UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Steve Barclay – 2023 Statement on the BioNTech Strategic Partnership

    Steve Barclay – 2023 Statement on the BioNTech Strategic Partnership

    The statement made by Steve Barclay, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, in the House of Commons on 9 January 2023.

    The UK’s response to the covid-19 pandemic demonstrated the power of Government collaborating with industry to accelerate life sciences innovation. We want to take this innovative approach to tackling the other major healthcare challenges we face, such as cancer.

    The Government have signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Germany-based company BioNTech. This MoU aims to build a strategic partnership which will bring innovative immunotherapy research to the UK, with the potential to transform cancer patient outcomes and develop new vaccines for infectious diseases. This agreement will pave the way for a multi-year partnership between the Government and BioNTech, accelerating trials into the company’s ground-breaking pipeline of products targeted at major global diseases such as breast, lung and pancreatic cancer, malaria and tuberculosis.

    BioNTech is a biopharmaceutical company developing a pipeline of cutting-edge immunotherapies—including mRNA-based vaccines and therapies. The company became a household name in 2020 after developing a covid-19 vaccine in partnership with Pfizer, which went on to become the world’s first licensed vaccine to use novel mRNA technology.

    Through this partnership with BioNTech, the Government aim to ensure trials into further promising vaccines and therapies are accelerated, to reach our patients faster. The agreement means cancer patients will get early access to trials exploring personalised mRNA therapies, like cancer vaccines. No two cancers are the same and mRNA vaccines will contain a genetic blueprint to stimulate the immune system to attack cancer cells. The collaboration will aim to deliver 10,000 personalised therapies to UK patients by 2030 through a new research and development hub, creating at least 70 jobs and strengthening the UK’s positions as a leader in global life sciences.

    BioNTech will also be the first industry partner in the new cancer vaccine launch pad which is being developed by NHS England and Genomics England. The launch pad will help to rapidly identify large numbers of cancer patients who could be eligible for trials and explore potential vaccine across multiple types of cancer. The partnership will aim to help patients with early and late-stage cancers.

    If successfully developed, cancer vaccines could become part of the standard of care.

  • Mark Spencer – 2023 Statement on Farming Payments Policy

    Mark Spencer – 2023 Statement on Farming Payments Policy

    The statement made by Mark Spencer, the Minister for Food, Farming and Fisheries, in the House of Commons on 9 January 2023.

    We are undertaking the most significant reform of agricultural policy and spending in England in decades as we take England out of the common agricultural policy. We are phasing out unfair and environmentally damaging farm subsidies, radically improving our services to farmers, providing one-off grants to support farm productivity, innovation, research and development, and developing and expanding our schemes to pay farmers to provide environmental goods and services alongside food production.

    The reform is enabled by our manifesto commitment to guarantee an average of £2.4 billion to farmers and landowners in each year of this Parliament, with all funding released from direct payments reductions to be made available through our new grants and schemes.

    The changes we are making are essential to help us grow and maintain a resilient, productive agriculture sector over the long term and at the same time achieve our ambitious targets for the environment and climate, playing our role in tackling these huge, global challenges. These reforms are about food and nature going hand in hand for all farmers, with environmental goods and services playing a key role in all farm businesses.

    We have reviewed our plans for the agricultural transition, considered feedback from the sector, and lessons learned from the early stages of the agricultural transition. We are moving ahead with the transition, on the same timescale, and pressing ahead with our environmental land management schemes, fine-tuning them to make sure they help to deliver our ambitious outcomes on the environment and support a thriving farming sector.

    As I confirmed at the Oxford farming conference last week, farmers will receive increased payments for protecting and enhancing nature and delivering sustainable food production.

    Farmers could receive up to a further £1,000 per year for taking nature-friendly action through the sustainable farming incentive (SFI). This new management payment will be made for the first 50 hectares of farm (£20/ha) in an SFI agreement, to cover the administrative costs of participation and to attract smaller businesses—many of whom are tenant farmers—who are currently under-represented in the scheme.

    Farmers with a countryside stewardship (CS) agreement will see an average increase of 10% to their revenue payment rates—covering ongoing activity such as habitat management. DEFRA is also updating capital payment rates, which cover one-off projects such as hedgerow creation, with an average increase of 48%. We expect there to be 32,000 countryside stewardship agreements live at the start of this year, a 94% increase from 2020.

    Meanwhile, capital and annual maintenance payments for the England woodland creation offer (EWCO) will also see an increase this year.

    We will evolve the existing countryside stewardship scheme instead of inventing a new “local nature recovery” scheme, to get to the same destination of supporting farmers to contribute towards net zero and biodiversity among other outcomes. This will include expanding the scope of the scheme to pay for a wider range of actions at a greater ambition, further improving the service so that it is easy for farmers to apply and get paid and targeting our funding through the scheme to where it will have the biggest impact.

    Taken together, these changes will mean we will support farmers and landowners for making space for nature alongside sustainable food production, contributing towards meeting the UK’s legally binding environment targets such as halting and reversing biodiversity loss by 2030, agreed at COP15 in December last year.

    Later this month we will be publishing detailed information about what we will pay for in our schemes, both this year and in future, and how farmers will be able to get involved.

  • Michelle Donelan – 2023 Statement on Channel 4

    Michelle Donelan – 2023 Statement on Channel 4

    The written statement made by Michelle Donelan, the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, in the House of Commons on 9 January 2023. This was separate to the verbal statement made on the same day by the Secretary of State.

