals to specialist keepers on the basis of conservation provision. The consultation is complete, and colleagues in the global wildlife division of Defra are looking at the responses. It would be inappropriate to pre-empt the outcome of the consultation by taking unilateral action on this matter. We would prefer to await a review of the results of the CITES consultation to ensure that there is a proper, unified approach to Government policy in this area. The welfare offence will be backed up by appropriate codes of practice for the types of animals concerned. We hope that the code of practice will be available and drafted by the end of the year. It may be considered that only specialist keepers will be able to comply with the code fully. The code of practice is guidance, but, in addition, it can be evidence of an offence or a defence to a criticism of an offence, depending on whether the code has been complied with. Our thinking is that secondary legislation under the Bill is the most appropriate vehicle, but we consider that a detailed code and the welfare offence team together are sufficient. There are other exotic species that also end up in sanctuaries, ranging from alligators to parrots. Primates and other creatures often go to specialist sanctuaries, but it is not always possible for them so to do. We intend as a priority to develop a detailed code for the keeping of various primate species that are likely to be held in captivity. Ultimately, we aim to restrict the keeping of primates to zoos, scientific institutions and specialist keepers. I hope that I have covered the points that were raised by the noble Baronesses. I am unable to respond in full to the noble Lord, Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville, except to observe that he has some interesting dining partners. I hope that the noble Baroness will feel satisfied with my reply. If she wants to raise further points before Report, I will be only too happy to respond.