§ Report stage resumed.
EARL ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, I would crave the indulgence of the House to clear up a point which received considerable discussion on the Committee stage of this Bill in relation to Clause 1. In the debate on that clause several noble Lords expressed concern about the way in which planning permission could be given for a slaughterhouse. They pointed out that a local planning authority could give planning permission without advertising or giving notice that planning permission had been sought. There is a real problem here and I agreed to look into it.
This is really a matter that should be dealt with in planning legislation rather than slaughterhouse legislation. I have therefore discussed it with my right honourable friend, the Minister of Housing and Local Government, and on his behalf I am able to tell your Lordships that he is very carefully considering the point. He tells me that there are, of course, other kinds of development which might be regarded as unpleasant and he wishes to consider whether there is not some way of regularising planning procedure in all these cases in the general sense suggested by several noble Lords at the Committee stage. I cannot be more specific about this matter, but I can give an assurance that my right honourable friend is giving it his most urgent personal attention.
§ Clause 3 [Reports on slaughterhouse facilities]:
EARL ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, as both the Amendments to Clause 3 standing in my name deal with a similar point it may be convenient to your Lordships to discuss them together. They are both drafting Amendments to clarify the phrase:
in full in relation to premises in respect of which a new slaughterhouse licence falls to be granted.These words help to define a date referred to in subsection (2) and the construction standard referred to subsection (3). I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 8, line 3, leave out lines 3 and 4 and insert (" of any one or more classes or descriptions ").—(Earl St. Aldwyn.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
Amendment moved,—
Page 8, line 17, leave out from (" premises ") to (" being ") in line 19 and insert (" of any one or more classes or descriptions ").—(Earl St. Aldwyn.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 4 [Grant of new slaughterhouse licences after submission of report]:
§
EARL ST. ALDWYN moved, in subsection (2), after "licence", where that word first occurs, to insert:
after the submission of their report aforesaid, being an application to which subsection (5) of section three of this Act does not apply and".
The noble Earl said: My Lords, the two Amendments to Clause 4, which make good a procedural defect in the Bill, deal with the same point and, with your Lordships' permission, I should like to discuss them, and also a consequential Amendment in Clause 6, together. Clause 3 (6) provides that applications for new slaughterhouse licences received during the two months period allowed for making representations to the Minister about the local authority's slaughterhouse report must be considered by the Minister before he accepts the report. He has the power to direct that they shall be deemed to have been included in the report. If he does that, they carry the right to a licence just as if they had been made during the freedom period. What is missing is specific provision for the procedure to be followed where the Minister decides not to give such a direction. For those eases the Amendments will require the Minister to direct the local authority to refuse the applications. Under the Bill as it stands any application turned down by the Minister under Clause 3 (6) would have to be considered again under Clause 4 (2) and the First Schedule. This was never intended and would be a great inconvenience to all concerned.
§ The consequential Amendment to Clause 6, at page 13, line 29, provides that there is to be no right of appeal to a magistrates' court for certain refusals. These are where an application 974 is refused in pursuance of a direction by the Minister under the new subsection (3) of Clause 4. This is in line with the principle embodied in the present provisions of Clause 6 (3); that is, where an application falls to be considered by the Minister, his decision will turn primarily on considerations of policy. In such a case it is not appropriate that an appeal should lie to the courts. I beg to move the first Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 9, after (" licence ") insert ("after the submission of their report aforesaid, being an application to which subsection (5) of section three of this Act does not apply and").—(Earl St. Aldwyn.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Amendment moved—
§
Page 11, line 21, at end insert—
(" (3) Where in the case of an application of which a copy has been forwarded to the Minister by a local authority under subsection (5) of section three of this Act, being an application for the grant of a new slaughterhouse licence, the Minister determines not to give such a direction as is mentioned in subsection of that section, he shall direct the authority to refuse the application forthwith, and the authority shall comply with that direction.")—(Earl St. Aldwyn.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 6 [Special grounds for, and appeals against, certain refusals]:
§
Amendment moved—
Page 13, line 24, after (" Act ") insert (" or under subsection (3) of that section ").—(Earl St. Aldwyn.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 10 [Grants for meat inspection at slaughterhouses]:
EARL ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, this is purely a drafting Amendment relating to the conditions about which the Minister must be satisfied before he makes contributions to a local authority towards the cost of meat inspection. One of the conditions is that the authority must have inspected in the year concerned more meat than is estimated to have been consumed by their own population. The present wording is that the quantity inspected must appear to the Minister
to exceed … what is likely to be required for consumption in the authority's district.975 The phrase "what is likely to be" was intended to allow for estimation, because the amount would not be exactly known. We see some risk, however, of its being interpreted as meaning "future requirements". That would be inappropriate, because the scheme, which is already in operation, is concerned with contributions towards expenses incurred in the preceding financial year. The wording now proposed should avoid this possible misunderstanding.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 16, line 26, leave out (" is likely to be") and insert (" it appears to him should be regarded as ").—(Earl St. Aldwyn.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ 3.55 p.m.
