HL Deb 07 June 1999 vol 601 cc137-8WA
Lord Hylton

asked Her Majesty's Government:

When they intend to respond to Lord Hylton's Question for Written Answer HL1474, put down on 10 March. [HL2438]

The Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Lord Whitty)

I am answering the noble Lord's Question today. The sudden upsurge in media and public interest in genetic modification technology earlier this year resulted in a very substantial increase in the volume of ministerial correspondence, Parliamentary Questions and correspondence from members of the public needing to be handled by officials. Officials have also been required to handle significantly increased levels of briefing resulting from several Select Committee appearances and the general increase in ministerial activity in this area. This increased level of activity, coupled with the need to provide full and considered replies to the large number of sometimes detailed and complex Parliamentary Questions tabled, has inevitably resulted in some increase in response time, which I regret.

Lord Hylton

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether, under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 or any other legislation, they have a duty to assess the risk of genetically modified animals escaping from captivity, cross-breeding or entering the food chain; what is their current practice in this respect; and whether there are adequate penalties for anyone accidentally or intentionally releasing genetically modified animals, including fish. [HL1474]

Lord Whitty

The keeping of genetically modified (GM) animals is subject to licencing by the Home Office and the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act. In addition, anyone intending to keep a GM animal must undertake a risk assessment under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, the Genetically Modified Organisms (Contained Use) Regulations 1992 as amended and the Genetically Modified Organisms (Risk Assessment) (Records and Exemptions) Regulations 1996 as amended. This assessment must include the risk of genetically modified animals escaping from captivity, cross-breeding or entering the food chain. Depending on the facts of the case, penalties available for the intentional or accidental release of GM animals include a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or imprisonment. We believe the existing penalties to be adequate.