Animal Welfare Strategy for England

Wednesday 21st January 2026 Westminster Hall

09:30

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the animal welfare strategy for England.

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell, and to have secured my very first Westminster Hall debate on animal welfare, which really means something to me. I am sure that colleagues present are equally compassionate and animal friendly.

The UK has a proud and long-standing history of championing animal welfare. Back in 1822, this country led the world with the Cruel Treatment of Cattle Act, the first ever piece of animal welfare legislation anywhere on the globe. That legacy continues today in the incredible organisations we are fortunate to have here in the UK: the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals; Cats Protection; the Blue Cross; the People’s Dispensary for Sick Animals, which provides free veterinary services to sick or injured pets; Battersea Dogs & Cats Home; and South Derbyshire’s very own Wonky Pets Rescue in Swadlincote.

I am immensely proud that the Labour Government are committed to delivering the most ambitious animal welfare strategy in a generation. Whether we are talking about cats and dogs who share our homes, the working animals who give disabled people independence, or those who support our police force and airport staff in keeping us safe, we owe animals a huge debt of gratitude.

I grew up with pets, and until recent years my daughter did, too. Sadly, the demands of this job and the lifestyle it requires—and my personal lifestyle—make having pets impractical for me at the moment. It would feel selfish. But I have no doubt that my time will come again. I see how my mum and stepdad organise their entire lives around their little dogs Rosie and Oliver, which is why I often smile when people talk about pet owners—because in reality they own us. Or rather, they are family members.

Animals are sentient beings capable of feeling pain, fear and joy. That places a responsibility on us all to protect them. It is reassuring that 85% of UK adults agree that we have a moral duty to safeguard animal welfare.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is a fantastic advocate for animals and for the people in her constituency, and I am grateful that she secured this debate. I want to thank all my constituents who have written to me to advocate for animals. We are clearly a nation of animal lovers. Last year, I wrote to the Government to request a ban on barbaric electric-shock collars and to raise concerns about the Warwickshire hunt and the damage it does to local wildlife. Does my hon. Friend agree that the animal welfare strategy will tackle those concerns, and that we must do all we can to protect our precious animals?

[Samantha Niblett]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, who I know is a big animal lover herself—we certainly have that in common—that the welfare strategy will tackle those concerns. I will address some of those points later in my speech.

We have a moral duty to safeguard animal welfare, and most people agree with us, so I warmly welcome the Labour Government’s recent animal welfare strategy. What a wonderful Christmas present it was for so many of us. The strategy sets out clear ambitions, to be achieved by 2030, on improving the lives of companion animals, wild animals, farmed animals and animals overseas. It commits to addressing loopholes around breeding, to banning snare traps, to delivering on our manifesto commitment to ban trail hunting and to introduce standards for the humane killing of fish.

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

I feel the need to say that, like 52% of the population, I am a dog owner myself—I have the wonderful Nico Ingham—and I was so pleased to see that the Government will consult on introducing a registration scheme for dog breeders to get rid of dodgy breeders and puppy farms, which many of my constituents in Stafford, Eccleshall and the villages have written to me about. Does my hon. Friend agree that the strategy is a crucial first step towards a kinder future for dogs throughout the country?

[Samantha Niblett]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend that it is a crucial first step. I cannot understand how anybody in all good conscience can run a puppy farm, but I understand how some people have the wool pulled over their eyes to buy from one. If we take away puppy farms as an option, those people will not be tricked.

The scale of this issue is vast. There are an estimated 35 million pets living in the UK, with the pet care market worth £8.2 billion and forecast to grow by 7% annually. At the same time, there are around 150 million farmed animals in England at any one time, comprising 22 million cattle, sheep and pigs and 133 million poultry. The livestock sector contributes £20.1 billion to the UK economy, thanks to the hard work of our farmers. While strengthening animal welfare standards here in the UK is vital, this must go hand in hand with Baroness Batters’s report and with genuine partnership working with farmers, who are already driving standards upwards. Crucially, we must ensure that they are properly supported and paid for this work.

I welcome the Government’s decision to transition to non-cage systems and to consult on phasing out enriched colony cages for laying hens. I support Compassion in World Farming’s “End the Cage Age” campaign. Cages severely restrict hens’ movement, preventing them from running, flapping their wings, dust bathing and foraging—behaviours that are fundamental to their welfare. At my most recent coffee morning in Burnaston, it was good to speak about farming again with my constituent Angela Sargent, this time about her concerns regarding salmonella in eggs from imported caged birds. I never buy eggs from caged birds, but I fully appreciate that not everyone can afford to make that choice and must take the cheapest option available.

This issue also has serious implications for British farmers, who are placed at a competitive disadvantage by the tariff-free import of eggs from caged Ukrainian hens. The same point applies for meat imports.

[Claire Hazelgrove (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate. Animal welfare is a cause very close to my heart and to those of so many across my constituency. Will she join me in paying tribute to the local campaigners who have helped to keep these issues at the heart of the agenda, even while the Conservative Government was very slow to act?

[Samantha Niblett]

I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. As MPs, we are pulled in every direction by many people, and it is hard to be in all places at all times, but the issues that cut through the most are the ones that are campaigned on the hardest and the heaviest. I am super grateful to the campaign groups that have helped to shape the animal welfare strategy.

I am reassured that the Labour Government recognise animal welfare as a global issue and have committed to continuing to work with organisations such as the World Organisation for Animal Health and the World Trade Organisation to champion high standards internationally and promote best practice. Public support for this approach is overwhelming: a 2021 National Farmers Union survey found that 86% of respondents believe that animal welfare standards for imports should match those in the UK, while a Which? survey found that 87% of people agree that imported food should meet our animal welfare standards.

Each year, approximately 40 million to 45 million male chicks from conventional laying-hen breeds are culled within 12 to 36 hours of hatching. It is encouraging that the UK egg industry is exploring technology to sex eggs before chicks are born, with the aim of eliminating the need for this practice. While I welcome the Government’s ambition to end the killing of day-old chicks, it is essential that we work closely with the farming industry to ensure that the costs are not unfairly passed on to farmers and that any transition happens on a realistic timeline.

[Irene Campbell (North Ayrshire and Arran) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate. An assessment of male chick culling found that the cost to introduce in-ovo sexing of eggs in this country would be approximately 1p per egg. I visited a facility in the Netherlands on Monday, and it costs approximately €0.01 per egg there.

[Samantha Niblett]

I did not know that fact, and I am really grateful to my hon. Friend for sharing it. One of the challenges is the lack of profit in farming. I welcome the fact that the Labour Government have committed to help our farmers to become more profitable. One pence per egg sounds very little, but it has a heavy impact on farmers’ productivity and profitability.

