RENEWAL OF LICENCE (Hansard, 12 June 1981)

§ Mr. Blackburn
I beg to move amendment No. 48, in page 5, line 27, after 'of', insert 'or withdrawn'.
One of the important features of the Bill is the care and welfare of animals. When a zoo is refused a licence, a period of grace is allowed for the running down of the stock. Amendment No. 48 would have the effect of granting this facility if an application is withdrawn. I commend the amendment to the House.

§ Mr. Blackburn
I beg to move amendment No. 49, in page 5, line 28, leave out 'three' and insert 'six'.
683 The amendment would provide a period of grace of six months, that is consistent with other similar circumstances. Those concerned with animals agree that six months should be sufficient for the disposal of the stock of a collection. In that spirit, I commend the amendment to the House.

§ Mr. Peyton
My hon. Friend the Member for Dudley, West (Mr. Blackburn) has made a move. However, I wonder whether he could go a little further. He said that those concerned with animals agree that six months should be sufficient. That is a rather sweeping assertion of a kind which all too frequently one hears in this place. There are those in the animal world and in my constituency who argue with conviction and force that the period should be 12 months. I accept that my hon. Friend is taking a step in the right direction and that he cannot change it now, but will he consider further whether the period should be extended beyond what he has proposed?

§ Mr. Blackburn
The issue has been the subject of much discussion. My right hon. Friend's argument has much merit. However, an appeal against the granting of a licence involves a period of grace. A further six months is granted after the final decision on the appeal. An unscrupulous zoo keeper could take advantage of an extension beyond six months. There is merit in reviewing the matter. However, my amendment takes a step in the right direction, and I commend it to the House.

§ Sir Anthony Kershaw
I appreciate and applaud the way in which the Bill's promoter accepts the suggestion made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Mr. Peyton). However, the promoter's argument that the time granted is only that after an appeal has been decided is not fair, because arrangements could not be made to dispose of the stock until the appeal had been decided. It could be premature to do that. If the stock were disposed of before the appeal, the purpose of the appeal would disappear. How long an appeal takes should not be taken into consideration when deciding whether it is possible to extend the period beyond six months.

§ Mr. Blackburn
I beg to move amendment No. 50, in page 5, line 31, at end add '; and the local authority shall take reasonable steps to secure that the holder of the licence is notified in writing of the extension.'. The amendment follows amendments Nos. 48 and 49 by placing a responsibility on local authorities to inform the licence holder when an extension of the licence has been granted. If a zoo if refused a licence, or a licence is withdrawn, the licensing authority will inform the zoo that a period of grace has been granted.