§ Mr. HancockTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if the Certificate of Designation for Huntingdon Life Sciences was amended on 23 May to allow the breeding and supply to other licensed establishments. [21253]
§ Mr. George HowarthI confirmed in my reply to the hon. Member on 24 November 1997,Official Report, column 439, that the Certificate of Designation was amended on 23 May to allow the breeding of dogs.
Under the terms of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, subsection 10(3)(a), dogs used in scientific procedures must normally be obtained from designated breeding establishments. There are no restrictions under the Act which prevent a designated breeding establishment from providing dogs to other establishments.
§ Ms KinghamTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if the temporary accommodation in which breeding beagles are housed at Huntingdon Life Sciences at Occold meets the recommendations of the code of practice for the housing and care of animals in designated breeding and supplying establishments when the licence was granted; [21037]
(2) for what reasons the Certificate of Designation for Huntingdon Life Sciences was amended to allow the breeding of dogs before planning approval to build kennels had been granted. [21036]
§ Mr. George HowarthThe company first discussed the idea of breeding dogs with the Home Office in late 1996. The proposed accommodation had not been built, equipped or staffed specifically for the breeding of laboratory dogs. In some minor ways it did not, at that stage, meet all the requirements of the code of practice for the housing and care of animals in designated breeding and supplying establishments. The Inspectorate asked that some changes be made to the facilities in which the dogs were to be housed to meet the requirements of the code of practice. These changes were completed before the formal application for an amendment to the Certificate of Designation to allow breeding was submitted.
The Certificate holder submitted the formal application in May. By this time, the conditions met the requirements of the code of practice. The inspector for this establishment and another inspector with a specialist interest in breeding establishments had thoroughly 263W inspected the accommodation and assessed the proposed staffing arrangements. There was no legitimate reasons to refuse the application.
Should it receive planning permission, the new dog breeding facility planned by the company will exceed the minimum requirements of the code of practice and will also allow the company to expand its breeding colony. This is currently being limited by the Home Office to a size which is appropriate for the current accommodation and facilities.