Similarly, we must listen carefully to farmers when considering how to move away from the use of farrowing crates for sows. While the crates are designed to protect piglets against being crushed, they also significantly restrict the sows’ movement and raise serious welfare concerns.

For many animal lovers, perhaps the most challenging part of the strategy is the issue of slaughter, even for those of us who eat meat. I will give a trigger warning now, because I am going to talk about things that might upset a few people.

Each year, just over 1 billion meat chickens are reared and slaughtered in the UK. I agree with the Government that all animals should be spared avoidable pain and distress at the point of killing, while also respecting the right of people to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. For example, a significant proportion of halal meat comes from animals that are stunned before slaughter to render them unconscious and insensible to pain. Slaughtermen are required to check for signs of consciousness between stunning and death. Certification bodies, such as the Halal Food Authority, enforce the standards through regular audits and inspections, combining ancient principles with modern safeguards. However, “a significant proportion” does not mean all animals, and I understand and share the concerns of those who are worried about the percentage that are not stunned before slaughter.

On the difficult subject of end of life for animals, I was grateful to the British Association for Shooting and Conservation for inviting me to a game dinner last November. 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.

To turn back to pets, I met vets Kathryn and Kieran Patel back in October—

[Will Stone (Swindon North) (Lab)]

We have seen a dramatic increase in the price of vet bills over the past couple of years. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need better regulation, more transparency and to bring bills down for our constituents?

[Samantha Niblett]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, who picked the right moment because I was just about to address that issue. I met vets Kathryn and Keiran Patel in October at their newly opened independent practice in Bretby. They would like the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 to be updated. They shared with me concerning insights about how a small number of large corporates dominate the sector, particularly in relation to fees and prescription charges.

In December, the Competition and Markets Authority published the provisional findings of its investigation of veterinary services for household pets, and it identified competition concerns. Many pet owners would welcome clearer pricing for common services, capped prescription charges and transparency around practice ownership. That said, the broader challenges facing veterinary practices and the cost pressures on pet owners deserve a debate in their own right. My good hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire South (Johanna Baxter) has been doing a huge amount of work in this space.

My constituent, David Llewellyn of Walton-on-Trent, is a strong advocate for reforming the regulations around puppy farming. I am delighted that our manifesto committed to ending puppy farming and puppy smuggling.

[John Whitby (Derbyshire Dales) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for securing the debate. Puppy farming is a cruel practice, with puppies taken early from their mothers, kept in poor conditions and sold through misleading adverts. It also creates distress for the families who unknowingly buy dogs raised like that. Will my hon. Friend join me in welcoming the animal welfare strategy’s commitment to end puppy farming, and call on the Government to ensure that the practice is ended as soon as possible?

[Samantha Niblett]

I absolutely join my hon. Friend in praising the Government for putting an end to puppy farming. As we discussed earlier with other concerned colleagues, it is barbaric. So many people who buy from puppy farms have been tricked into doing so. It is absolutely right to put an end to it.

I am proud that the Labour Government passed the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Act 2025, which bans the import of dogs and cats under six months old, those that have been declawed or had their ears cropped, and those that are heavily pregnant. However, my constituent Lexi Ireland is vice-chair of Basil’s Forever Sofa, which rescues Romanian dogs and rehomes them in the UK, and she contacted me with concerns that, unless carefully drafted, the legislation could inadvertently prevent legitimate charities from rescuing dogs with cropped ears or docked tails. I wrote to Baroness Hayman, who reassured me that all necessary exemptions will be provided through secondary legislation. I also welcome the Act’s power to prevent the supply to the UK of low-welfare pets, such as stray animals brought back from overseas holidays.

Cats Protection has raised concerns that the strategy does not go far enough in delivering what it describes as

“meaningful protection for cats and kittens”,

particularly around irresponsible breeding, including the breeding of bully cats. It has also called for a single point of search for cat microchipping—I must confess that I assumed that already existed.

I welcome the Government’s decision to reconvene the responsible dog ownership taskforce, which provides an opportunity to reduce dog attacks and improve safety in public areas. Although I believe that the previous Government made the right decision at the time in introducing the XL bully ban, given the tragic loss of life we were seeing, I recognise the heartbreak experienced by responsible pet owners whose well-loved dogs were cherished family members.

I share the Government’s concerns about the welfare implications of e-collars, and I support positive, reward-based training as the preferred approach. Later in this Parliament, we will consult on whether to ban e-collars, following the example already set in Wales.

The Hunting Act 2004 is 20 years old, yet concerns persist about illegal hunting taking place under the guise of trail hunting. I have heard from farmers and landowners who oppose trail hunting due to the land damage but feel under pressure to allow it. Trail hunting was banned on National Trust land in 2022, due to animal welfare concerns, and Forestry England and several local authorities and private estates followed suit, often citing environmental damage. I am glad we are banning it altogether.

I also support the Labour Government’s decision to end the use of snares. A YouGov poll in January 2025 found that 71% of adults in England believe snares should be illegal. I welcome the review of other traps, including those used indoors, while noting concerns raised by the British Pest Control Association that banning smaller traps could increase chemical use, which is a concern more broadly. My constituent Harriet Redfern contacted me after losing her beloved dog, because she believed that non-pet-friendly pesticides were to blame. Others have had similar experiences, including Lisa, who shared her anguish with me during a horse-safety ride that I attended, organised by Councillor Ann Hughes, chair of Overseal parish council.

I welcome the strategy’s commitment to exploring measures to prevent equines from being exported for slaughter, but road safety is an urgent issue in the UK that affects horses and their riders, who are disproportionally women. Mary Holland, who invited me to the horse-safety rides, is part of the Pass Wide and Slow campaign, which calls for better driver education to ensure that horses, riders and motorists are kept safe. I am sure campaigners would welcome provisions on that in future iterations of the animal welfare strategy.

I was struck by something that Sally Barker wrote on my Facebook post when I announced the strategy before Christmas. She said that

“whilst I applaud this, we are quite clearly no longer a nation of animal lovers, if we were, this would not be necessary”.

That is a valid point, and it really made me sad. There will always be awful people who do not treat animals right, so I am glad that our animal welfare strategy seeks to provide protections. It balances compassion with practicality, ambition with partnership and ethics with economic reality. From pets and farm animals to wildlife and working animals, from domestic change to global leadership, the strategy sets a clear direction of travel.

Animal welfare is not a niche issue: it speaks to who we are as a society in the main. I am proud that the Labour Government are rising to the challenge, listening to constituents, working with farmers and experts, and placing animal welfare firmly at the heart of public policy. I look forward to continuing this work and to seeing our commitments translated into a real and lasting change for animals across the UK and beyond.

[Emma Lewell (in the Chair)]

I am immediately imposing a four-minute time limit on Back-Bench speeches, so not every Member will get to speak. However, if Members keep their speeches shorter, more people will get in.

