§ 20. Mr. Hoyasked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will seek to amend the Protection of Animals Act, 1911, to bring within its ambit modern methods of livestock rearing.
§ Mr. StodartThis Act and the corresponding Scottish Act of 1912 are intended to ensure that animals are not ill-used no matter what method of rearing is followed, and my right hon. Friend is not satisfied that any amendment is necessary.
§ Mr. HoyThat is a very disappointing Answer. Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that thousands of people were horrified by the Press picture of the modern method of pig production in this country and that the revelations in Ruth Harrison's book astonished many people who were not aware of what was happening? While people are not opposed to modern methods of cattle or fowl production, they are appalled by the cruelty which is taking place. Will the hon. Gentleman look at the whole question again?
§ Mr. StodartI know that many people feel grave misgivings on this subject, but I cannot accept the implication that intensive methods of rearing necessarily give rise to suffering. After all, those who adopt these systems must ensure that their animals are able to thrive. I speak with some experience and I assure the hon. Member that if animals thrive, as they do—and I must say that I often wonder how they do, but the fact remains that they do—it is difficult to assert that they are suffering cruelty.
§ Sir J. EdenIs there any evidence of cruelty as a result of these intensive rearing methods? In view of the general expression of public anxiety, would it not be advisable to have some form of impartial and authoritative inquiry?
§ Mr. StodartThere is no evidence of cruelty. There is ample opportunity for prosecution by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals if cruelty can be proved, but I think that there is no evidence of it. However, I will take note of what my hon. Friend has said about the possible need for an impartial inquiry.