    Channel 4 is a great British success story. It is an integral part of our public service broadcasting system—contributing to the UK’s creative economy, providing greater choice for audiences, and supporting the booming British production sector. In fact, independent production in the UK is a now mature £3 billion industry, up from £500 million in 1995.

    However, as the Government set out in their broadcasting White Paper last year, all public service broadcasters (PSBs) face challenges from structural changes in the broadcasting landscape. Channel 4, along with all other PSBs, is facing unprecedented competition for viewers, programmes and talent from overseas as well as new, rapidly-growing streaming platforms. It is important for the UK’s thriving creative industries and the wider economy that we support our PSBs to grow, compete and to make high-quality, original content that people all over the UK love, trust and learn from.

    Channel 4 is uniquely constrained in its ability to respond to these challenges. There are limits on Channel 4’s ability to raise capital and its current operating model effectively stops it from making its own content. Under current legislation it operates as a publisher-broadcaster, meaning that all its shows are commissioned or acquired from third parties—such as independent producers or other broadcasters—who typically retain the rights to those programmes.

    The challenges faced by Channel 4 are real. That is why the previous Government decided to proceed with a sale of the business in order to free the broadcaster from the constraints holding it back under public ownership.

    After careful examination of the business case for the sale of Channel 4 through the lens of this Government’s focus on economic stability and long-term sustainable growth and considered engagement, I have decided that pursuing a sale is not the best option to ease the challenges facing Channel 4, nor to support growth in the UK’s creative economy—especially the independent production sector. However, doing nothing also carries risks, and the Government believe change is necessary to ensure the corporation can continue to thrive now and long into the future, in a rapidly changing media landscape.

    After careful discussions with Channel 4, I am announcing a package of interventions that will ensure the broadcaster remains focused on sustainability and has new opportunities to grow while serving audiences in the decades to come with high-quality, innovative and distinctive content.

    When parliamentary time allows, we will, through the Media Bill, introduce a statutory duty on Channel 4 to consider its sustainability as part of its decision making. We are also working with Channel 4 to agree updated governance structures that assure the Government of Channel 4’s long-term sustainability, including an updated memorandum of understanding between my Department and Channel 4 which will be made publicly available.

    To assist in Channel 4 meeting its new obligation, we will provide them with new commercial flexibilities. While ensuring that Channel 4 continues to play its key role in incubating and supporting the independent production sector, which often includes new and highly-innovative companies, I will look to relax the publisher-broadcaster restriction to enable Channel 4 to make some of its own content, and exploit intellectual property as other public service broadcasters are able to.

    In determining how this relaxation should be designed and implemented, the Government will work closely with the independent production sector and others to consider necessary steps to ensure that Channel 4’s important role in driving investment into the sector is safeguarded. Any changes to Channel 4’s commissioning model would need to be introduced gradually, with appropriate checks and balances, and following consultation with the sector. For example, this will include increasing the level of Channel 4’s independent production quota, which is currently set at 25 per cent of programmes; and potentially introducing specific protections for smaller, new and innovative independent producers.

    As part of the package, Channel 4 has agreed to enhance its support for the independent TV production sector and regional roles and skills. It will increase its annual investment in 4Skills—its paid training and placement programme for young people—from £5 million to £10 million a year by 2025. It will double its number of roles outside London from its original target of 300 to reach 600 roles across the UK in 2025. This will include jobs in Channel 4’s national HQ in Leeds, as well as in Glasgow, Manchester, Bristol and potentially elsewhere.

    To enable Channel 4 to make investments that could put it on a more sustainable footing, we will also make it easier and simpler for Channel 4 to draw down on its private £75 million credit facility. In the event it pursues more ambitious investment opportunities to promote the corporation’s long term sustainability, we will support Channel 4 to access more private capital under its current borrowing limit of £200 million set in law—while taking steps to minimise the risk to public finances. We will also consider future requests to raise the organisation’s borrowing limit if appropriate.

    This package does not impact Channel 4’s current “out of London” or “out of England” quotas, which are set in its broadcasting licence by Ofcom, and to which we would still expect Channel 4 to adhere.

    Channel 4 will also include a new section in its annual report assessing the due impartiality of its news service and how the channel’s content aims to demonstrate the highest editorial standards. This is important work that will add to transparency and focus and I look forward to seeing Channel 4’s findings

    Alongside the changes to Channel 4, the Media Bill will introduce a wide range of measures to modernise decades-old broadcasting regulations, including prominence reforms to increase the growth potential of the UK’s public service broadcasters and foster innovations in the way TV is produced and consumed. Further details on the Media Bill will be announced in due course.

  • James Cartlidge – 2023 Statement on the Energy Bills Discount Scheme

    James Cartlidge – 2023 Statement on the Energy Bills Discount Scheme

    The statement made by James Cartlidge, the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, in the House of Commons on 9 January 2023.

    Following a review of the energy bill relief scheme (EBRS), the Government today announce a new energy support scheme for businesses, charities, and the public sector. The new energy bills discount scheme (EBDS) will provide all eligible UK businesses and other non-domestic energy users with a discount on high energy bills until 31 March 2024, following the end of the EBRS in March 2023.

    This will help businesses locked into contracts signed before recent substantial falls in the wholesale price manage their costs and provide others with reassurance against the risk of prices rising again.

    This further support follows the Government’s unprecedented package for non-domestic users through this winter through the EBRS, worth £18 billion per the figures certified by the OBR at the autumn statement.

