Selaine's response to amendment:
In response to a number of enquiries, I am outlining the reasons why I voted against New Clause 2 of the Agriculture Bill.
It is first worth stressing that we can only move towards a better financial support system for farmers because we have left the European Union.
We are now moving towards a system which does not reward farmers based on how much land they own, but on how they use that land. Farmers will be rewarded for providing ‘public goods’, which will encourage environmentally-friendly farming and increased domestic production of food. One of the lessons of the pandemic has surely been that we should produce more of what we consume here in the UK.
Whilst I agreed with the intention of the proposed amendment, its unintended consequences could have seriously damaged the UK’s ability to strike new trade deals. This is one of the key reasons why people voted to leave, and it would be wrong to ignore that.
Throughout the transition period, the European Union have demanded that they should have a say over our laws in order for us to trade. I think that most people see this as unreasonable, and it would be unreasonable for us to make the same demand of other countries. There are also serious questions about whether making this demand would mean that the UK fell foul of international law and WTO rules.
Our farmers have a reputation for being the best in the world, producing food to the highest standards. Long may that continue and I am sure that British consumers will continue to make the right decision and carry on buying British.
Amendments NC1 and NC2 would, if passed, have significant unintended consequences which go beyond our current standards on food imports. The supply of certain products would be severely disrupted, if goods that meet our current import standards were to be blocked, including goods we import now from the EU.
NC1 and NC2 would affect UK exports to countries where we have not yet signed a continuity agreement. The extra conditions in these two new clauses could result in countries refusing to roll them over. For example, this would risk whisky exports worth £577m a year. Another example is the impact it would have on our potato farmers – 22% of UK potato exports go to those countries with whom an agreement has yet to be signed. In addition, because of the prescriptive nature of these clauses, it is too difficult for the Government to comply before the end of the transition period.
I will not support the lowering of our animal welfare or food production standards as we negotiate trade deals. I have spoken to Ministers who have assured me that this is also the Government’s position, and it is also worth highlighting that any trade deal will require the approval of MPs.
The Agriculture Bill makes a series of commitments on domestic food production, something I know a lot of farmers are concerned about. The Bill, after lobbying from myself and other colleagues with significant agricultural sectors, now includes a specific commitment to encouraging domestic food production. The Government will also be required to report on food security, and I know the Environment Secretary wants to see less of our food come from abroad.
I will continue to speak with Ministers on a regular basis about any concerns raised with me, and I will be supporting the Agriculture Bill when it comes before the House of Commons.
Animal research still plays an important role in providing vital safety information for potential new medicines. It is worth remembering that, as a result of findings from animal studies, a large number of potential new drugs never get as far as being tested in humans. Some aspects of the toxicological assessment of new medicines cannot be adequately assessed in humans, and animal data will be the only kind available.
Without animal testing it is highly likely that a large number of potentially dangerous new medicines would be tested in healthy volunteers and patients in clinical trials, and I know Ministers believe that this would be quite unacceptable. However, animals are only used when there are no suitable alternatives, and by encouraging new cutting-edge approaches to science we will ensure that standards of animal welfare are improved.
I fully support all steps to establish new methods and to support the life sciences and research industry. However, existing scientific research methods ensure that, by the time medicines reach clinical trial, risks are significantly reduced.
We are a nation of animal lovers, so it is only right that we have some of the highest welfare standards in the world. In addition to fur farming being banned in the UK, I am pleased to note that the import of fur products is tightly regulated. It is illegal to import furs derived from cats or dogs, or products made from them. In addition, the fur and skin of endangered animals or fish cannot be imported without a valid permit.
As well as this, it is prohibited to import furs or fur products from 13 wild animal species originating in countries where they are caught in the wild by leg-hold traps, or trapping methods that do not meet international standards of humane trapping. Strict rules are also in place to ensure that animals kept for fur production are kept, trapped and slaughtered humanely.
I appreciate that there is considerable support for banning all imports of fur products. The UK continues to support higher animal welfare standards worldwide as the best way of phasing out cruel and inhumane fur farming and trapping practices that are banned here. Now we have left the EU, the Government has retained all the current regulations banning imports of cat and dog fur and seal products from commercial hunts, as well as controls on products from endangered species and humane trapping. Until the end of the transition period it is not possible to introduce additional restrictions on the fur trade, but at the end of that period the UK will have a unique opportunity to ensure we have the highest standards in every area of animal welfare.
The UK will also be able to press for high standards through international forums such as the World Organisation for Animal Health, CITES and others. The UK will retake our seat on these bodies and be able more effectively to promote and support improved animal welfare standards internationally.
I share your high regard for animal welfare, which I am pleased is protected by comprehensive and robust legislation. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 already makes it an offence to cause any unnecessary suffering to any animal, including gamebirds.
This legislation is backed up by the statutory Code of Practice for the Welfare of Gamebirds Reared for Sporting Purposes. The code recommends that when birds are housed or penned, the accommodation should be well constructed and managed and of sufficient size to ensure good health and welfare.