09:48

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) for securing this fantastic debate. My inbox is regularly more full of animal welfare issues than anything else. I have been contacted by residents such as Becky Wood, who invited me to her home to visit her rehomed donkeys and chickens and taste her vegan brownies, and many others who are really pleased to see this animal welfare strategy but are impatient for action to follow.

I welcome the commitment to reform the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966. I will leave it to other Members, including my hon. Friend the Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers), who have expertise in this matter, to talk about that, but I want to make a plea on behalf of pets who are too old to insure or whose families simply cannot afford the premiums. My constituent Vivenne told me that

“the whole business model appears to be set up to milk insurance companies but the ones who cannot insure their dogs have to find the ever increasing costs themselves. We will always find the funds as it is not our rescue dogs’ fault that they both need care but we object to being unfairly ‘fleeced’.”

Concerns have been raised by vets in my constituency about their ability to operate alongside huge corporations. Given the changing landscape for our country, I hope that that will be treated with the urgency that it deserves.

Many vets work in cattle and farming, and I welcome the proposal about caged animals and male chicks. My brother Spencer’s first holiday job in the 1980s was on a battery chicken farm. I do not think that any of us had any idea what that was, but I recall him lasting just a matter of days there, because the brutality of the place and the overwhelming stench of ammonia led to the very swift decision that he simply could not work there.

[Will Stone]

Speaking about farming, my friend Kyle is opening up a company called Hoxton Farms, which is developing lab-grown meat. I invite everyone in the Chamber to come along in March to our open day and give it a try.

[Vikki Slade]

I have to say that that makes me feel a little queasy, but perhaps I will push my own boundaries.

Living on the edge of the countryside, seeing cows and sheep is an everyday occurrence that helps us to understand where our food comes from, and we are all used to mammals in our homes. Fish and sea creatures, however, do not have the same association, despite the very hard work of Pixar in bringing Nemo and Dory to life.

My daughter Abbi is a Young Dragon, a sea kayak ambassador and expedition leader. On her trips around the islands of Scotland and elsewhere, she has witnessed fish farms that are beyond the sight of most people. She described the water as being almost solid with fish. She explained that disease can spread fast when insufficient space is provided, and she shared her deep concern about the risk that poorly managed fish farms can have a detrimental effect on the wider ecosystem. I welcome the commitment to improve fish welfare, but can the Minister confirm if that will go beyond the nets and fences of the fish farms?

There are many more issues that I would love to talk about: speeding up the end of animal testing to deliver a truly cruelty-free UK, the absence of a ban on trophy hunting imports in the animal welfare strategy, and the consistent refusal, despite my many questions in Parliament and in writing, to make wildlife crimes notifiable. It is ridiculous that people who commit crimes against wild animals are treated less harshly than those who commit crimes against our pets. I really hope that the animal welfare strategy is the first step, and not the final destination. I look forward to hearing more about what legislation will follow in the King’s Speech, so that we can actually deliver change for our animals, wherever they are.

09:52

[Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) on securing this important debate. There are many Members present for this debate, so we can tell how popular it is.

I welcome the ambition of the Government’s animal welfare strategy for England, but it could be strengthened further. It contains important commitments that, if delivered, could significantly improve the lives of millions of animals. I am a long-standing supporter of animal rights, and I have consistently raised these issues with current and previous Governments. As a Labour MP, I pay tribute to the work of the Labour Animal Welfare Society.

In the past four or five weeks alone, around 7% of correspondence to my constituency office has related to agriculture, animals, food and rural affairs. The most common issues include calls to end animal testing, phase out cages for farm animals, strengthen hunting bans and bring an end to trophy hunting. I welcome that the strategy responds to many of those concerns, particularly by making it a key priority to end the use of crates and cages, and by committing to a ban on trail hunting and the use of snare traps.

Given the scale of ambition in the strategy, and the Government’s stated aim to deliver it by 2030, prioritisation will be essential. Farmed animals must be at the heart of delivery, simply because of the sheer numbers involved and the scale of potential welfare gains. Overall, the strategy represents a significant opportunity to transform animal welfare in England, but ambition must now be matched with urgency, clear timelines and strong legislation.

My time is limited, so I will cover just a few points. The Government have proposed a consultation on banning electric-shock collars but, sadly, there is no firm commitment and there are further delays. I want to see an immediate ban on the use and sale of electric-shock collars for pets. Furthermore, cats are bred without adequate safeguards. Many female cats are in ill health and are overbred, and male stud cats experience poor welfare. The Government must do more to address harmful breeding practices.

Lots of organisations and charities have raised concerns about microchipping. The strategy should commit to introducing a single point of search for microchipping databases. As the strategy notes, there are 23 databases, so anyone scanning a cat may have to check multiple databases. The Government must urgently include provision for a single point of search.

Some Members have already covered the issue of banning trophy hunting imports. I find it disappointing that a ban was not part of the animal welfare strategy. A recent survey shows that more than 80% of people support a ban. The Government should introduce a Bill as a priority. On 29 August 2025, I tabled written parliamentary question 71178. The Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh), responded:

“The Government committed to banning the import of hunting trophies”.

I want to see urgent progress on that.

Early-day motion 86, “Ban on trophy hunting imports”, was tabled on 19 October 2021 by our former colleague Sir David Amess, who was tragically killed; I pay tribute to all his work on animal welfare issues over many years. I was the second person to sign the early-day motion so when, sadly, Sir David was brutally killed, I was asked to take it over—my record on this issue goes back a long time. I urge the Government to push a bit harder.

On male chick culling, the Vegetarian Society last year launched a campaign called Ban Hatch and Dispatch. Approximately 45 million male chicks are culled each year, primarily through gassing. I urge the Government to ban male chick culling and support the smooth implementation of mandated in-ovo sexing in British hatcheries.

I thank all the organisations that campaign on these issues, in particular Humane World for Animals, Cats Protection, Dogs Trust and Compassion in World Farming, which have supplied us all with briefings.

09:59

[Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)]

It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I congratulate the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) on securing the debate.

There is much in the animal welfare strategy on which I think we can agree. I welcome the moves to ban puppy farming and introduce a close season for hares. However, there are also areas of great concern. We are in danger of effectively exporting many jobs and much of our farming industry abroad. We are increasingly going to see low-welfare standard meat and eggs coming into this country. I urge the Government to address that.

I think all Members in the debate welcome any improvement in animal welfare standards in our farming industry. However, we do not wish to see low-welfare meat coming into this country with the consequence that our industry is replaced, British jobs and British producers are taken away, and more animals are killed at welfare standards that are substantially below the welfare standards we have in this country today. I certainly do not think that that is the Government’s intention, but there is a danger that it is what we will deliver. I urge the Minister to ensure that any products imported into this country match the welfare standards we expect of our farmers in the United Kingdom.

[Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)]

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the recent Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee report highlighting the massive illegal imports of meat that already occurred when his party was in government?

[Sir Gavin Williamson]

I thank the hon. Member for highlighting that. I think it shows that, across parties, we want to see something done about this matter. I would certainly support the Labour Government making moves to address it.

Another area of great concern to me is non-stun slaughter. I am not going to go through how barbaric that is and how much pain we put animals through as a result, but we are seeing an ever-increasing number of animals being killed by non-stun slaughter. In just two years, the number of sheep slaughtered by non-stun slaughter has increased from 22% to 29%. Under the Slaughter of Animals Act 1933, animals must be stunned before slaughter so that they are unconscious and do not experience unnecessary pain.

[Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)]

My right hon. Friend has long been a doughty champion for animal welfare. The strategy includes other measures around slaughter, such as on the use of carbon dioxide stunning. The industry has looked at various ways to reform that, but it would be very challenging and potentially very costly. Like a number of other measures in the strategy, we must ensure that transition is done with the industry and does not impact British food production or our food security.

[Sir Gavin Williamson]

Absolutely. We need to do everything we can to produce more food in this country rather than abroad.

I am concerned about the increasing trend of non-stun slaughter. As I said, 29% of all sheep slaughtered in this country are killed through non-stun slaughter. The 1933 Act made it clear that non-stun slaughter is permitted only for religious reasons, but that is clearly not what is happening today. Many retailers, right around the country, sell animals that were non-stun slaughtered; the National Secular Society found that Asda, Morrisons, Sainsbury’s and Tesco all did so without any form of labelling. It is critical that consumers understand what they are buying.

In this country, 30 million animals are killed by non-stun slaughter—a most awful way of slaughtering animals—every year. We can make a significant difference. There is no reason for them to be killed in that way. In making sure that they are stunned, we can still ensure that they comply with halal and kosher standards. If we want to make sure that animals are put first and that we are looking after them, the Government need to be more robust in squeezing out these practices, and I hope the Minister will say a few words about how she is looking to do that. We want to make sure that our farmers can compete on a fair playing field on the world stage, but we also need to end the barbaric act of non-stun slaughter in this country and deliver higher welfare standards to so many animals.

10:03

[Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, as always, Ms Lewell. I am tempted to join the discussion about non-stun slaughter, but I will not, other than to say that my understanding is that the derogation to allow it is meant to cater to domestic populations, yet we are exporting quite a lot. Not allowing animals killed in that way to be exported would be one way to significantly reduce the numbers.

I very much welcome the animal welfare strategy. There is lots of good stuff in it, and things that some of us who have been around for a long time have been pushing for for many years. I would like a bit more clarity from the Minister on the timescales and when these measures are likely to come into effect. Will legislation be needed? Will there be one overarching animal welfare Bill—primary legislation—or can we do things by statutory instrument? Will the Government look to private Members’ Bills? That was something that the previous Government used to try to kick issues into the long grass; they were nervous about bringing forward anything more substantial because they thought that we would try to ban trail hunting. We tried to tack that on, so they farmed off individual, discrete private Members’ Bills to their Back Benchers instead, and even those did not get over the line for the most part. Also, how will progress be monitored? Can we have a regular statement to Parliament?

I am a little concerned by how much is going out to consultation. I have had a briefing from the NFU, which I have read carefully. I appreciate the financial pressures on the farming sector, and I know that colleagues will talk about things like the sexing of the 40 million to 45 million male chicks that are slaughtered each year within a day of their birth. There are systemic issues with how much farmers are paid for their food and how much we are prepared to pay for it, but we should not use the argument about the financial pressure on farmers to move away from doing what is right in terms of ethical animal welfare practices.

I look at things very much from the perspective of trying to avoid a shift towards ever more intensive industrialised farming. We know that the poultry industry, for example, is huge: over 1 billion meat chickens are bred every year. We know the impact on our water supplies and air quality from what are more like factories than farms. There is very little profit to be made from that.

On the dairy sector, one of my concerns is how the strategy links up with moves to reduce emissions from livestock. The Climate Change Committee recommended reducing herd sizes to about 80%, but the Government talk about increasing production as a way of compensating for that. As I understand it, a beef suckler cow naturally produces about 4 litres of milk a day, and at the moment a dairy cow produces about 28 litres a day. If we are talking about increasing production and getting ever more milk out of a cow—treating them like machines rather than sentient animals—that will be of real concern to me, so I would like to know how that will be dealt with.

My final point is about octopus farming. The sentience of decapods and cephalopods was recognised, after quite a battle, in the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act 2022, but cephalopod molluscs, which include octopus, have not been brought into the scope of the Animal Welfare Act 2006. There are measures abroad, in the United States in particular, to ban octopus farming. I am very concerned about plans for an octopus farm in the Canary Islands. Can the Minister tell us the Government’s stance on that?

10:07

[Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) on securing this really important debate. I really appreciate the discussion, and wholeheartedly support much of what has been brought up.

One thing that I am disappointed to see is missing from the strategy is the breeding of dogs with extreme conformation. I am specifically talking about brachycephalic dogs—dogs with flat faces, including pugs, French bulldogs and English bulldogs. They are bred with such extreme conformation that they have a narrow trachea, so they struggle to breathe. They have narrow noses and what we call inverted laryngeal saccules at the back of their throat. That all impedes air flow, which means that many of these dogs require surgery in the first few months of life simply to breathe. Many owners who buy these dogs have no idea that that is going to be the situation. They might spend several thousand pounds buying a puppy, then come into the vet and discover that, within weeks or months of owning the dog, they are going to have to fork out for surgery. Some cannot afford that, which means the dog gets rehomed or euthanised—that is heartbreaking for owners and vets.

In case people think I am talking about a very niche issue, the number of brachycephalic dogs increased by 3,000% between 2010 and 2020, and around that time French bulldogs surpassed labradors as the most registered dog in the UK. This is possibly the single biggest pet animal welfare situation at the moment. Aside from the breathing issues, the dogs look very cute—that is why people breed them; they look like a teddy bear, with little flat faces and big bulgy eyes—but their eyes end up getting corneal ulcers and are damaged very easily. Some of these dogs have lifelong painful eye conditions as well.

The popularity of these dogs is driven partly by social media influencers posing with them and partly by companies using them irresponsibly in advertising, completely out of context—for example, for absolutely no reason, a pug pops up on the Amazon error page. It is such a problem that it is causing vets a lot of distress as well. If you talk to a bunch of vets about it, they will almost roll their eyes and say, “You wouldn’t believe how many of these I saw today. It’s really upsetting.” It is upsetting for owners as well.