    At autumn statement, we were clear that such levels of support, unprecedented in their nature and scale, were time-limited and intended as a bridge to allow businesses to adapt. Wholesale energy prices are falling and have now gone back to levels seen just before Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. But to avoid a cliff-edge for businesses and provide reassurance against the risk of prices rising again, we are launching the new energy bills discount scheme, giving them the certainty they need to plan ahead.

    The new scheme strikes a balance between supporting businesses over the next 12 months and limiting the taxpayer’s exposure to volatile energy markets, with a cap set at £5.5 billion based on estimated volumes.

    Through the scheme, from 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024, eligible non-domestic customers who have a contract with a licensed energy supplier will see a unit discount of up to £6.97/MWh automatically applied to their gas bill and a unit discount of up to £19.61/MWh applied to their electricity bill, except for those benefiting from lower energy prices. The relative discount will be applied if wholesale prices are above a price threshold of £302/MWh for electricity and £107/MWh for gas.

    A substantially higher level of support will be provided to businesses in sectors identified as being the most energy and trade intensive—predominately manufacturing industries. A long-standing category associated with higher energy usage, these firms are often less able to pass through cost to their customers due to international competition. Businesses in scope will receive a gas and electricity bill discount based on a price threshold, which will be capped by a maximum unit discount of £40.0/MWh for gas and £89.1/MWh for electricity. This discount will only apply to 70% of energy volumes and will apply above a price threshold of £185/MWh for electricity and £99/MWh for gas.

    This Government are committed to supporting UK business and the voluntary sector, and through this package we aim to give organisations the certainty they need to plan through next winter.

  • Kemi Badenoch – 2023 Statement on Gender Recognition – Approved Overseas Countries and Territories

    Kemi Badenoch – 2023 Statement on Gender Recognition – Approved Overseas Countries and Territories

    The statement made by Kemi Badenoch, the Secretary of State for International Trade, in the House of Commons on 9 January 2023.

    I would like to notify the House of the progress we are making in implementing our 2020 response to the Gender Recognition Act (2004) consultation. In particular, the House will wish to be aware that I will be updating the list of approved overseas countries and territories (provided for under section 1(1)(b) of the Gender Recognition Act) to make sure it does not compromise the integrity of the Gender Recognition Act. This follows previous periodic updates.

    The list of approved overseas countries and territories was last updated in 2011. A commitment was made to keeping the list under review.

    There are now some countries and territories on the list who have made changes to their systems since then and would not now be considered to have equivalently rigorous systems. It should not be possible for a person who would not satisfy the criteria to obtain legal gender recognition in the UK to use the overseas recognition route to obtain a UK gender recognition certificate. This would damage the integrity and credibility of the process of the Gender Recognition Act.

    We are finalising details of overseas countries and territories to be removed from the list via an affirmative statutory instrument. These comprise countries and territories where there is a clear indication that the country now no longer has a system at least as rigorous as those in the Gender Recognition Act 2004. We are undertaking a thorough checking system to verify our understanding of each overseas system in question.

    I will formally engage with other colleagues and Ministers from devolved Governments in advance of laying the statutory instrument. The Government are committed to ensuring that this outcome of the Gender Recognition Act consultation is followed through and upheld, and the overseas list will be updated via statutory instrument more regularly in future.

  • Johnny Mercer – 2023 Speech to the Veterans Trauma Network Annual Conference

    Johnny Mercer – 2023 Speech to the Veterans Trauma Network Annual Conference

    The speech made by Johnny Mercer, the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, at the King’s Fund in London on 11 January 2023.

    The first thing I want to say is thank you.

    If you look at where we were and where we’ve come, we’ve made extraordinary progress for the people we’re trying to help. So thank you for everything you’ve done, and for the way everyones applied themselves to this, and congratulations on the Health Service Journal Award, which I know is an important moment as well.

    I want to reiterate this government’s position on veterans affairs after what was clearly a rather turbulent period last year. I hope that my appointment is an indication of what this Prime Minister wants to achieve in this space. I clearly would not have returned to Government if I did not think the Prime Minister was serious about achieving that combined ambition of making this the best country in the world to be a veteran. I intend to put the turbulence behind us and move on, and maintain my consistency in this role and what I want to see in turning that vision of the UK being the best country in the world to be a veteran, into a reality, an actual reality, for our veterans in communities up and down this country.

    I congratulate the entire NHS on their commitment to this mission. Locally in my constituency, I pay tribute to Jon Coates, for all his work, and his predecessor, Joe Kyo as well. And I know this is replicated in trusts up and down the nation. The NHS has always been a deep and close friend of veterans, and I pay particular tribute to Kate Davies and the work we’ve done together over the years, for her relentless commitment in this space, and I hope that we can continue to work closely in 2023.

    But I wanted to come along today chiefly to seek your help. I am in the process, at the moment, of building really clear pathways of veterans support across the United Kingdom.

    Of course, Op Courage, the one you’ve heard of, was the pioneer, a single clear defined pathway for veterans to access world-class mental health care. Rooted, commissioned and ordered by the NHS in England. During its first year, it had 19,000 referrals. Which is a massive unmet need and shows you what we can do in this space if we design good programmes where there’s room for everybody, everybody comes together and we deliver it.

    Last month, the Prime Minister launched Op Fortitude, something similar in the space of homelessness, for some of our most vulnerable veterans. This programme initially ran over Christmas last year, ensuring no veteran involuntarily slept rough over the Christmas period. We’re going to launch formally on the 1st of April this year, working with great partners, like Riverside and Stoll, we will end veterans homelessness in this country in 2023.