Specifically, the code recommends that barren raised cages for breeding pheasants and small barren cages for breeding partridges should not be used and that any system should be appropriately enriched. Keepers are required by law to be familiar with this code, which encourages the adoption of high standards of husbandry. Failure to observe the provisions of this code may be used in support of a prosecution.
These rules are enforced by the Animal and Plant Health Agency, as well as by local authorities, who can both carry out routine welfare inspections and investigate complaints. Prosecutions can be brought where necessary.
I am pleased that the Government has taken action to ban cages or close confinement systems where there is clear scientific evidence that they are detrimental to animal health and welfare. For example, the use of battery cages for laying hens has been banned since 2012.
Bats and the Environment Bill
The Government has committed to developing a Nature Recovery Network and, in the long term, to create or restore 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitat outside the protected site series. A new framework for Local Nature Recovery Strategies will be legislated for in the Environment Bill, to help support the Nature Recovery Network - creating places that are richer in wildlife.
The Bill will also require the preparation and publication of Local Nature Recovery Strategies, mapping nature-rich habitats, so that investment can be targeted where it will make the most difference. The Government will provide data, guidance, and advice, but these local plans will embrace local knowledge to strengthen links between neighbouring communities and support the wider Network.
The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) will scrutinise Government policy to ensure the environment is at the heart of decision making. Crucially, it will have the power to run its own independent investigations and enforce environmental law, including taking government and other public bodies to court where necessary. I believe that it is vital we have the required protections and mechanisms in place to protect our wildlife.
Animal Welfare & Food Standards and Future Trade Deals
I can assure you that food and animal welfare standards will not be reduced in the pursuit of trade deals. Our manifesto commits us to maintaining and defending our high standards of food safety, animal welfare and environmental protection as we embark on our trade negotiations from around the world. Any future trade deal must work for British farmers and consumers. Legislation has already been passed which will mean EU standards on food such as chlorinated chicken have come into UK law. EU regulations on hormone-treated beef are already part of UK law. These prevent the use of growth hormones in imports and domestic production.
The Government has published its mandate for the trade negotiations between the UK and the US, and it makes clear that we will not compromise on our food, environmental, or animal welfare standards. I will ensure that the interests of our farmers in North Devon are protected because we cannot afford to undermine what is an essential sector for North Devon.
Nature & The Environment Bill
The Environment Bill will put the environment at the heart of all policy and hold governments to account if they fail to uphold their environmental duties. The Office for Environmental Protection, a new, world-leading independent regulator, will be established in statute to scrutinise environmental policy and law, investigate complaints and take enforcement action when necessary. This will ensure we succeed in leaving the environment in a better condition than we found it.
In the 25 Year Environment Plan, the Government committed to developing a Nature Recovery Network and, in the long term, to create or restore 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitat outside the protected site series. The Bill will also require the preparation and publication of Local Nature Recovery Strategies, mapping nature-rich habitats, so that investment can be targeted where it will make the most difference.
I believe that the irresponsible use of the whip is completely unacceptable. The British Horseracing Association (BHA), the governing and regulatory body for the sport, requires that whips used in horse racing must be used responsibly, for safety reasons and only to encourage the horse.
The BHA policy on the whip was drawn up in consultation with animal welfare groups, such as the RSPCA and World Horse Welfare. The latest rules include a threshold on the number of times the whip can be used before racing stewards can consider an inquiry. If the rules are broken, the jockey may be banned from racing for a certain number of days depending on the seriousness of the offence.
In addition to sanctions from the sport, using the whip indiscriminately on horses could lead to a prosecution under the 2006 Animal Welfare Act, which makes it a criminal offence to cause unnecessary suffering to any animal. I would encourage anyone with evidence that a racehorse has suffered unnecessarily from being whipped to report it to the local authority.
I therefore believe that the provisions of the 2006 Act, coupled with the BHA’s rules on the use of the whip, provide adequate protection for racehorses.
All animals should be treated with thought and care. Trophy hunting involves pursuing another animal in conditions which causes stress, fear and pain, with hunters killing as a form of entertainment, not for food, to control pests or to protect other species.
I cannot see a justification to defend hunters who kill an animal which has been bred in captivity for the specific purpose of being hunted for entertainment. I believe action is needed to stop this sort of exploitation. I am therefore pleased that the Government has launched a consultation on options to restrict the imports and exports of hunting trophies to the UK - including a potential ban.
This consultation, alongside a call for evidence, will allow ministers to understand the public’s views on all sides of the debate and gather expert evidence to inform any next steps. It will run until the 25th February 2020 and you can take part, should you wish, by visiting https://consult.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-management/trophy-hunting-consultation/.
Nature and the Agriculture Bill
The decision to leave the European Union has created an historic opportunity to deliver a green Brexit, where environmental standards are not only maintained but enhanced.