It is rightly illegal to intentionally cause an animal to suffer, and people get prosecuted for that. For some reason, it does not seem to be illegal to breed an animal that you know will definitely suffer—an animal that will almost certainly require surgery just to be able to breathe. This is something that the Government need to take very seriously, and something that we should really focus on. There is the potential for legislation to apply already, if it were tweaked, because it could be argued that an animal with two parents that were bred to need that type of surgery in the first place is being intentionally caused to suffer. I urge the Government to look at this, because it is possibly the biggest pet animal welfare issue that we deal with at the moment.

10:11

[Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) on securing the debate.

Animal welfare is one of the biggest issues people write to me about, and I am glad when they do, because the way we treat our animals matters and says a lot about what kind of country we are and want to be. I see every day in Aylesbury and the surrounding villages how much people care about animals. We are fortunate to have local charities doing brilliant work with and for animals. I think, for example, of Horses Helping People, a charity in Ledburn, where I met the most beautiful, well cared-for horses and heard about the role they play in helping people who are neurodivergent, have learning disabilities or anxiety, or are experiencing other mental health challenges.

We are fortunate to have local farmers like Nick, who I met on his beef farm near Wingrave, who are determined to give their animals the best quality of life. They know what a difference that makes to consumers. I am also fortunate in my patch to have people who feel passionately about this just on a personal level and write to me about all sorts of things, some of which we have discussed today, whether it is banning electric-shock collars for pets, ending the cruel use of snare traps, or banning illegal puppy and kitten smuggling—I was pleased to support the law on that that passed last year.

I want to touch briefly on three recurring themes that come through most strongly from my constituents. The first is the use of cages for hens. We have heard a lot about chickens and the industrial scale of the chicken farming industry in particular. My constituents are really clear that animals should receive care, respect and protection, whatever farming system they are kept in, and I agree. I welcome the fact that the animal welfare strategy commits to phasing out cages for laying hens, alongside farrowing crates for pigs. Those will be fantastic steps, and I hope the Minister will work at pace, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders, to drive them forward. I would love to see an end to male chick hatching, too. We have the technology; we just have to adopt it, and others have covered that well.

The second point that many people write to me about is animal testing. Personally, I want to see that phased out as quickly as possible. We have made a great commitment—a £60 million investment—to accelerate the development of alternatives, alongside further funding to advance human relevance testing models. We have a serious science-led road map in the animal welfare strategy, and it has been welcomed by organisations such as the RSPCA and Cruelty Free International, but I hope we can keep going further and faster to advance the scientific alternatives in areas where they do not yet exist.

The third point, which has not yet been raised in detail, is food labelling. Many constituents have told me that they want clearer animal welfare information on the food they buy so they can make the right purchasing decisions that align with their values. It can also really help the farmers who invest in higher welfare standards to differentiate their products and be fairly rewarded for them. It is really important for young people as well; we want them to have a better relationship with food and animals than we do, and knowing where their food comes from and seeing it on packaging could help. I have seen commitment from the Government in this area and I hope we can progress that quickly.

The direction of travel set out in the animal welfare strategy sets a really positive path ahead of us. I hope we can continue to move at pace to implement it. The UK’s proud reputation for high animal welfare standards is deserved, and if we can move the strategy forward, we can ensure that further improvements become a legacy of this Government.

10:15

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) for setting the scene so well and for her contribution. I understand that this issue is devolved, but colleagues in Northern Ireland watch decisions in this House very carefully, including the proposed legislation, so there will be much interest in this debate.

I speak as an animal lover—many people will say that, but I am. My wife has volunteered in animal shelters for the last 15 years, so I am used to coming home to another cat or dog that she has acquired along life’s way. For some reason strays seem to come to our house and stay too—they obviously know that they will be well looked after. We love our animals and have an animal graveyard at the bottom of our garden—we live on a farm—for the dogs and cats that have passed on. We have a place for them in the garden, and also among the trees as well.

I have long stood firm on the need to ban the import of hunting trophies, and this comes from someone who supports country sports. It is my firm belief that we should use what we shoot, which is why many of my neighbours woke up on Boxing day after we had been out shooting with a present of pheasants, ducks or pigeons. They have to be plucked and cleaned before they are ready, and the preparation is left to them. My point is that we must never confuse shooting to eat or for conservation with the collection of a trophy.

To give an example, each year on our farm we use a Larsen trap, which is a humane trap, to capture and control predators and encourage small bird life. Along with my son, last year we trapped 45 magpies and 10 grey back crows. What did that do? It transformed our farm; before there were few young songbirds, but now there are many. We now have an abundance of small bird life that we have not had on our farm for many years, including yellowhammers, which are back in numbers on our farm, and indeed on our neighbours’ farms. That bird is almost extinct in some parts and is often used nowadays in different terminology, for a different reason. Looking after the predators ensures that the small, threatened species can thrive. The animal strategy must acknowledge that a multifaceted approach is necessary in the countryside for farm control and conservation, and that animals should not be senselessly slaughtered.

I will conclude because I am conscious that I would like to give others a chance to speak. I highlight, very briefly, that while I oppose animal testing on many levels—it is not worth testing a face cream that may take away wrinkles on animals—I do believe that there is a place for animal testing for medication to save lives. That must be acknowledged in any strategy that comes forward. There is a difference, and we must acknowledge that.

10:18

[Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I stand here as the owner of Roy the dog, who we were originally told was a black lab but turned out to be the size of a cocker spaniel—we are still not entirely sure what happened there. When I told my wife that I was going to apply for selection in Hexham, she said that if I was going to do this mad thing then we were getting a dog—thank goodness: he looked good on the leaflets.

Animal welfare and the extension of the fox hunting ban to include trail hunting was one of the first things that drew me into politics, and to the Labour party. There is a lot to be welcomed in the animal welfare strategy, and I say that as someone who has spoken to many constituents who are appalled by the continuation of fox hunting and want to see it end.

I want to touch upon the excellent speech, in many respects, by the right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson). Continuing to allow lower standard food into UK shops undermines our farmers and our claims to prioritising welfare. My hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury (Laura Kyrke-Smith) made the point that improving food labelling is essential for allowing customers to make conscious choices to know that they are supporting, not just high-welfare food standards and domestic procurement, but reducing the carbon emissions caused by food when they back British-made food. Therefore, labelling could be looked at by the Minister, to see how we can ensure that we not only prioritise animal welfare in trade deals and preserve UK standards wherever possible, but that we promote domestic food consumption, so that we do not allow fields to be carved out of the Amazon to feed the United Kingdom. We must ensure that we back our farmers wherever possible, in order to feed the United Kingdom.