    It’s an extremely complex issue. It’s not as presented by many actors, but I’m confident by the end of 2023 with the money and the programmes that we’ll put in, there will be no veterans sleeping involuntarily rough in this country.

    It won’t surprise you that I want to do the same with physical health care needs this year.

    The number one challenge for veterans seeking help in this country remains navigating the various options available, and understanding the offers of help they receive.

    Standardising some of the excellent service they receive right across the country and removing the kind of lottery of postcode opportunities. Similarly, it is not right, that after so much money and effort has gone in, by a lot of people in this room, to improving where we were, from those early days of Iraq, or Afghanistan, or indeed, back in the 90s, that those of our most seriously wounded continue to have an opaque view of how their needs will be met in 2, in 5 or in 10 years time. I want to resolve these issues in quick time and launch a clear pathway for physical veterans care across the United Kingdom.

    The Veterans Trauma Network is at the heart of this. With the best of the NHS working in collaboration with wraparound care from our charity sector. I want this single pathway to expand nationwide and ensure that every veteran with physical and complex health care needs can benefit. I want to improve accessibility, increase innovation and have a system that is responsive to new data and evidence in ways that we haven’t seen before.

    Of course, a large part of this work will be increasing awareness. You do so much good work already and for 15 years you’ve pioneered combat medical innovations, ensuring that those with the most severe injuries are much more likely to survive and thrive. It’s about standardising that approach, it’s about formalising your work and crucially bringing government resource and commitment to your programmes, to ensure their enduring nature in the years to come.

    A real service innovation is the multidisciplinary approach you take, addressing not just physical health needs, but the wider health and social needs of the veteran so they can heal, recover and thrive. We need to build stronger collaboration with a wider range of partners in the state sector and charities to keep delivering this. Ensuring veterans receive the very best of British science and technology that healthcare has to offer. That is why the Government launched the Health Innovation Fund on which I will have more to say in the weeks ahead.

    That’s why Op Courage has been so successful.

    That’s why we’ve put so much effort into understanding the veterans picture, through data which we did not have in this country. So we could demonstrate the kind of openness and agility to meet the changing demands of our physically injured, as time progresses, from those who lost limbs, to those who suffer musculoskeletal injuries, or in need of pain management, through to the care needs of the aged veteran.

    The Office for Veterans’ Affairs has and continues to change what it means to be a veteran in the UK today. This Prime Minister has me around his cabinet table because he wants to get it right. There is political and public support, but professionalising veterans care and getting it onto a sustainable footing for the decades ahead like never before, so that we never return again to the days of the past that we know too well.

    But we must all play our role and that’s why I’m here today. I want everyone who has enduring physical health needs from their time in service to experience the benefit of the veterans Trauma Network. I want it to be easy to access on a standardised basis, not based on who you know, or where you live, but on a needs basis across the Nation.

    I want everyone to know about your great work. I want it to be a future focused on an enduring, ambitious footing, with full Government and Prime Ministerial support. And I’m determined we will get there, with Op Fortitude, Op Courage and this growing network – whatever you want to call it – we are building permanent strong foundations and pillars of support for veterans across the United Kingdom.

    Everybody has a role to play in that national duty – not mine or a few of us here – but that national duty towards this country’s armed forces veterans.

    I very much look forward to working with all of you in the months ahead.

  • Trudy Harrison – 2023 Speech on Snares

    Trudy Harrison – 2023 Speech on Snares

    The speech made by Trudy Harrison, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, in Westminster Hall on 9 January 2023.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers—for the first time, I believe. This is a very important debate. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley (Nick Fletcher) for securing it and the Members who are here listening to it. The petition secured more than 102,000 signatures. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley for requesting that this be a civil, polite and respectful debate in which we listen to the various views.

    It is of particular relevance that we have heard from two farmers with first-hand lived experience. I, too, have always lived in the countryside. As a farmer’s granddaughter I am aware of the devastation that can be caused by foxes in particular and the need for the control of predatory species. It is not just predation that is the cause of nature’s decline, as I am sure the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) will agree. There are many aspects. That is why at the end of this month we will bring forward our environmental improvement plan, which will fully explain DEFRA’s plans, along with those of many other organisations. It is a priority for the whole of society to ensure that nature recovers, and having a plan for predators is certainly part of that.

    The petition triggered today’s debate and has raised many concerns that free-running snares—the type that relax when the animal stops pulling—are indiscriminate, cannot ensure animal welfare, cause unnecessary suffering to mammals and should be banned. I want to set out what the current law on the use of snares is. Snares that have been set in position and that are of such a nature and so placed as to be calculated to cause injury to any wild animal must be inspected at least once a day. In all the accounts I have heard today, I am pretty sure that the snares were not inspected, thereby breaking the law.

    It is illegal to use a self-locking snare. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 prohibits causing unnecessary suffering to an animal under the control of man—“man or woman” would be the inclusive term, I am sure. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 states that it is illegal to set in position any trap or snare calculated to cause bodily injury to any wild animal included in schedule 6, such as badgers, otters, red squirrels and hedgehogs. The Deer Act 1991 makes it an offence to set in position any trap or snare calculated to cause bodily injury to any deer coming into contact with it, or to use any trap or snare for the purpose of killing or taking any deer. It is also illegal to set in position any trap or snare calculated to cause bodily injury to any wild animal included in schedule 6 to the 1981 Act, or to use a snare for the purpose of killing, taking or restraining such an animal. So a number of laws are already in place that try to protect wildlife.

