HL Deb 02 July 1976 vol 372 cc962-9

12.10 p.m.

Lord CHELWOOD

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill.

Moved, that the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Chelwood.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly.

[The Earl of CATHCART in the Chair.]

Clause 1 [Licences]:

Lord CHELWOOD moved Amendment No. 1:

Page 1, line 22, after (" stipulate ") insect (" (being a fee which is in the authority's opinion sufficient to meet the direct and indirect costs which it may incur as a result of the application) ").

The noble Lord said : In moving this Amendment, I hope it will be helpful to your Lordships if I take the opportunity to say a brief word about the Amendments which we have to consider today. They are self-explanatory, and it was obvious from the Second Reading debate in your Lordships' House that there were a number of reasonable criticisms that ought to be met and that there was therefore still room for improvement in the Bill.

If I may say so, I am very much indebted to my noble friends Lord de Clifford and Lord Newall for the care which they took to ensure that this measure said what it meant with absolute clarity. During the course of the Second Reading debate, the noble Lord, Lord 'Wells-Pestell, suggested a meeting in which the Bill's sponsor, Mr. Peter Thomas, and I could discuss with him and the critics of the Bill ways of improving it without in any way changing its objects. That was a suggestion which I accepted with alacrity and pleasure. Thus with the excellent help and advice of senior officials we went through all the criticisms and suggestions and reached complete accord.

Where the criticisms could not be met by Amendments, the original wording, coupled in some cases with the guidelines which will undoubtedly be issued by the Home Office and local authorities seemed to provide a satisfactory answer. This kind of co-operation between the two Houses obviously has much merit in helping to carry out our traditional revising role as a Second Chamber, and is perhaps especially suitable for a Private Member's Bill commanding such wide support in all quarters of both Houses. I should like, if I may, to thank everyone for their co-operation.

I do not think the Amendments will provide any problems in another place. The schedule is a very tight one. We are expecting to give this measure its Third Reading only two or three days before the last day set aside in another place for Private Members' measures. I will not go through in great detail every clause line by line. That was done in another place and I went through them fairly fully during the Second Reading in this House. I shall, of course, be only too happy to do my best to answer questions when we come to the Question, Whether the clause shall stand part of the Bill?

With regard to Amendment No. 1, as the Bill is at present drafted it provides that a local authority shall not grant a licence unless an application for it is accompanied by such fee as the authority may stipulate. During our Second Reading debate on 15th June, my noble friend Lord de Clifford drew attention to the fact that one of the principles we should try to agree upon was that the charges for people who wish to keep wild animals in their private grounds or on their premises must not be permitted to fall on the rates, and I think we were all agreed about that. He also felt that the charges made by the local authority for a licence must be kept as reasonable as possible and not be made prohibitive. The same point was made by my noble friend Lord Newall, who expressed himself as being worried about the likelihood that different councils might charge widely differing fees for licensing. He also went on to say that he was not particularly impressed by the precedents which existed under which local authorities had discretion to charge whatever fees they thought appropriate.

In reply to these two criticisms, I undertook to look carefully into the point, although I felt at the time that the policy followed in recent years in regard to local authority licensing fees, which was to leave them to the discretion of the local authorities, had considerable merit. None the less, as a result of the discussions we have had, it became clear that the Department of the Environment, who are particularly concerned in this area, were of the view that it is essential that local authorities should be able to charge fees sufficient to cover their costs, both direct and indirect—their overheads—which are attributed to the service that they are providing. Specified fees and maximum fees have tended to fall far behind inflation, particularly if the means of raising them are cumbersome. It is not thought likely that local authorities will seek to charge a fee wholly inconsistent with the service that they provide; that is to say, they are not likely to use the Dangerous Animals Act—as I hope it will be—as a means of raising money.

The test or the amount of the fee will surely be the reasonableness of it, but in order that the matter should be put beyond any shadow of doubt we came to the conclusion that it would be reasonable to insert into the Bill the words in the Amendment, which are entirely consistent with the general policy on fees, which I have expounded, and I feel that these words go a long way to reassure those who felt doubts that the present wording left too much to the discretion of local authorities. I understand that this Amendment is acceptable to the Government and I hope it will commend itself to the Committee. I beg to move.

Lord NEWALL

As it is already Friday afternoon, I certainly do not intend to delay your Lordships at all and as my noble friend Lord Chelwood has already said, we are certainly very grateful for the kindness of the noble Lord, Lord WellsPestell, in allowing us to cover all the ground in what might be termed a private committee and agreeing these Amendments in a more informal fashion with both Houses. Undoubtedly this has saved a great deal of time on the Floor of the House here and has avoided needless debate and argument. We certainly want this Bill to go through and as regards this Amendment and the other three which we shall deal with shortly, unless there is some vast change of mind I do not think there is any point in my talking on them unnecessarily.

Lord DE CLIFFORD

I should like to join with my noble friend Lord Newall in thanking the noble Lord, Lord WellsPestell, for his great assistance to us in resolving our difficulties. I welcome this Amendment as it meets most of the points which I made on the subject of licensing and I trust the Committee will accept it.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Lord DE CLIFFORD moved Amendment No. 2:

Page 3, line 3, leave out from (" licence; ") to end of line 7 and insert— (" (iv) the person to whom the licence is granted shall hold a current insurance policy which ensures him and any other person entitled to keep the animal under the authority of the licence against liability for any damage which may be caused by the animal; and (v) the terms of any such policy shall be satisfactory in the opinion of the authority; ")

The noble Lord said: In moving Amendment No. 2, I should like at the same time to speak to Amendment No. 4. I wish to express thanks to the noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell, and his advisers for their assistance in drafting this Amendment so that it met my point. The Amendment deals with the subject of insurance policies. I was not very happy that, as phrased in the Bill, the requirements of insurance covered all the injuries and damage which I felt a person who wished to keep wild animals in his back garden, or wherever it might be, should hold. The effect of this Amendment is to include the liability to damage to property. I am quite satisfied that damage to persons is now covered and the acceptance of this Amendment will extend it to property. The effect of Amendment No. 4 is merely to define the meaning of the term "damage ". I beg to move.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

12.20 p.m.

