Animal Welfare Bill

moved Amendment No. 1: Page 4, line 3, at end insert ““, that the first and second conditions mentioned below are met. (4A) The first condition referred to in subsection (4) is that there has been produced to the veterinary surgeon such evidence as the appropriate national authority may by regulations require for the purpose of showing”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, I will also speak to Amendments Nos. 2 to 4. A considerable amount of time has been spent—long before I joined the department—discussing the docking of dogs’ tails. The Government’s amendments are in response to the amendment tabled in Grand Committee by the noble Lord, Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior, prompted by concerns raised by the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons. The RCVS was worried that a vet could be accountable if they had been misled into docking a dog illegally, and that assessing whether a dog was ““likely to work”” from evidence provided was not within their professional expertise and training. Rather than having to certify that, in his opinion, a dog is likely to work, the amendments will allow a vet to certify that he has seen the evidence required by regulations to demonstrate that the dog is likely to work. On that basis, I beg to move.