    It has been clear from today’s debate that although the laws are there, snares are used indiscriminately and are not checked, and that the code of practice that should be followed is clearly not being followed. In preparation for this debate, I looked into this issue to see the guidelines on our DEFRA website for the appropriate use of snares. I will be the first to admit that the information is not clear and must be improved. That will be done in very short order.

    Patricia Gibson

    The Minister talked about how the law, as it currently stands, would prevent the kind of suffering we have heard about today. Clearly, the law is not being observed. In her preparation for the debate was she able to find out any information about any prosecutions that have been brought as a result of the kind of suffering we have been hearing about?

    Trudy Harrison

    The hon. Member makes an excellent point. As I am sure she can imagine, I tried to find out that very information, but because wildlife crime is not a notifiable crime, it is nigh on impossible to find it out. Instead, I contacted the RSPCA today to request an urgent meeting, because I know that members of the public who find animals in distress often turn first to the RSPCA for assistance. That is why I will have that meeting.

    I hope that both the hon. Member and the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Newport West (Ruth Jones), will be pleased to hear that I am reaching out to the devolved Administrations in Scotland and Wales to see what lessons have been learned from the measures that are already in place in Scotland and to understand the rationale for the proposals in Wales. I am keen to understand how my counterparts in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are protecting wildlife.

    Rachael Maskell

    Will the Minister set a timeframe for when she will bring her piece of work to a conclusion and therefore move forward with legislation, hopefully to bring in a ban, which is what Labour Members at least want to see?

    Trudy Harrison

    There have been multiple calls for me to give further confirmation on the call for evidence that was identified in the animal welfare action plan. Although I am not able to provide any further information on that in this debate, what I can say is that the environmental improvement plan is being worked on pretty much night and day—I was certainly working on it over the Christmas period. I have every confidence that that plan will be published on time at the end of January. On the progress that has already been made on the animal welfare action plan, I would be happy to write to the hon. Member with a detailed explanation. I have one in front of me, but as it is 15 pages long I do not have time to go through it in detail now.

    Ruth Jones

    Will the Minister give way?

    Trudy Harrison

    One final time.

    Ruth Jones

    I will be very quick. The Minister just said that she would issue the call for evidence by the end of this month. I am just checking for correctness—is that correct?

    Trudy Harrison

    That is not correct, no. I was referring to the environmental improvement plan. It was a condition of the Environment Act 2021 to provide such a document by the end of January, and I am confident that that will be the case and am very much looking forward to that plan.

    Tracey Crouch

    Will the Minister give way?

    Trudy Harrison

    No, I am afraid I will not give way any further.

    There is no question but that if snares are used incorrectly they can cause significant injuries and suffering to the animals for which they were set and, through accidental capture, to non-target species for which snaring is entirely inappropriate.

    As I have said, in 2021 the Government published the Action Plan for Animal Welfare, with the commendable aim of ensuring high animal welfare standards. The programme of work has already delivered some outstanding outcomes, such as banning the use of glue traps and the introduction of legislation to crack down on the abhorrent practice of illegal hare coursing. Additionally, current legislation already provides strong protection for the welfare of trapped animals. Anyone using snares must act within the law to ensure that their activities do not harm protected species. As I have already set out, penalties include an unlimited fine or a custodial sentence. We urge those with concerns relating to the misuse of snares to pass them to the police for investigation, as we have to prioritise Government time.

    It has been many years since this issue was debated so thoroughly, so I thank my hon. Friends again for discussing it in so much detail. I am aware that Wales has recently taken the decision to prohibit the use of snares and note that Scotland is reviewing its approach. I reiterate that I will work with the devolved Administrations to understand the implications, but I am also aware that we must protect lapwings, curlew and other ground-nesting birds, so we will take a balanced approach. We will observe how friends in the devolved Administrations implement their proposed changes to snaring. I hope we can learn from the different approaches. I will certainly keep an open mind about whether any new rules and regulations are required in England in the future.

    Thank you, Mr Vickers, for your excellent chairmanship of this debate. I leave the last word to my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley, who has done a sterling job in bringing forward this debate.

    Nick Fletcher

    I thank all Members who spoke in this important debate. I thank the petitioners and the members of the public who have joined us today, and the Petitions Committee team, which works ever so hard throughout the year to bring debates to us in this Chamber.

    The hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) said that 75% of the animals that snares catch are not the target animal. She spoke of technology; perhaps we can do some work with that. My hon. Friend the Member for Chatham and Aylesford (Tracey Crouch) said that we require action now; we just need to get on with it. The hon. Member for Rutherglen and Hamilton West (Margaret Ferrier) spoke of the recent decision of the BVA, which called for an outright ban. The hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Olivia Blake) said that the break-away device does not operate as it should with smaller animals that are not the target animal.

    In respect of my right hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Sir Robert Goodwill) and the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), we need to listen to the voice of experience. The Minister also comes from a farming background. We need to listen to what they say, because it is extremely important. The ratio of Members present who want to ban snares to those who do not is 3:1, which is similar to the ratio for the wider population, but how many of those who want to ban them have had a life dealing with foxes and the implications of this type of injury to curlew, lapwings, chickens and other things?

    We have had a civil debate today and it has been fantastic. We should have further debates, and I am glad that the Government are working on this issue. It is important that we take a balanced view. I will finish with what the hon. Member for Strangford said: this should be proportionate and justified.