I will quickly mention a few other issues that the strategy could address. One of the issues that comes across my desk quite a lot is concern about vicarious liability when it comes to raptor persecution on grouse moors. I engage a lot with grouse moors in my constituency—I speak to the people involved with them—so I know that it is incredibly important to a lot of people that where raptors are being persecuted, the ultimate owner of the land is held responsible, and that we do not simply allow those lower down the food chain to take the blame. We must ensure that such persecution of raptors is made the landowner’s responsibility.

The constituency of Hexham is full of animal-lovers, who are concerned about pets, livestock and growth in animal welfare standards. The strategy is an incredibly good foundational document, but I urge the Minister to consider where we can go further. I note that one of the Parliamentary Private Secretaries at the Department for Business and Trade, my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer (Mr Charters), is here; it would be great if he could go back to colleagues in the Department and urge them to ensure that when they engage in trade negotiations, we are able to have confirmatory votes on them, so that MPs can stand up and be counted when it comes to ensuring that animal welfare standards are preserved, not just at home but abroad.

10:21

[Adrian Ramsay (Waveney Valley) (Green)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell, and I thank the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) for securing this important debate today.

I come to this debate with the simple belief that animals should not suffer at our hands. That is why I welcome the animal welfare strategy, which was published last month. It reflects years of campaigning by animal protection organisations and growing public demand for change. It also marks a significant step forward, with real commitments on cages, crates, wildlife protection and welfare standards. I look forward to supporting the Government in making sure that those commitments are kept and change happens.

A strategy is only as good as its delivery. As organisations such as Humane World for Animals and Compassion in World Farming have made clear, without clarity about how and when the strategy will be delivered, there is a real risk that it will remain aspirational, rather than being the transformative instrument for change that we all hope it will be.

The scale of the challenge is stark. In 2024, around 280 million animals were kept in intensive farming in the UK, and that number is going in the wrong direction—an increase of 23 million since 2017. That growth has not been driven by rising domestic demand but by cost pressures, economies of scale and policy choices that continue to favour factory farming over higher welfare alternatives. That is why the strategy’s commitment to ending the use of cages and crates matters so much. Around 200,000 sows still spend weeks of their lives confined in farrowing crates, unable even to turn around, while around 8 million laying hens remain in cages that are little larger than an A4 piece of paper.

Warm words are not enough. The reforms must be time-bound, properly resourced and backed by financial support to help farmers transition. The Nature Friendly Farming Network and Compassion in World Farming are clear that improving animal welfare must go hand in hand with supporting farmers, rather than their being left to shoulder the costs of transition on their own. Crucially, we must ensure that the higher standards that will be required in the UK are applied to imports, so that any higher welfare British farmers do not find themselves being undercut. As others have said, mandatory welfare labelling for both domestic and imported goods is also vital.

There are welcome things in the strategy for animals in the wild, such as the imminent complete ban on the use of snares and the action on trail hunting, but there are crucial omissions in the strategy. It is silent on ending greyhound racing, which the Labour Government in Wales are doing. It also fails to mention the prohibition of imports of fur and hunting trophies, as well as regulation to limit the noise from fireworks in order to protect animals.

There is much to welcome in the strategy, but there are also some omissions. It acknowledges the need to reduce animal experimentation, yet we have heard that 2.5 million animal experimentation procedures were carried out last year. The Government are on the right path to replacing animal experiments with modern, reliable alternatives, judging from the plans that they announced in November. However, we need clear, time-bound plans that cover experiments on all types of animals.

Finally, none of these things will work without enforcement. Animal Aid, Cats Protection and many others warn that weak inspections and under-resourced regulators undermine even the best legislation. Whether we are talking about farms, laboratories or companion animals, standards without enforcement are standards in name only.

The public, the science and morality have aligned. We have the evidence and the expertise and, with this strategy, we have the momentum. The question now is how we can support the Government to match ambition with action, clear timelines, robust enforcement and real support for those doing the right thing. I urge the Government to ensure that the strategy delivers not just promises, but real lasting change for animals—and I will support them in doing so.

10:25

[Cat Eccles (Stourbridge) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) for securing this important debate. The Government’s animal welfare strategy, published last month, is welcome. It makes important commitments to improving animal welfare, but it will come as no surprise that I want to raise some issues around cats in particular. I will declare an interest as the vice-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on cats. I am also owned by three furry felines.

There are roughly 12.5 million cat owners in the UK, with around a third of households owning at least one cat, but there are significant inconsistencies in animal welfare protections between cats and dogs. In July 2025, I presented a petition to No. 10 Downing Street with the charity CatsMatter, which called for cats to receive the same legal protections as dogs when involved in road traffic collisions. Under the Road Traffic Act 1988, drivers are required to report hitting a dog but not a cat. CatsMatter has another petition calling on Parliament to legislate, which has already reached 11,000 signatures. The animal welfare strategy should include a commitment to providing that protection for cats.

The strategy needs to go further to address breeding practices, as has already been mentioned today. Over the last 200 years, cats have been increasingly bred for distinctive characteristics to make them look a certain way. Unfortunately, those characteristics become increasingly extreme and over-exaggerated, and they cause serious health and welfare issues. In the Netherlands, new ownership of Scottish Fold and hairless Sphynx cats was recently banned to prevent unnecessary suffering; that followed a breeding ban of those species in the same country in 2014. The UK Government should consider similar moves to prevent cats suffering. Extreme cat breeds such as the Bully cat are bred in ways that predispose them to skin disease and respiratory issues. Breeding Munchkin cats with short legs can lead to joint abnormalities that result in arthritis. There needs to be far greater parity between cats and dogs in breeding regulations to prevent the exploitation of cats for commercial gain.

Another significant concern, which other Members have mentioned, is that we have only committed to a future consultation on electric-shock collars. There was already a consultation in 2018, which was fairly conclusive. We do not need another consultation: we need an immediate ban on cruel electric-shock collars. We also need to go further with microchipping and create a single point of information rather than 23 separate databases. At the start of this week, many colleagues were here debating fireworks yet again; that is another missed opportunity in the animal welfare strategy.

We have an opportunity before us to deliver a strategy that does more than just gesture at compassion, and one that genuinely protects millions of cats—and other animals—who share our homes and lives. Cats deserve the same consideration, protections and commitment to welfare that we already extend to dogs. I urge the Minister: let us be bold, let us listen to experts and the public, and let us implement meaningful change that cat owners and cats have waited far too long to see.

10:29

[Liz Jarvis (Eastleigh) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I congratulate the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) on securing this important debate. I believe that how we treat animals says everything about who we are as a society. I receive countless emails from constituents who care deeply about the welfare of animals, so I welcome the introduction of the Government’s animal welfare strategy for England and the recognition that animals are sentient beings. I am pleased that the Government have committed to measures that include the banning of cages for laying hens, ending puppy farming and phasing out pig farrowing crates. If Britain is to secure its reputation as a world leader on animal welfare, the strategy must go further, faster and be wider in scope.