Lord CHELWOOD moved Amendment No. 3:

Divide Clause 1 into two clauses, the first consisting of subsections (1) to (10) inclusive (Licences) and the second consisting of subsections (11) to (18) inclusive (Provisions supplementary to section 1).

The noble Lord said: I beg to move that Clause 1 be divided into two clauses, the first to consist of subsections (1) to (10) inclusive with the margin title " Licences ", and the second to consist of subsections (11) to (18) inclusive, with the margin title, " Provisions supplementary to Section 1 ". This Amendment is a drafting Amendment, designed to split the already over-long Clause 1 into two parts. At present, Clause 1 covers four pages of the Bill. As I have explained, the first will deal with licences and variations of conditions, and the second will deal with supplementary provisions such as appeals, currency licences and offences. There is no change at all in the substance of the provisions. I beg to move.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 2 to 5 agreed to.

Clause 6 [Interpretation.]:

12.22 p.m.

Lord DE CLIFFORD moved Amendment No. 4:

Page 7, line 22, at end insert— (" " damage " includes the death of, or injury to, any person; ")

The noble Lord said: I beg to move Amendment No. 4. This is purely consequential on the first Amendment which the Committee have accepted.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 7 agreed to.

Clause 8 [Protection of existing keepers]:

On Question, Whether Clause 8 shall stand part of the Bill?

Lord CHELWOOD

I should like to raise one brief point. Anxiety was expressed by my noble friend Lord de Clifford about the 90-day period during which someone who already keeps dangerous wild animals must apply for a licence. Of course, if this Bill reaches the Statute Book—and it looks like having a very good chance of doing so—the period will be much more than 90 days; in fact there will be six months, because there will be 90 days after the Bill has passed through all its stages in Parliament before the first day on which it will be necessary to apply for a licence. There will be a period of six months and therefore I think the point is met.

Lord DE CLIFFORD

At this point I should like to thank my noble friend Lord Chelwood. This is most satisfactory. I think that the sooner we get this Bill into operation, the better. I was privileged yesterday to see, in a programme on ATV at 6 o'clock, one example of why this Bill is so necessary. A gentleman from Cradley Heath was seen outside a court to which he had been taken for disturbing the peace, or something of that sort. He had with him four lion cubs, just in the back of an estate car. A more typical example of how badly this Bill is needed one could not wish for. Not only that: on making inquiries, I found that in his back garden this gentleman keeps a puma cub, a fully grown lion, a Bengal tiger cub and the four lion cubs. Let us give this Bill some speed. A period of 90 days may seem a short time to my noble friend, but if I could bring it in tomorrow, I would.

Clause 8 agreed to.

Remaining clause agreed to.

Schedule [Kinds of dangerous wild animals]:

On Question, Whether this shall be the Schedule to the Bill?

Lord ROBERTHALL

I am not an expert on the subject but, like many of your Lordships, I have been in the game parks in East Africa. I was always told that the buffalo was the most dangerous of all animals there. Perhaps we could be told why that is not included in the Schedule.

Lord CHELWOOD

A great deal of care has been taken over a long period to try to make sure that the Schedule is sensible in every way, as it has deliberately been kept brief. There are many very rough and dangerous animals and, for that matter, insects, which could well be included in the Schedule. However, in the opinion of the sponsors of the Bill, it was thought that to make a long Schedule including animals such as the buffalo, which, indeed, is a rough animal, would be unnecessary, simply on the grounds that people do not happen to be in the habit of keeping buffaloes. Where they did so, the Home Secretary has power to add to or subtract from the Schedule, subject to the approval of Parliament. So I am inclined to think that, in spite of the suggestions made about snakes and so on, the Schedule is about right. It can be amended without much difficulty, so I hope it will commend itself to your Lordships.

Schedule agreed to.

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

I am sorry to rise at this stage, but, with the indulgence of your Lordships, I will not take up much time. It would be rather churlish of me if I did not say how grateful I am to the noble Lords, Lord Chelwood, Lord Newall and Lord de Clifford, for their very kind observations with respect to myself. This is the second time I have suggested this procedure, where there are difficulties, and where there are likely to be difficulties, in respect of Amendments. As on the former occasion, the difficulties were resolved very quickly, due, in the main, to the fact that the noble Lord, Lord Chelwood, himself was very receptive to forthcoming ideas, to the noble Lord, Lord Newall, and particularly to the noble Lord, Lord de Clifford, who raised a good many of the difficulties, but who was eager to find a solution.

I think I may perhaps take what is considered to be an unusual step in your Lordship's Committee, not only in thanking the noble Lord concerned, but in saying how grateful I am—and I am sure the noble Lord, Lord Chelwood, is also—to my officials who were, as one would expect them to be, extraordinarily able and very helpful.

Lord CHELWOOD

Obviously, it would be ungracious of me if I did not take the opportunity of echoing every word that has been said by the noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell. Indeed, I have had every possible help with this measure. It came as something quite strange to me, and I have had to brief myself on all kinds of dangerous wild animals, about half of which I have never heard. I should like to thank the noble Lord the Minister for all the help he, his officials, the experts and the Parliamentary draftsmen gave me when they must have been under heavy pressure. I am sure your Lordships will all agree with everything the noble Lord has said.

House resumed : Bill reported with the Amendments.