  • Ruth Jones – 2023 Speech on Snares

    Ruth Jones – 2023 Speech on Snares

    The speech made by Ruth Jones, the Labour MP for Newport West, in Westminster Hall on 9 January 2023.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. On this first day of term, I extend good wishes for the new year to all colleagues gathered here today. I hope that one and all, and particularly the staff of this House and those in the offices of parliamentarians, had a happy and enjoyable Christmas with their families and friends, and very happy Hanukkah to our Jewish friends and colleagues.

    I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Don Valley (Nick Fletcher) for introducing the debate in such a measured way. It was very helpful to have the balances that he gave.

    We are gathered here once again to discuss animal welfare, and I thank the more than 102,000 people in constituencies across our country who signed the petition. I note that every single one of the top 10 constituencies for signatories is represented by a Tory MP, including some Ministers, and I hope the debate will gently guide the Minister to provide real answers. If we cannot get them here, I would be happy for her to write to me.

    It was only a few weeks ago that we were here in this place discussing animal welfare and the Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill, or rather the need for Ministers to bring it back to the House. Indeed, anyone who waited and watched out for the Environment Act 2021, all those months ago, may remember my renaming it the “Missing in Action” Bill, but I think we can now describe the Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill as the “Missing in Action” Bill mark 2. I say that more in sorrow than anything, because the Labour party believes in honouring our animal welfare promises, and we will always push for the strongest possible animal welfare policies. That is why this debate on snares is so important.

    Colleagues of all parties will know that the United Kingdom is one of a small handful of countries in our part of the world that does not prohibit the use of snares in our green open spaces and on our farms. I am sure that many Members present have seen the horrific film footage—for example, of badgers becoming entrapped —and that is not to mention the frequent reports, which have already been mentioned, of domestic pets being caught in, injured by, or sometimes killed by snares. While we have left the European Union, it is clear that this Government need to wake up and join most countries in Europe in banning the use of snares.

    I make no apologies for my constant references to Wales and the important work being done by the Welsh Labour Government. As the Member of Parliament for Newport West, I can testify to their commitment and hard work. That is why I welcome the fact that, in their programme for government to the Senedd after last year’s election, the Welsh Government committed to ban the use of snares in Wales. Of course, while Cardiff Bay is in the process of delivering, it is a very different picture here in Westminster. His Majesty’s Government have made it clear that they have no current plans to ban snares in England—I am more than happy to take an intervention from the Minister if that is not the case.

    Why is this important? As we all know, numerous animal welfare issues arise from free-running snares—I thank Animal Aid for the briefing it sent through ahead of this debate. I want to remind colleagues of the impact of snares, although many colleagues have already explained that impact far more eloquently than I can. We know that the old-fashioned snares may become frayed and rusty, leading to them behaving more like self-locking snares. In their state of panic, animals may not stop pulling when caught, and can die of asphyxiation. Animals can be snared by other parts of their body, including abdomen, leg and shoulder, causing horrific injuries and a slow death.

    Non-target animals, such as legally protected badgers as well as cats and dogs, may be caught in snares. In the case of badgers and some dogs, the stop that has been mentioned may have been set for foxes, and is set far too tight for an already panicking animal. Similarly, if the animal is caught by an area that is bigger than the neck, the stop is ineffective and the snare can, and does, cut into the animal, causing injury, pain, distress and even death. Lactating animals may be trapped by a snare, leaving offspring to die of starvation, and ensnared animals may be attacked while still alive by other animals and killed. Additionally, as we have heard, animals might die of hypothermia, dehydration or starvation. The impact of snares is clear, and that list just touches on the examples we could point to.

    The current legislation provides insufficient protection for threatened species and the welfare of trapped animals. The Tory Ministers in DEFRA appear to believe that the onus is on trap operators to work within the law to avoid harming protected species or causing unnecessary suffering, but we know that is not working, so we need the Government to step up and take firm action now. At present, as we have heard, the Scottish Government are consulting on potential measures to address snare use, with a ban expected to be among the options they consider. I urge Ministers in Holyrood to be bold and ambitious, and to give their colleagues in Cardiff a call if necessary.

    We on the Labour Benches believe that the UK Government should follow the example of the Welsh Labour Government in bringing forward legislation to ban the use of snares. If they do so, they will have our support; if they will not, they should get out of the way, and we will add it to our to-do list when Labour forms the next Government. Our support for action on snares is not new: we moved new clause 16 to the Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill before Ministers were forced to carry it over, then leave it on the shelf. My colleague and hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Olivia Blake) made it clear that we want to see change and action—that was some time ago now. Even before then, in 2016, my hon. Friend the Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) committed that Labour would ban snares.

    Back in May 2021, the Department published its action plan for animal welfare, in which it pledged to launch a call for evidence on snaring. The then Minister for Nature Recovery and the Domestic Environment, the hon. Member for Taunton Deane (Rebecca Pow), acknowledged that

    “snares can cause immense suffering to both target and non-target animals including pet cats and dogs”.

    She was correct, but as ever—and as the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May), has said—nothing has changed.

    A ban on snares has strong backing from the public and the non-governmental organisations alike. I pay tribute to all the animal welfare charities and organisations—Humane Society International, Animal Aid and the RSPCA, to name just a few—that are working to deliver the change that all of us, certainly on the Labour Benches, want to see. It is important to note that a ban on snares was included in the sector’s 2021 “Act Now for Animals” green paper, signed by more than 50 animal welfare charities, and that polling conducted by Survation in 2020 showed that 73% of UK adults support a ban.

