§ 28. Sir R. Russellasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why he has taken no action on the recommendations of the Littlewood Committee, presented to his predecessor in April, 1965, on experiments on living animals.
§ Mr. Merlyn ReesThe Committee acknowledged that the present law has been generally effective and laid no emphasis on the urgency of the reforms it proposed; and while my right hon. Friend recognises the need to replace the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876, by legislation more suited to present-day requirements, the Government cannot justify according it priority over the many other pressing demands on its legislative programme.
§ Sir R. RussellIs it not four and a half years since the report was presented and is not the number of experiments increasing every year, now reaching over 5 million a year? Does not this matter need urgently to be looked into? Will the hon. Gentleman give it some attention?
§ Mr. ReesWe have discussed this many times before. I accept that there is an increase in the number of experiments, but this of itself is not the only criterion to take into account. There are many other pressing demands on the programme, and I stick by what I have said.
§ Sir D. RentonBearing in mind that there has already been a delay of four years in implementing the report, will the hon. Gentleman say what is inhibiting its being implemented now? Is it cost? If so, how much is the cost?
§ Mr. ReesIt certainly is not cost, but it would be an enormously long Bill. There is a great deal of work to do before it could be brought to the House and there are other pressing demands on the legislative programme. It is not the first time that this sort of thing has happened, under all Governments.
Mr. J. T. PriceWithout entering into the very controversial question of vivisection, which is dealt with in the Littlewood Report, may I ask whether my hon. Friend is aware that those paragraphs which deal with the use of toxic chemicals in experiments on animals are appalling and disgust all decent people who are familiar with them? Could not his Department take emergency action to deal with that aspect of the report, on which there has been strong support by some of the most responsible biologists in this country, who are not wildcats by any means and do not make wild statements? Will my hon. Friend do something about that aspect of it?