My constituency of Eastleigh is home to the Blue Cross, which regularly receives greyhounds that have been abandoned, injured and traumatised. Between 2017 and 2024, across the UK more than 4,000 greyhounds died or were put to sleep as a direct result of racing, and more than 35,000 injuries were recorded on UK tracks. Interest in greyhound racing is declining. The industry has repeatedly promised reform, but has failed to deliver meaningful improvements. That is why the largest animal welfare charities, including the Dogs Trust, the RSPCA and the Blue Cross, have jointly called for greyhound racing to be ended. The Welsh Government are already taking steps in that direction. I am therefore deeply disappointed that the animal welfare strategy does not mention greyhounds once. Will the Minister consider the calls made by charities and commit to end greyhound racing in the UK?

I also want to raise again the issue of trophy hunting. I have previously asked the Minister why it remains legal to import hunting trophies of vulnerable and endangered species, including critically endangered rhinos, elephants, cheetahs and leopards. Despite repeated promises from the previous Government to end the practice, legislation has not yet been delivered. Will the Minister provide a timetable for when exactly the Government plan to introduce the legislation? I also urge the Government to stand firm against attempts by the Trump Administration to influence our country’s stance on trophy hunting imports.

Turning to kept wild animals, the strategy states that the Government will work with experts and industry representatives to ensure that animals kept in zoos and aquariums in Great Britain are looked after to the highest standards. What reassurance can the Minister give me that zoo licensing inspectors and the Zoos Expert Committee will be given tangible powers to enhance that goal rather than simply offering advice, and that those powers will include the ability to mandate improvements, impose sanctions or ultimately withdraw licences where welfare standards are clearly not being met?

I was proud to support my constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers), with his Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Act 2025 to protect those animals from mutilation and illegal trafficking. I welcome the strategy’s desire to take steps to improve the uptake of a pet-selling licence by those who sell cats and kittens as pets, but the lack of a commitment to regulate cat and rabbit breeding, which has been highlighted by the Blue Cross, is disappointing.

The strategy is a very welcome step forward, but it must be more ambitious on timescales, enforcement and scope. Animals cannot wait another decade for change.

10:32

[Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your guidance this morning, Ms Lewell. I pay tribute to all the speakers, including those who have come here with much to say but have not managed to get in in this debate. I feel for them— I have been there. I offer a massive thank you to the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) who led the debate with real distinction and great passion. She made an important series of points, many of them followed up with her own examples.

How we treat animals is an indicator of whether we can even call ourselves a civilised or humane society. Overall in the UK I think we treat animals relatively well. We are a nation of animal lovers. That is what we call ourselves and mostly that is true. Some 84% of us, for example, consider animal welfare when we act as consumers and buy food. Animals are sentient, but they do not have agency, although I can neither confirm nor deny that the size of our majority in Westmorland is down to the fact that we extended the franchise to certain woolly residents. Herdwicks are, after all, rugged individualists and are thus part of the core Liberal vote.

But animals do not get to decide how humane we are. That is for us to choose. We can choose to protect the culture and practices of how we care for wildlife, pets and livestock and not, for example, undermine those practices by undercutting our ethical British farmers with products from overseas produced in less than humane conditions.

The Government are doing some things right—it is important to acknowledge that. They are choosing to ban cages for laying hens and farrowing crates for pigs by 2032, but the strategy fails to adequately consider domestic food security and competitiveness, which are crucial to maintaining and extending our strong animal welfare culture in the UK.

If the Government propose raising domestic animal welfare standards further, which they rightly do, they must also take steps to ensure consumers are protected from imported food products that can be produced to lower standards. British farmers should not be asked to compete with imports produced at those lower standards, which would be illegal if they were produced here in the UK, and yet they are being asked to do so.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

We have seen reports about the US suspending the technology prosperity deal with the UK in an effort to force the Government to accept lower-standard imports in order to secure a trade deal with the US. Does my hon. Friend agree that these bully-boy tactics by the Trump Administration should not be kowtowed to, and we should not accept lower standards in return for a trade deal with the US?

[Tim Farron]

Of course. What is the point in having these standards if we give them away to those who put us under extreme pressure? I completely agree with my hon. Friend and urge the Government to take the same position.

We are seeing the UK outsourcing its egg and pig production abroad, to lower standards—it has already begun. In 2024, the UK imported 109,644 tonnes of eggs, equivalent to the output of approximately 8.5 million layer hens. The previous Labour Government banned sow stalls in 1999, and this Government are now proposing to phase out farrowing crates, yet in the last year the UK imported just shy of 600,000 tonnes of pork—6.4 million pigs—mostly from countries where these practices remain, and are likely to remain for some time, utterly legal.

More than 90% of UK citizens believe that UK animal welfare standards should apply to imports, and so do I. The UK needs to protect those high welfare standards, for ethical reasons of protecting animal welfare but also to ensure that we do not harm our domestic agriculture industry and therefore reduce our food security even further. Farmers in Cumbria and across the whole United Kingdom are vital to food security. It is time we listened to them and made Government a help, not a hindrance. It is not right to put them in a position where they are forced to compete with cheaper, less ethically produced imported food.

I am a free trade liberal, but free trade is not free if it is not fair. We need a level playing field, especially on animal welfare practices. It is right that we celebrate Britain’s high animal welfare standards, but we should do more than just celebrate them—we should put our public money where our public mouths are. Public sector procurement policy should ensure that the majority of food we purchase comes from the UK, because buying British is not just patriotic; it is the surest way we can know that the food we eat will be ethically farmed. Across the 1,600 farms in Westmorland and Lonsdale, farmers take great pride in the high animal welfare standards they implement. The Government need to recognise and reward that.

The Liberal Democrats will not punish farmers by importing animal products with low welfare standards. Sadly, the Government continue to do that. On 9 January, the Government lifted reinforced import controls on consignments of beef, poultry meat, meat products and meat preparations exported from Brazil to Great Britain. That change means that Brazilian shipments will no longer be subject to the additional checks that were previously imposed, reducing inspection intensity. That is clearly a backwards step.

The Liberal Democrats have a clear vision for how we would tackle these issues more broadly. Trade deals must never undercut UK animal welfare. We will sign a veterinary and phytosanitary agreement with the EU, restoring co-operation and alignment on food and welfare standards. We will ban the import of food produced with antibiotic growth promoters and ensure that no product illegal to produce in Britain can be sold here, and we will support farmers directly to help them lead the world in high standards of animal husbandry. Because animal welfare matters to us, we would ensure that the regulatory and economic levers that Government can pull will be used to not just protect Britain’s high welfare standards but advance them further.