    I thank all the stakeholders, campaigners and organisations that work day in, day out to fight for the welfare of our natural wildlife, our animals, our pets and this country, to show real and meaningful leadership. We get the importance of action. We care about ensuring that our country leads by example. When we win the next election, we will do what Ministers are not doing: we will deliver.

    I have three specific questions for the Minister. When does she expect a ban to be brought to the House? What specific discussions has she had with colleagues in the Welsh and Scottish Governments about their work to impose a ban? Finally, will Ministers work with all of us who want to ensure that the Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill comes back, and would they support an amendment to that Bill that bans the use of snares in England? I am happy to be written to with answers, but I would like a response, please.

    As has been mentioned, in response to the latest question on snares in May 2022, the Secretary of State stated that the call for evidence on the use of snares would be published “in due course”. We are now eight months on from that and at least two and a half years from the original question. Will the Minister tell us when the Government will finally put out that call? I thank the hon. Member for Don Valley for introducing the debate.

  • Patricia Gibson – 2023 Speech on Snares

    Patricia Gibson – 2023 Speech on Snares

    The speech made by Patricia Gibson, the SNP MP for North Ayrshire and Arran, in Westminster Hall on 9 January 2023.

    I am pleased to participate in this e-petition debate requesting that the UK Government prohibit the sale, use and manufacture of free-running snares under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, putting them in the same category as self-locking snares, which are already illegal. I thank the hon. Member for Don Valley (Nick Fletcher) for his excellent opening speech on behalf of the Petitions Committee.

    I applaud the League Against Cruel Sports, Animal Aid and Cats Protection for all the work they do to promote the welfare of animals. They provided such excellent briefings for this debate, as did the House of Commons Library. As we have heard, the matters raised are devolved to the Scottish Parliament, but I understand the concerns and the depth of feeling. As we saw in the previous debate on cats, animal welfare is very close to the hearts of all our constituents across the UK. Again, it is no surprise that such a petition attracted over 102,000 signatures.

    Snares are used to catch foxes or rabbits. However, as we have heard, they cannot distinguish between different species of animals, so the consequences of their use are indiscriminate. For example, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has reported that almost 30% of rabbit snare operators have caught a cat, causing horrible injuries. Cats often die long and painful deaths if they are not rescued or able to escape.

    We have heard much about so-called humane snares today, but they still cause terrible problems, injuries and suffering for animals that become trapped or entangled. They make frantic attempts to escape, which is the natural reaction of any living creature. Of course it is going to make frantic attempts to escape when it feels trapped, and it suffers real mental and behavioural stress. The trapped creature fears predation and capture due to its restraint, and it ends up suffering from thirst, hunger, exposure and even infections arising from painful injuries caused by this so-called humane snare—something that I do not think many of us will put much weight on.

    In rural settings, sadly, sometimes it is considered necessary to enable land managers to control certain species to protect livestock, crops and wild birds. However, it is also true that the lawful use of traps can sometimes result in unintended harm to wildlife, and there are undoubtedly occasions when traps are not deployed or used in a way that complies with current regulations. That was made clear in the independent grouse moor management group report, which was commissioned by the Scottish Government and published towards the end of 2019.

    Following the SnareWatch annual report in 2021, the Scottish Government commissioned an additional review that will look beyond the terms of the Wildlife and the Countryside Act 1981 to consider a potential ban on snaring. Both land management and animal welfare aspects will be under consideration because that is important, as the hon. Member for Don Valley outlined. Many people have been calling for that position for some time. In the meantime, Scotland has the most robust laws on snaring in the UK, including requirements for registration and training. However, there is no denying that creatures continue to suffer terribly and unnecessarily, despite any well-intended measures to mitigate this cruel and barbaric practice.

    The Scottish Animal Welfare Commission, as well as recommending a ban on the sale and use of glue traps, concluded that any traps that do not “instantly kill” or render a creature “irreversibly unconscious” are likely to inflict unnecessary suffering. Therefore, the use of snares must give cause for significant concerns for animal welfare. That is why the Scottish Government are reviewing snare laws: the inflicting of unnecessary suffering on any creature is simply unacceptable. I believe it is possible to ban snaring while working constructively with land managers, which is what we all want to see.

    In testimony to the Scottish Parliament, Ranald Munro, professor of forensic veterinary pathology, said that

    “snares are primitive indiscriminate traps that are recognised as causing widespread suffering to a range of animals…being caught in a snare is extremely distressing for any creature and vigorous attempts to escape are natural.”

    That should not surprise anybody. He went on to detail the horrific injuries that a snare can cause, which I will not detail because they are truly harrowing, but suffice to say his conclusion was that:

    “These unfortunate animals suffer immensely.”

    We heard further examples of that from the hon. Member for Don Valley, who opened the debate. We cannot allow this to continue.

    It is my hope that both the Scottish and UK Governments will reflect on and consider the evidence and testimony. I have every faith in the Scottish Government’s robust and compassionate approach to animal welfare to date, and I am sure they will ban these appalling snares once and for all. In the meantime they have imposed more regulation around their use and operation, but nothing can truly mitigate the suffering and cruelty caused.

