§ Mr. Andrew Bowdenasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will decline to issue any new licences under the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 for experiments on animals involving pain and death where an alternative non-animal method exists; and if he will make a statement;
(2) if he will revoke all existing licences under the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 for experiments on animals involving pain and death where an alternative non-animal method exists; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. MellorWhilst having no power under the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 to impose a blanket restriction of this kind my right hon. and learned Friend does, in considering applications for the various kinds of authority which may be given under the Act, have proper regard to the possibility that a known and suitable alternative may exist. Moreover, licensees under the 1876 Act are regularly reminded of the desirability of developing and using non-sentient alternatives to animals whenever practicable. I understand that where a proven alternative exists, researchers are usually quick to adopt it on humanitarian, scientific and economic grounds. When legislation to implement the proposals in the recent White Paper is introduced, applicants for project licences will be required for the first time to certify that no satisfactory alternatives exist before their licence can be granted.