Experiments on Living Animals (Hansard, 31 May 1962)

§ Sir Richard Glyn
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions in the last five years permission to prosecute a person licensed to perform experiments on living animals, under the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876, has been refused.

§ The Joint Under-Secretary of State, Home Department (Mr. Charles Fletcher-Cooke)
No application for my right hon. Friend's consent to a prosecution was made in this period.

§ Sir Richard Glyn
I hope that my hon. and learned Friend will realise that there is a certain amount of public apprehension about the possibility of cruelty in these cases. Can he assure the House that if any case of cruelty comes to the knowledge of his Department a prosecution will be instituted, even if a private complaint has not been laid?

§ Mr. Fletcher-Cooke
I can certainly give that assurance. We believe that there have been no prosecutions because the Act is honestly observed to the best of their ability by those who work it. The minor infractions are, of course, reported in the annual returns, and my hon. and gallant Friend will see that in those cases it is almost always a case of inadvertence rather for a more serious motive

§ Mr. Hayman
Will the hon. and learned Gentleman take into account the widespread apprehension that exists about these experiments and the widespread fear that there is unnecessary pain and cruelty? Seeing that there are now only six inspectors compared with three twenty years ago, when then the experiments were about one-fifth of what they are now, will he ask his right hon. Friend to set up a small committee of inquiry into the whole issue, if only to relieve public anxiety?

§ Mr. Fletcher-Cooke
I am well aware of the degree of public anxiety, but I can assure the hon. Member for Falmouth and Camborne (Mr. Hayman) that it really is based on the misconception that the experiments of which there has been the greatest growth are in any way surgical experiments. The growth is almost entirely due to the fact that 1560 now, by Statute, we are obliged to see that many new substances that are necessary for the health of the human race are injected or fed into animals. In the vast proportion of cases there is no question of cutting or vivisection in the old sense of the word.

§ 14. Sir W. Teeling
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he intends taking concerning suffering caused to rabbits, details of which have been sent him by the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion; and, in view of the fresh evidence contained in these cases, whether he is still satisfied that his staff is adequate to meet the situation.

§ Mr. Fletcher-Cooke
Inspectors under the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876, are always ready to inquire into any case of unnecessary suffering alleged to have been caused in experiments; but the information sent by my hon. Friend is not sufficiently specific to enable us to trace the place and circumstances in which these experiments are said to have been carried out.

§ Sir W. Teeling
Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is making quite big propaganda— if one cares to call it that— throughout the country, presumably quite genuinely, on this whole subject, not only with regard to rabbits, but with regard to other animals as well? The Act seems to be rather out of date today and, presumably, there are various loopholes in it which are being used. Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that many people are very dissatisfied that practically no prosecutions are brought under the Act by the Home Office representatives, and does he feel satisfied that enough is being done to prevent what reputable societies such as the R.S.P.C.A. regard quite definitely as very bad practices?

§ Mr. Fletcher-Cooke
We have had a Question today about the number of prosecutions and I dealt with that part of the matter then. There are subsequent Questions about the pamphlets issued by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. I am waiting for more details of the experiments mentioned in my hon. Friend's Question because we should hope to 1561 examine them. Often in these cases, when details are finally sent, including photographs, we find that they relate to experiments which have taken place outside the United Kingdom altogether.

§ Sir W. Teeling
On a point of order. In view of the fact that it is obviously impossible to get an answer to these questions——

§ Mr. Speaker
No.

§ Sir W. Teeling
I ask leave to raise this matter on the Adjournment because of the unsatisfactory nature of the replies.

§ Mr. Speaker
I have repeatedly to ask hon. Members to adhere to the traditional formula and not to make speeches when giving notice.

§ 20. Mr. Fisher
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has studied the recent demands of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, details of which have been sent to him, with regard to experiments on animals; and whether he will make a statement.

§ Mr. Fletcher-Cooke
Yes, Sir. The proposals made are in line with those put to my right hon. Friend when he received a deputation from the Society last year. My right hon. Friend then gave a full reply to the Society's representations and an assurance that every care was taken to see that all the requirements of the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876, are fully observed.

§ Mr. Fisher
Are there sufficient inspectors to watch the more serious operations on animals? If not, would there be sufficient qualified vets to act as additional inspectors if more were thought to be needed? Would it be helpful to invite one or two extra additional veterinary surgeons to serve on the Advisory Committee, and would it be helpful in reassuring public opinion to try to arrange, possibly, for hon. Members of this House to visit some of these licensed premises?

§ Mr. Fletcher-Cooke
In reply to the latter part of that question, certainly we should be happy to try to at-range for these visits. As to the appointment of more inspectors, we are of opinion that there are at present enough inspectors 1562 for this purpose. We should welcome inspectors with veterinary qualifications provided they also have medical qualifications. On this latter point, my right hon. Friend insists. There is at present one veterinary surgeon serving on the Advisory Committee, but if one or more others are suggested, we will certainly consider that and see whether, with the agreement of the Chairman, they could be co-opted.