    We need to move away from the use of snares completely, as Ireland and many of our European neighbours have already. Where there is a need to control foxes, rabbits and so forth, there are alternative, more humane ways to do so. We have heard about some of them today, including electric fencing, wire-netting fences, motion sprinklers, ultrasonic devices, tree guards, and the use of radios or reflective discs. A whole range of genuinely humane alternatives is available, which is why so many countries have already banned snares completely. Should we not be looking at that and learning from them?

    I heard the right hon. Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Sir Robert Goodwill) talk about how we can deal with vast areas—for example, I think he mentioned the Yorkshire moors. I do not pretend to have an answer to that particular problem, but we must learn from our European partners, who will have grappled with the same kinds of issues. There is much to learn, and there are alternatives to be had. We cannot continue on the “there is no alternative” route when so much suffering is taking place, because that is what makes the barbaric use of snares all the more horrific. The fact is that we already have at our disposal, if we choose to use them, so many alternatives available. If so many other countries can use more humane and effective alternatives, why would we not consider using them in the UK?

    I hope and believe that the Scottish Government will move to a position of banning snares, and I know that the Welsh Government intend to do so. In that spirit, I urge the UK Government to do the same for England as well. It makes eminent sense for policy on this issue to be co-ordinated across the UK, so that all creatures in the UK, wherever they happen to be, have the same protection from this cruel and, importantly, unnecessary practice.

  • Olivia Blake – 2023 Speech on Snares

    Olivia Blake – 2023 Speech on Snares

    The speech made by Olivia Blake, the Labour MP for Sheffield Hallam, in Westminster Hall on 9 January 2023.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Vickers. I thank the hon. Member for Don Valley (Nick Fletcher) for opening the debate in a measured way. Some 267 of my constituents signed the petition, which shows the huge love of nature and animals there is in my constituency.

    Snares are indiscriminate, yet universally cruel. What is clear is that the non-statutory code is simply not enough to protect animals from painful injuries, suffering and death. As we have heard, that includes protected animals, such as badgers, and even cats and dogs. DEFRA’s own research shows that 68% of animals caught are not the intended target species. Under the code, snares should be checked twice, but the law only requires them to be checked once every 24 hours. It is hard to comprehend the volume of snares, given that 1.7 million are set every year. We have heard from other Members about the huge and lasting impact that snares can have on the wellbeing on animals, such as capture myopathy, panic immobility, thirst, starvation, dehydration and many more.

    We know that snare users have admitted that non-target species have been caught in their snares. For example, DEFRA research from 2008 to 2010 showed that 60% of people using fox snares admitted that they had captured non-target species in them. Landowners who do not use snares do not want to go back to their use. There are many landowners, of many hundreds of thousands of hectares up and down the country, who no longer use snares, and will not use snares, because they view them as incredibly cruel.

    We know that cats and dogs organisations are unified in their opposition to the use of snares because, within three years, 97 cats and 31 dogs were caught in snares. I am a dog owner—I have a dog necklace on today—and I would be horrified if, out in the countryside, my dog was unfortunate enough to step in a snare and be injured. I do not think that anyone should have to go through that.

    Break-away snares, as we have heard in the debate, have been seen as almost an answer to this situation. However, 69% of badgers do not escape from those snares, so they are not a solution; they are not even 50% good at what they are saying they are good at. The National Anti Snaring Campaign commissioned TTI Testing to do tests on those snares; it found that a force of over 70 kg of weight would be needed on a 2 mm wide area of the snare to cause a break. That is a huge amount of force that would need to be exerted on a snare. If you have ever seen an animal in a bad situation, Mr Vickers, you will know that they are not directionally pulling; the forces are very dynamic when they are struggling and they will not be able to get out of those snares. That is why 69% of badgers were unable to escape from them.

    We have also heard a lot about the different impacts of predators, but we have had a 64% decline in rabbits and a 44% decline in foxes. Declines in nature species are incredibly complicated. We cannot just say, “This is down to predators.” We have seen paper after paper looking at habitat loss, agricultural practices and their impacts on insects and other things that bird species might eat, and the lack of different crops and changes in sowing, and the impact on nesting spaces within that. The impacts of all of those different elements cannot just be laid at the feet of foxes or rabbits. It is absolutely a falsehood. It is a false flag.

    Predation, yes, is an issue, but there absolutely are alternatives to snaring to help protect species from predation, whether through trap and release, electric fencing, wire netting, motion sprinklers, ultrasonic devices or the use of radios and reflective surfaces. There are many different ways of putting predators off, and ensuring that we have a habitat and landscape available to lapwings and curlews is the most important thing in their protection.

    Sir Robert Goodwill

    Does the hon. Lady genuinely think that those deterrence methods would be suitable, and work, on the vast thousands of acres on the North Yorkshire Moors, where lapwings and curlews need to be protected?

    Olivia Blake

    We know the nesting areas of certain birds, and we already put signs up to say, “Keep your dogs on a lead” or “Do not go in this area,” and I think that, actually, yes, where snares are no longer used—on many hundreds of thousands of hectares—those alternatives have been used well. We are not seeing any of the organisations that have moved away from snares saying, “Actually, it hasn’t worked; we want to go back to using snares,” because those alternatives have proved effective. I think that that needs to be on the record in this debate. It is just a false flag to say that predation is the problem here. Loss of habitat, and the impacts that we have had on our environment, cannot be understated in this, as I have said.

    I just think that we need to ban snares because they are cruel and indiscriminate, as I have said, and there is nothing about them that we could not think outside the box and find an alternative for. I think we all have enough ingenuity that cruelty does not have to be the first and only option in the way that we manage our landscape and protect the species that are special to us.