Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2007

I start by welcoming the noble Lord, Lord Taylor, to his Front-Bench position. I look forward to debating many issues with him both in Committee and on the Floor of the House. I also welcome the fact that we will benefit from the experience of the brief which the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, has and that he has not been reshuffled somewhere else. We certainly all appreciate the fact that he will continue to give us the benefit of his knowledge. Having said that, most of my questions will refer to issues raised in our debates on the Animal Welfare Bill. I agree with the noble Lord’s comments that much animal welfare is in the hands of consumers and their buying choices, but a lot also rests in the hands of the Government in how they choose to empower retailers through labelling schemes and, for example, whether they will make the Food Industry Sustainability Strategy voluntary or statutory. There was a fair amount of comment from the industry when it was made voluntary that it was fine for those who are happy to promote their goods on the basis of meeting very high standards and probably fine for those at the bottom of the pile who just sell on low price—even if it is not so fine for animals—but that it did nothing for all those in the middle. Although a lot of power is in the hands of consumers, the Government should not be sloping their shoulders in this regard. I have a few questions for the Minister on the detail of the regulations. The first concerns Regulation 6, setting out the ““familiarity provision”” for codes of practice. It states that the person responsible must be familiar with how to look after an animal. The RIA suggests that this provision will cost the livestock industry £7.9 million each year. Can the Minister explain how that figure was reached and what systems the Government have introduced to ensure that this familiarity, or those he understands the industry will introduce? My second question concerns livestock kept on common land, and I welcome the fact that the regulations will cover that. The NFU states that it would be useful to review in due course how this works in practice. Does the Minister have a timetable in mind for conducting such a review? Some common land is very low-lying and the recent flooding incidents highlighted the plight of trapped animals. I guess that that will be covered by the regulations through inspections and so on, but it shows that climate events have an effect. The regulations refer to exceptionally hot weather. Climate events will impinge more and more on welfare issues. When we were debating the Animal Welfare Bill, I introduced an amendment on Report suggesting that in exercising the duty of care, a person responsible for an animal should have regard to its degree of domestication. The Minister rejected the suggestion as inappropriate, but Regulation 4 makes it clear that a person responsible for a farmed animal is obliged to have regard to its adaptation and domestication. Why does the Minister think it appropriate that domestication should be a consideration for farmed animals, which tend to include fewer exotic species, but not for companion animals? The Minister will remember that the debate was about companion animals as they were covered by the Bill; not particularly dogs and cats which everyone regards as domesticated, but rather those other species that are not. My fourth point includes the question about standards for cages. Again, during debates on the Act, I raised the issue that there were no comparable standards for cages for game birds. I welcome the standards here, but the Minister told us on 23 October: "““We intend to set up a working group before the end of the year, with the objective of producing the code in 2008””.—[Official Report, 23/10/06; col. 1007.]" I wonder whether he has a progress report for the Committee on that code. My fifth point is that one of the economic savings listed in the RIA is that now farmers will not have to comply with improvement notices. Can the Minister confirm that inspectors will be able to issue improvement notices under Section 10 of the Animal Welfare Act and that if a person responsible for a farmed animal does not comply with the notice within the stated period the inspector may begin proceedings for an offence under Section 9(1)? My last point is about bees; not de minimis small-scale beekeeping but bee farming. Bee health is becoming more and more pressing. The regular inspections envisaged for other farm animals under the regulations might well have very much benefited the bee population. Very regular inspection is one of the ways of making sure that a virus does not spread and that the things likely to be causing colony collapse are kept under strict control. Will the Minister comment on that? That said, I welcome the regulations.