HC Deb 19 January 1998 vol 304 cc406-10W
Mr. Baker

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many animals have been bred for use in experiments at Porton Down in each year from 1990 to 1997 to date; and how many of each year's total were subsequently killed without being so used. [22965]

Mr. Spellar

This is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA). I have asked the Chief Executive to write to the hon. Member.

Table 1.
Year Mice Rats Marmoset Rhesus Pigs
Weaned Issued Surplus cull Weaned Issued Surplus cull Weaned Issued Surplus cull Weaned Issued Surplus cull Weaned Issued Market sales
1990–91 4,800 1,468 3,056 13,596 5,314 9,348 227 104 0 39 19 0 54 46 20
1991–92 4,503 1,034 3,108 12,060 4,987 6,047 237 74 0 42 33 0 14 11 0
1992–93 4,886 857 3,710 11,663 2,797 7,677 221 72 0 44 40 0 69 48 10
1993–94 4,376 1,645 2,348 11,373 3,883 7,076 224 245 0 73 50 0 79 57 20
1994–95 10,669 3,867 5,959 9,009 2,499 7,188 202 12 94 59 37 0 61 52 15
1995–96 8,628 4,200 3,884 6,694 2,553 3,985 134 197 0 62 43 0 96 40 46
1996–97 8,412 3,225 4,690 5,716 3,138 2,072 129 149 0 49 38 0 81 45 29
1997–January 1998 3,835 923 3,167 4,344 724 2,504 91 49 0 42 48 0 44 42 9
Table 1 shows the number of animals weaned by the breeding unit at CBD, the number of animals issued from the unit and the number of animals culled by the Unit. This information is shown for the financial (not calendar) year. The numbers of animals (mice, rats, marmosets and Rhesus) issued represent those for scientific use at CBD and sales of surplus animals for scientific use at other establishments; the number of animals retained for replenishment of breeding stock is not shown in this table. Surplus pigs are sent to the local market; the figures do, however, include a small number kept for breeding at CBD. The number of animals weaned is not necessarily equal to the total of the number issued and the number of surplus stock culled in any one year. The discrepancies may be due to the occurrence of natural deaths or to the fact that animals, especially the Rhesus monkeys and marmosets, may not be issued until they are between 12 and 24 months old. The number of rats and mice culled is high, but in line with commercial operation. This is due to stringent experimental requirements, such as the use of single sex or narrow weight ranges. However, with the exception of 1994–1995, no Rhesus monkeys or marmosets have been culled. The marmosets were culled due to a very low usage at CBD and an unexpected fall in demand elsewhere. Table 1 shows that the breeding of marmosets was, therefore, significantly reduced in subsequent years. I hope this information is helpful.

Mr. Baker

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the date of the last occasion on which he or his predecessor viewed(a) the conditions in which animals are kept at Porton Down and (b) an experiment to which an animal was subjected. [22967]

Mr. Spellar

Since 1 May 1997, no Minister from this Department has visited the Chemical and Biological Defence Sector at the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency, Porton Down. I intend to visit Porton Down myself in the next two or three months.

Mr. Baker

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what measures he is taking to introduce alternatives to animal experimentation at Porton Down; and if he will list the initiatives in this area since 1995. [22962]

Letter from John Chisholm to Mr. Norman Baker, dated 19 January 1998: I am replying to your Question to the Secretary of State for Defence concerning the number of animals bred and used in animal experimentation at Porton Down in each year from 1990 to 1997 as this matter falls within my area of responsibility as Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency. The animal species currently bred at Porton Down are Rhesus monkeys, common marmosets, Porton strain mice, Porton strain Wistar rats and Large White pigs. These colonies must be maintained at levels sufficient to protect the genetic base of the species and to supply all of DERA's requirements in terms of numbers, sex, age, weight, timing and quality.

Mr. Spellar

This is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA). I have asked the Chief Executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from John Chisholm to Mr. Norman Baker, dated January 1998: As Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) I have been asked to reply to your question about the introduction of alternatives to animal experimentation at Porton Down. The use of alternatives to living animals has always been a priority in designing and executing research programmes to address the MOD's requirements. Alternatives must be fully considered when drawing up a project licence application. At CBD each project licence application is subjected to an internal peer group ethical review. The meeting is open to all members of staff, the details of the licence application are briefly presented and then the meeting is open to debate on both scientific and ethical concerns. One of the major aims is to ensure that the "3Rs' have been addressed, i.e., Reduction, Replacement and Refinement. The review can result in an application being completely rejected, held over subject to improvements being made or approved for submission to the Home Office. The review procedure is in line with the outcome of a Home Office Supplementary Note 'Interim report on the review of operation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986' dated 6 November 1997 which emphasises the requirement that applicants for new project licences must demonstrate that they have sought alternatives before the use of animals is proposed. With respect to initiatives since 1995, a new in vitro toxicology laboratory has been commissioned at CBD Porton. The use of in-vitro cell and tissue culture models allows innovative research to identify novel medical countermeasures and examine the potential hazards and the mechanism of action of chemical and non-chemical agents. Similar models are also used in research to investigate treatment regimes and prospective protective and decontaminating compounds for use in a chemical warfare environment. Experiments using animals have also been essential for advances in the surgical management of injury. Another recent initiative has been the development of a variety of model systems for studies on the protection of personnel from physical injury and the identification of injury mechanisms. The model systems can be grouped under three headings; animal cadaveric tissue; physical models; and computer models. They have either reduced or entirely replaced the use of living animals. I hope this is helpful.