§ LORD FARINGDON moved, after Clause 10 to insert the following new clause:
§ Meat inspection in slaughterhouses
§ " . The Minister shall, within a period not exceeding five years from the passing of this Act, make regulations which shall make provision for securing—
- (a) the inspection of all animals intended for slaughter for sale for human consumption, and
- (b) of all carcases of animals so slaughtered and no meat shall be sold for human consumption unless there has been such inspection:
§ Provided that where by reason of accidental injury, illness or exposure to infection it is necessary that an animal shall be slaughtered without delay and notice is given to the local authority as soon as is reasonably possible, whether before or after the slaughtering takes place, the said animal but not the carcase thereof shall be deemed to have been inspected."
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, I asked the noble Earl another question, to which I have not had an answer—though I do not blame him for that. I asked him on Committee stage whether he could tell me what percentage of the 80 per cent. of the total quantity of meat he claimed to be inspected was inspected both on the hoof and in the carcase, and whether the 80 per cent. was a total, global percentage, covering all meat which had been inspected either on the hoof or in the carcase. He informs me (if he will forgive my repeating what he has told me privately) that in fact the 80 per cent. is inspection of carcases. That is of very considerable interest to me and rather reinforces the point I made. It means that a very small percentage 976 of meat is fully inspected—that is, inspected both on the hoof and after killing.
§ At the Committee stage, when withdrawing a similar Amendment, I suggested that I might put down an Amendment which made some allowance for the fact that there is, as we all know, a very considerable shortage of inspectors at the present time. The noble Earl said he was sure that his noble friend the Minister was most anxious that meat should be inspected, and he would do everything possible to ensure that a satisfactory or an adequate number of inspectors was available to inspect all meat, but that he could not accept my Amendment at that time. I took his point, and your Lordships will observe that I have now introduced a provision for the insistence of 100 per cent. inspection after a period of five years. I very much prefer to know that something must be done within a given time, rather than rely on the good intentions of Ministers and officials. To be given an actual datum line by which time something has got to be done tends to produce the desired result very much more frequently. I hope the noble Earl will see his way to accept this Amendment. I think it is an important and valuable Amendment. However, I shall not, if he rejects it, press it to a Division. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
After Clause 10, insert the said new clause.—(Lord Faringdon.)
EARL ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, I appreciate that noble Lords opposite are deeply concerned that, as soon as possible, all meat at our slaughterhouses should be inspected. The Government share that concern very much indeed. However, I am afraid that I cannot advise your Lordships to accept this new clause, because, in the first place, it is inappropriate that a compulsory time limit should be laid upon the Minister over a problem which he cannot in all respects control. Meat inspection, as the noble Lord knows, is delegated to local authorities. The difficulties (one of which, as he has already said, is staffing) can be overcome only by joint efforts on the part of local government and the trade, as well as of the Ministry. The noble Lord has distinguished in his clause the two parts of the full process of inspection. Our efforts 977 are at present concentrated on the inspection of carcases, or post-mortem inspection. Difficulties remain before we secure such inspection in full, but I am hopeful of their solution. In fact, the figure which I gave your Lordships on the last stage of this Bill, of some 80 per cent., was rather an under-estimation. We have since then had some new figures, and the proportion is, in fact, nearer 90 per cent.
EARL ST. ALDWYNThat is carcases only. The inspection of animals before slaughter is, frankly, not common in England and Wales at present.
The organisation of full ante-mortem inspection would demand a great deal of thought from the Department and bodies representative of local government and the professions concerned. It might be a very considerable time before enough qualified staff were available. It would, therefore, be quite unreasonable that a time limit should be written into the Bill now. Moreover, the proposed new clause is really unnecessary. My right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when he was Minister of Agriculture, gave an assurance in another place that he and the Minister of Health would make new regulations at the earliest practicable date. Powers to do so already exist. In the light of that, and as they are well aware of the importance of meat inspection to public health, the Ministers need no statutory compulsion of the kind suggested by the noble Lord. For these reasons I hope that the noble Lord will withdraw his Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.