The Agriculture Bill will enable a balance between food production and the environment which will safeguard our countryside and farming communities for the future. The Bill sets out how farmers and land managers in England will be paid public money for “public goods,” rewarding them for the work they do to safeguard our environment. This will help our country meet crucial goals on climate change and protecting nature and biodiversity.
In addition, the Environment Bill will place environmental ambition and accountability at the heart of Government. Legislative measures will be introduced to address the biggest environmental priorities of our age, including nature recovery, ensuring we can deliver on the commitment to leave the natural world in a better condition than we found it. A new framework for Local Nature Recovery Strategies will be legislated for in the Environment Bill, to help support the Nature Recovery Network and better direct investment in the environment and green infrastructure – creating places that are richer in wildlife and provide wider benefits for local communities.
Clear Access, Clear Waters
I am enthusiastic about promoting sport and recreation in the countryside, and understand the positive benefits outdoor activities can have. However, I am also mindful of the rights of communities and people who live or work on land adjoining water and so we must seek to maintain this delicate balance between the rights of all parties.
I therefore support continuing to use local, voluntary agreements to increase river access for walkers, swimmers and non-powered craft. The rights of other users, as well as protection for wildlife and the environment, are important considerations. These sensitive issues can best be dealt with at a local level rather than through a one size fits all approach decided in Westminster.
I share your concern about the health of our rivers and I am glad we have made good progress. More than 5,300 miles of rivers have been improved since 2010.This means our rivers are in the healthiest state for 25 years with otters, salmon, sea trout and other wildlife returning to many rivers for the first time since the industrial revolution.
As well as this, since the water industry was privatised, around £25 billion has been invested to reduce pollution from sewage, covering improvements in sewage treatment and in sewer overflows keeping our rivers clean.
I am in favour of strict targets on air pollution and ours have been described by the WHO as ‘an example for the rest of the world to follow’. The Government’s Clean Air Strategy aims to cut air pollution through new primary legislation. The Strategy details how the UK will go much further than the EU in reducing particulate matter pollution. It sets out to halve the number of people living in areas with high concentrations of particulate matter and it will mean legislation to give councils more power to improve air quality and ensure that only the cleanest domestic fuels and stoves can be sold.
The Environment Bill will build on this Strategy, and highlight our drive to go further to clean up our air. The Bill will set ambitious, legally-binding targets to reduce fine particulate matter and these targets will be among the most ambitious in the world, improving the quality of millions of people’s live.
Finn's Law Part 2
Thank you very much for contacting me about the Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill.
I completely agree that we need to have the right legislation in place to ensure that those who are cruel to animals or who neglect their welfare are properly punished. The UK is a country of animal lovers and MPs must reflect that when making decisions. I am therefore happy to say that the Government will introduce legislation to increase the maximum sentence for animal cruelty to five years imprisonment.
This is on top of a number of other animal welfare measures such the ban on the use of animals in travelling circuses, passed last year. Moving forward, consultations are being set up to look at banning long journeys for animals being transported for slaughter and further restrictions on the trade in hunting trophies.
Friends of the Earth
I can absolutely assure you that climate change is at the forefront of my decision making and I am in favour of rapid cuts to carbon emissions. I want to continue the progress we have made thus far (a 25% reduction in carbon emissions over the past nine years) and redouble our efforts so that the planet is in a fit state to be passed on to future generations.
Putting the net-zero by 2050 target into law marked an important moment and showed just how far we have come as a country in forging a strong consensus behind climate action. I am concerned, however, that 2050 might be too late and I will be liaising with Ministers to explore whether we could achieve net-zero sooner.
I believe the best approach to stemming the flow of plastic is by taking action on land. The UK’s world-leading ban on microbeads will help stop potentially billions of particles from entering our seas every year, and over 15.6 billion fewer bags have been issued since the introduction of the plastic bag charge in 2015. I am also pleased that following an open consultation a ban on the supply of plastic straws, excluding those needed for medical purposes, plus drinks stirrers and cotton buds will come into force next April.
Since water privatisation, around £25 billion has been invested to reduce pollution from sewage, covering improvements in sewage treatment and overflows. In England, between 2015 and 2020, water companies are investing over £3 billion to improve their sewerage infrastructure. It is also encouraging to see tough enforcement action when things go wrong, as with the unprecedented fine of almost £20 million levied against Thames Water in March 2017 in response to six cases of avoidable sewage pollution.
I am pleased that 41 new Marine Conservation Zones have been created. The UK now has 355 Marine Protected Areas of different types, spanning 220,000 square km. No new activities deemed damaging may take place in these areas and existing harmful activities will be minimised or stopped to allow important habitats to recover.
A review has now been launched into whether and how Highly Protected Marine Areas, the strongest form of marine protection, could be introduced in English seas. This will help inform the Government’s work to expand and strengthen the UK’s Blue Belt to create richer habitats for marine life.