Mr. Baker

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what external procedures exist to ensure that animals held at Porton Down are allowed so far as possible to follow normal behaviour patterns and that the are properly looked after. [22966]

Mr. Spellar

This is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA). I have asked the Chief Executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from John Chisholm to Mr. Norman Baker, dated 19 January 1998: As Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA), I have been asked to reply to your question about the way in which animals are cared for at Porton Down. All work and housing involving animals at DERA's Chemical and Biological Defence Sector (CBD) at Porton Down are conducted strictly in accordance with the Home Office guidelines on the care and use of animals as defined within the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 which is administered by the Home Office. CBS adheres to and expands upon existing Home Office codes of practice and guidelines for the care and housing of animals involved in scientific procedures. There is an on-going programme of environmental enrichment for all species. In particular, CBD Porton has an established track record of innovative approaches to the housing of non-human primates used in scientific procedures. Inspectors from the Home Office make both announced and unannounced visits to CBD Porton and have full access to all CBD animal facilities. As part of the Act the establishment must have a named veterinary surgeon and named animal care and welfare officers. At CBD these officers have formed and internal Animal Care and Use committee. The welfare of the animals is of paramount importance to Porton Down which has a world wide reputation for its excellent standards of husbandry and breeding of laboratory animals. In addition to the statutory controls in place, the Ministry of Defence has established an independent animal welfare committee—Animal Welfare Advisory Committee—which reviews the arrangements for animal care and welfare at sites within DERA carrying out work with animals, and advises on best practice. The reports from this independent committee are made to the Chief Scientific Adviser to the Ministry of Defence and are published in the House of Commons Library. I hope this is helpful.

Mr. Baker

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if the terms of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 are applied to procedures carried out at Porton Down. [22961]

Mr. Spellar

This is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA). I have asked the Chief Executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from John Chisholm to Mr. Norman Baker, dated 19 January 1998: As Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA), I have been asked to reply to your question about the application of the terms of the Animal (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 to procedures carried out at Porton Down. All work involving animals at DERA's Chemical and Biological Defence Sector (CBD) at Porton Down is carried out strictly in accordance with the requirements of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 which is administered by the Home Office. I hope this is helpful.

Mr. Baker

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps he has taken to ensure that animal experiments undertaken at Porton Down do not breach the terms of the Protection of Animals Act 1911 in respect of the deliberate infliction of wanton physical cruelty. [22964]

Mr. Spellar

This is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA). I have asked the Chief Executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from John Chisholm to Mr. Norman Baker, dated 19 January 1998: As Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) I have been asked to reply to your question about the steps taken to ensure that animal experiments at Porton Down do not breach the terms of the Protection of Animals Act 1911. All work involving animals at DERA's Chemical and Biological Defence Sector (CBD) is carried out strictly in accordance with the requirements of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 which superseded the Cruelty to Animals Act (1876). The Act covers all experimental work involving the use of animals, and states: "A person guilty of an offence under section 1 of the Animals Act 1911 or section 1 of the Protection of Animals (Scotland) Act 1912 in respect of an animal at a designated establishment shall be liable to the penalties specified in subsection (1) above". I hope this is helpful.

Mr. Baker

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence to what extent he shares information obtain from animal experimentation at Porton Down with other members of NATO; and to what extent he is provided with information obtained from animal experimentation carried out in other NATO countries. [22968]

Mr. Spellar

This is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA). I have asked the Chief Executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from John Chisholm to Mr. Norman Baker, dated 19 January 1998: As Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation Research Agency (DERA) I have been asked to reply to your question about the extent to which information gained from animal experimentation is shared among the members of NATO. The UK government participates, whenever possible, in collaborative research programmes which involve a sharing of data and, indeed, results from the UK research programme have been shared with other NATO members. One of the considerations in planning collaborative programmes and sharing information is the reduction of animal use on an international basis. I hope this is helpful.