Quarantine Rules: Consultation (Hansard, 15 March 1999)

§ Lord Donoughue
My Lords, the Government are considering the way forward following the consultation on the review of quarantine rules undertaken by the Advisory Group on Quarantine. In that consultation, more than 96 per cent. of respondents were in favour of reform broadly on the lines of the Kennedy recommendations. We will make an announcement as soon as we can.

§ Lord Waddington
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply and for his help in this matter. I can assure him that I am not asking this question in any mood of carping criticism. Is the Minister aware of arguments in his department that primary legislation is necessary in order to set up the new system rather than regulations under the Animal Health Act? Is it not necessary to make good speed in this matter in order to avoid any unnecessary hardship to animal owners and animals, and also in order to avoid any risk of an increase in smuggling now that people know that vaccinated animals pose no risk of carrying rabies?

§ Lord Donoughue
My Lords, I entirely agree with the noble Lord that we must make the fullest speed possible. The Kennedy Committee recommended that any new system should contain no more risk than the existing system. We have to put into place monitoring and control measures which ensure that. That is what has delayed matters so far.

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, I do not think the Minister answered the question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Waddington. Can he perhaps rephrase what he said to include an answer to the noble Lord's question on regulations?

§ Lord Donoughue
My Lords, on the noble Lord's point about regulations or primary legislation, that depends on what type of machinery we put in place. Some of the machinery may require primary legislation; some, it is to be hoped, will require only secondary legislation. There are also problems of European Union rules. All that is being examined. If we can do something and avoid the need for primary legislation, we will certainly do that.

§ Lord Kimball
My Lords, will the Minister bear in mind that those people who invested their money in quarantine kennels did so because of government regulations and stood in for a service that the Government would have had to provide? Will the Minister bear in mind in any adjustment to the current regulations that kennel owners are entitled to proper compensation for having done a job that the Government should have done?

§ Lord Donoughue
My Lords, kennel owners have been included in the fullest way possible in the consultation. As far as concerns compensation, the Government's present view is that they have been given due warning. In any case, after the reforms, which will only apply to the European Union and rabies-free islands in the European Economic Area, there will still be a great deal of business for them with animals from elsewhere in the world.

§ Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior
My Lords, it is probably a rumour at present, but can the Minister say whether or not it is true that there may be a legal challenge from the European Union to the United Kingdom for charging for assessing certification at the port of entry on the basis that that would contravene the freedom of movement of goods and animals into this country? If that were to be so, I understand that it might cost the Government some £9 million to £10 million not to charge people for bringing animals into this country.

§ Lord Donoughue
My Lords, one of the problems we have to consider is that when we put a procedure in place it must be one that will not be subject to legal challenge or would survive it. The European Union rules on freedom of movement are a prime area. We are looking at ways to achieve the reforms in the direction that Kennedy recommended and which we want, and which will not be subject to challenge. There are indeed costs in the new procedures, and we have to look at how those costs will be met. Many people would feel that 471 the taxpayer should not pay the full cost of something which is to the benefit of an important but small number of pet owners.

§ Baroness Sharples
My Lords, can the noble Lord say how many ports of entry have the necessary facilities to deal with any change in quarantine laws?

§ Lord Donoughue
My Lords, I cannot say that because we have not yet reached the point at which we decide what the monitoring facilities are and which ports of entry should have them.

§ Lord Waddington
My Lords, can the Minister help me on this point? If charging brings the risk of a challenge in the European Union because of interference with free movement, then, a fortior, the present system of quarantine interferes with free movement. So that argument is as broad as it is long.

§ Lord Donoughue
My Lords, yes. The European factor is one aspect of the charging problem but it is not the only one. As to the decision of who is charged and how, that matter is under active consideration at the moment.

§ Lord Brougham and Vaux
My Lords, can the Minister give the House an idea of when things might change? What timescale are we talking about?

§ Lord Donoughue
My Lords, I cannot give a precise answer to that question. The noble Lord will recall that the Kennedy Report suggested that it might take as long as three years. At present Ministers are very committed that it should take less time than that. But we have to decide the procedures and then possibly develop some pilot schemes. We would like to get it in as soon as possible. The noble Lord should bear in mind that currently about 8, 000 animals pass through the kennels. The Kennedy Report estimated that there might be as many as a quarter of a million animals coming through in the first year of the new scheme. Therefore, this will need very careful and detailed preparation.

§ Lord Shore of Stepney
My Lords, having enjoyed the enormous blessings and benefits of being a rabies-free area for so long, I hope my noble friend can assure me that the onus of proof will be very clearly upon the advocates of change in moving away from our present and effective rabies legislation. I hope my noble friend is not also telling us that the freedom of movement provisions of the European Union extend to animals as well as persons.

§ Lord Donoughue
My Lords, freedom of movement applies to movements in trade and persons. As to risk, it was a basic principle of the Kennedy Committee that the new proposals should not involve increased risk. The committee carried out a very technical analysis of risk and concluded that the system it proposed would not include risk. I should point out to my noble friend that the European Union is effectively rabies-free as far as 472 concerns human beings. Most of the European Union, except for Germany recently, is rabies-free as far as concerns pets. It is not the case that we have an oasis here and outside us are deeply affected areas.