§ Mr. FlynnTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence with which countries the DERA has been involved in collaborative research involving animals in the last 10 years. [20511]
§ Mr. SpellarThis is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA). I have asked the Chief Executive to write to my hon. Friend.
Letter from J. Chisholm to Mr. Paul Flynn, dated 18 December 1999:
As Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) I have been asked to reply to your question about which countries DERA has been involved with in collaborative research involving the use of animals over the past ten years.DERA has been, and continues to be, involved in a large number of collaborative research programmes, a small number of which involve the use of animals by one or more of the partners. Information as to whether specific programmes include animal use is not collected centrally, and to look at agreements individually in order to identify those which involve animals would incur unreasonable costs.However, in general terms, collaboration involving the exchange of data likely to have been generated from experiments involving animals occurs, or has occurred with the following countries-United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, France, Norway, Netherlands, Sweden and Germany.I am sorry that I cannot be more helpful on this occasion.
§ Mr. FlynnTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list(a) the procedures which have been carried out on horses and (b) the number of horses involved in these procedures which have died as a result at (i) Porton Down and (ii) other establishments for which he is responsible in each of the last 10 years. [20468]
§ Mr. SpellarThis is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency. I have asked the Chief Executive to write to my hon. Friend.
Letter from J. Chisholm to Mr. Paul Flynn, dated 18 December 1997:
As Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA), I have been asked to reply to your questions about procedures carried out on horses at Porton Down and elsewhere.The numbers of procedures carried out on horses at the Chemical and Biological Defence (CBD) Sector at Porton Down in each of the last 10 years are reported as follows:279W
Year Number of procedures 1987 7 1988 1 1989 0 1990 50 1991 46 1992 44 1993 16
Year Number of procedures 1994 0 1995 0 1996 0 Between 1987 and 1993, a total of eight horses were used as blood donors for the supply of normal blood used in the preparation of media for microbiology. The horses were bled in rotation and only small volumes, relative to the size of the animals, were taken. The removal of a small volume of blood every few weeks caused no ill effects in the animals and no animals died as a result of these procedures.As you can see from the figures above, the relationship between the numbers of procedures, animals used and deaths is not necessarily a simple extrapolation. Further, there have been changes in the reporting requirements of the Home Office. For example, when the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 was first introduced, it was agreed with the Home Office Inspectorate that multiple blood samples taken from a single horse would constitute one procedure. This changed in 1990, when a procedure was recorded each time a blood sample was taken.There has been a continuing interest in the use of animals in defence research and the retrieval of information to answer this question has highlighted potential anomalies in the presentation and interpretation of statistics regarding animal experimentation. I refer to my replies to questions from Mr. Norman Baker MP and from yourself (Official Report Cols 174 and 172 dated 2 December 1997).Specifically, in each case we presented the figures on animal experimentation as returned annually to the Home Office. However, there are differences in reporting requirements between the two Acts which have governed animal experimentation (the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 and Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986), and a subsequent revision in 1990 to the 1986 Act has required that the figures recorded are the numbers of procedures conducted rather than the numbers of animals involved.As a result, there are some inconsistencies in the statistics over the period of time in which these changes took place. In the majority of cases, the number of procedures conducted equates to the number of animals used. During the investigations into this matter we have discovered that the over reporting also relates to sheep and dog usage but unfortunately the available data has not been recorded in a suitable manner to allow a reliable breakdown of information to be produced. Nevertheless, the gross statistics which have been provided are substantially correct and represent the maximum experimentation figures.Finally, as far as the Defence Animal Centre is concerned, I can confirm that no procedures have been carried out on horses (and hence there have been no deaths) over the past 10 years.I hope this answers your questions and clarifies the position.