A Westminster Hall debate on the government’s Animal Welfare Strategy for England yesterday (21 January), introduced by Samantha Niblett MP (South Derbyshire, Lab), raised notable concerns for farming, wildlife management and rural communities. The debate featured further confirmation of the government’s plan to ban trail hunting: per the Minister, Dame Angela Eagle MP, a consultation is now expected “very soon.”
Opening the debate, Ms Niblett welcomed the strategy as a “first step” and set out the government’s ambitions across companion animals, farming, wildlife and overseas trade. She emphasised the importance of improving welfare in farming but, in remarks later echoed by others such as Charlie Dewhirst MP (Bridlington and The Wolds, Con) and the Shadow Minister, Robbie Moore MP, she acknowledged the need to work “in genuine partnership” with farmers and ensure they are properly supported and paid for the changes expected of them.
The government’s commitment to banning trail hunting was repeatedly welcomed by Labour Members, plus Adam Ramsay MP (Waveney Valley, Green). Joe Morris MP (Hexham, Lab), was especially vocal. Overall, however, the issue did not loom large and of those MPs who used their speech to focus on a single issue, none chose hunting. Challenged on the position of the Opposition, Mr Moore said:
“I am very clear: fox hunting was banned… and any fox hunting that is seen to be taking place is illegal.... This is not an animal welfare issue… The Opposition’s position is that there are much, much more important things that the government should be focusing on.”
Shooting came off more lightly still. Again, Mr Morris proved most critical, stating that while he does engage with the grouse moors in his constituency he supports vicarious liability in cases of raptor persecution, such that landowners would be held responsible for incidents apparently occurring on their land. By contrast, Ms Niblett’s speech included a paean to wildlife management and game:
“I feel far more comfortable eating meat from animals that have lived a full life in open spaces in our beautiful Derbyshire countryside, and whose deaths were carried out swiftly by trained conservationists who play a key role in conservation, pest control and habitat management. I am grateful to those who help to manage our countryside and parks responsibly and humanely, even for animals we do not eat, such as grey squirrels that damage young trees.”
One related issue that did feature prominently was the proposed ban on snares. Little distinction was made in the debate between older, indiscriminate snares and modern humane restraints. That lack of nuance will concern many in the countryside who rely on effective predator control as part of responsible game and wildlife management.
The risk of UK farmers being undercut by imports produced to lower welfare standards was a recurring theme across parties. Ms Niblett, Mr Morris, Mr Ramsay, Sir Gavin Williamson MP (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge, Con) and Liberal Democrat spokesperson, Tim Farron MP, warned that raising domestic standards without applying equivalent requirements to imports would be damaging for British food production. All urged the government to ensure that imported products match UK welfare expectations, particularly given existing pressures on farm businesses.
The Minister responding for the government, Dame Angela Eagle MP, confirmed that the strategy will not be delivered through a single, comprehensive Animal Welfare Bill. Although she denied that the government’s approach would be “piecemeal,” what she outlined sounded very much that way: a series of consultations, secondary legislation and targeted primary legislation brought forward over the course of the Parliament. She argued that this would allow the government to prioritise action, work with stakeholders and avoid poorly designed policy. On farming, she acknowledged the need to design reforms in collaboration with practitioners but had little to say on imports. A more targeted debate today on import standards may help pin the government down on this critical issue.
While many MPs welcomed the strategy’s intent, the debate underlined the Countryside Alliance’s concern that good intentions by themselves are not enough. They must be matched by evidence-based policy, proper consultation and a clear understanding of how proposals will affect farmers, wildlife and rural communities.