§ Annabelle EwingTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to bring forward regulations on(a) mandatory investment by commercial companies into the development of non-animal alternatives to animal testing and (b) over-breeding of animals for experiments. [43970]
§ Angela EagleThe Government does not believe that setting mandatory requirements for investment into research into alternatives to the use of animals in scientific procedures is either desirable or necessary.
Nonetheless, every year the Home Office makes available to the Animal Procedures Committee (APC) a budget for research aimed at developing or promoting the use of alternatives which replace animal use, reduce the number of animals used, or refine the procedures involved to minimise suffering (the three Rs). Details of completed research projects are published in the annual Report of the Animal Procedures Committee, which is available from The Stationery Office.
The amount made available to the Committee for 2001–02 for this specific purpose has increased to £280,000. However, this is not the only money spent by the Government on seeking to develop alternatives, as other Departments also fund such work. It is estimated that the total spent on this by the United Kingdom Government is in the region of £2 million each year. Industry also spends many millions of pounds each year on the search for and development of alternatives. To take this further on an international level, the United Kingdom Government will continue to support the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) through contributions to the European Union.
The Animal Procedures Committee looked at the issue of the over-breeding of animals for use in scientific procedures as part of its 10-year review of the 1986 Act. The Committee defined "overbreeding" as "the production in breeding programmes of animals intended for use in scientific procedures but which prove to be unsuitable for such use or surplus to requirements". With the exception of genetically modified animals, the production of which is a regulated procedure, these animals are not recorded in the annual statistics on animal use under the 1986 Act since they are not used in regulated procedures. Estimates vary significantly as to the number of animals that may be involved. The Animal Procedures Committee concluded that although some overbreeding was unavoidable, it can and should be minimised and it recommended principles of best practice to help to achieve this. The Committee also undertook to liaise with the Laboratory Animal Science Association, which has also been considering the issue of overbreeding and how it can be minimised, to refine these principles before finalising its advice. I expect to receive the Committee's report by the summer and will carefully consider the further advice it provides.