The animal welfare strategy, welcome though it is, must be far more comprehensive in scope, recognising that our approach to trade, public procurement and our domestic economy can have huge impacts on improving or worsening the collective welfare of animals. I urge the Government to be fully aware of those impacts and learn from the failure of the last Government, whose rush for politically convenient trade deals led them to throw our farmers and our animal welfare standards under the bus.

09:39

[Robbie Moore (Keighley and Ilkley) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. It is good to be able to discuss the animal welfare strategy after the Government announced it on 22 December—after Parliament had risen and just before Christmas—in an attempt to avoid scrutiny. I thank the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) for securing this debate, which I believe is her first in Westminster Hall—what a great topic to bring to the House, because it finally gives all Members of Parliament the opportunity to scrutinise the strategy.

We are a nation of animal lovers, as has been made clear by the contributions to the debate. Members have mentioned the pets at home that they care for deeply—including Roy the dog, mentioned by the hon. Member for Hexham (Joe Morris). I hope that it was not just Roy the dog that managed to get the hon. Member elected, and that it was his good work as well, even though Roy appeared on his leaflets.

It is right to point out that since leaving the European Union we have had greater freedom to determine our animal welfare law. We passed the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act 2022, which recognised the sentience of vertebrates. Powers conferred by the Act have also seen octopuses and lobsters recognised as sentient beings. The Act also created the Animal Sentience Committee, which provides expert advice to the Government on future animal welfare reforms.

The Animal Welfare (Livestock Exports) Act 2024 delivered on the previous Government’s commitment to ban the export of live animals, a practice that extended the unnecessary stress, exhaustion and injury caused by export. In 2016 and 2023, the previous Government made changes to the law to require dogs and cats retrospectively to be microchipped in England, ensuring that they can be reunited with their owners; I visited Oakworth Boarding Cattery and Yorkshire Cat Rescue, in my constituency, which very much welcomed the measure. In 2019, wild animals were banned from circuses, and the Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 increased the maximum possible sentence for animal cruelty from six months to five years.

However, there is much work to be done. We welcome a good proportion of what is in the animal welfare strategy, including banning puppy farming, but I will spend most of my contribution talking about the recommendations that impact our farming sector. The Government must work with our farmers, listen to the concerns of the industry and ensure that any reforms are affordable, are practical, are effective and, at their heart, promote animal welfare. I therefore concur with my right hon. Friend the Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson) and the hon. Member for Hexham that any food we import into this country must meet our animal welfare standards.

When we are putting additional pressures on our farming community through employer national insurance, the minimum wage and the family farm tax—which are hindering the investment our farming businesses and wider supply chain need to make to deal with the additional challenges associated with animal welfare regulation—there is a fear that British domestic food production will be unable to compete with imported food. We have seen an increase in the amount of food not produced at our standards coming into this country.

The British Poultry Council has recognised this issue. It states:

“Welfare will continue to be a top priority for our members…However, welfare does not exist in isolation from all the other pressures we face, and our guiding light right now has to be feeding the nation through supporting our food producers not hindering them.”

That is why it was so frustrating to learn this week—despite the concerns expressed by the hon. Member for South Derbyshire about eggs being imported into this country—that the Government have extended for a further two years the relationship whereby Ukrainian eggs can be imported into this country, despite those eggs not being produced at the high standards that we require in this country and industry concerns around salmonella. I hope that the hon. Lady shares my concerns about the Government’s extending that relationship, despite the concerns raised by the wider egg industry.

One point that has not been mentioned in today’s debate is the Government’s desire to change the welfare practices associated with lamb castration and tail docking, about which many sheep farmers have raised huge concerns. The castration of male lambs is an important management practice to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and tail docking is essential to prevent and reduce the risk of fly strike. Those are significant animal welfare issues.

The Government have launched a consultation, but they need to listen to our farming communities and learn from their insight. The current proposals will be detrimental to animal welfare, reduce our ability to compete and have a negative impact on the sector. Simply dictating that an anaesthetic must be used is wholly impractical and, I dare say, adds to the level of uncertainty about animal welfare. When dealing with very small lambs, it is very difficult to get the dosage of anaesthetic right. That is just one illustration of the Government’s naivety in relation to how food is produced in this country.

The Government also wish to introduce further animal welfare controls for broiler breeding—the meat chicken sector—to promote slower-growing breeds. I again urge them to continue to engage with the sector through the consultation that they will no doubt undertake and to adopt an evidence-based approach that considers domestic food security and consumer demand. Chicken is of course a very important meat product, and the Government’s direction of travel is causing concern in the broiler industry.

I also want to talk about ending beak tipping in the poultry sector. As birds age, there is huge risk associated with pecking. That issue has high animal welfare status, and hatcheries use skilled operators and precision equipment in beak tipping. The Government aspire to ban the practice, but that is not necessarily in the best interests of the industry, so I urge them to engage with the poultry sector through the consultation. There was a real opportunity in the animal welfare strategy to be really tough on food labelling, and it is therefore frustrating that there is no real ambition in that regard. Compassion in World Farming and Members in this Chamber have expressed their disappointment that the strategy does not include proposals on food labelling.

Our in-house vet, the hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers), said that there was a missed opportunity to tackle the issue of dogs with facial conformation challenges. He made the point that between 2010 and 2020, there was a 3,000% increase in flat-faced dogs. I will not repeat the terminology, because I am not familiar with it, but there was a missed opportunity to tackle that conformation in dogs.

It is also disappointing that there was no ambition to reform the veterinary sector. The strategy fails to include much-needed urgent reforms and actions for the veterinary sector, which faces a workforce shortage. The sector not only maintains standards but should be driving the enhancement of animal welfare and animal standards. The Opposition are clear that the Government need to make that a priority, so I ask the Minister what their intentions are.

Another area of concern, which we debated in this Chamber earlier this week, is fireworks. That issue was raised not only by the RSPCA but by more than 376,000 people who signed petitions on the subject. There was a huge missed opportunity in the animal welfare strategy, which does not address the hugely negative impact of fireworks on pets, other animals and livestock.

[Perran Moon]

I have listened intently to hon. Gentleman, but I am struggling to understand the Opposition’s position on trail hunting. Will they join Reform in supporting it or Labour in banning it?

[Robbie Moore]

I am very clear: fox hunting was banned in 2002, and any fox hunting that is seen to be taking place is illegal. The fact that trail hunting has been included in the animal welfare strategy is an indication of the Government’s naivety about what is happening. This is not an animal welfare issue; the Government are removing liberty, freedom and the ability for private individuals to conduct an activity on their land. The Opposition’s position is that there are much, much more important things that the Government should be focusing on.

10:49

[The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)]

It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) for securing the debate. I am sure we can all agree—as virtually everyone has said—that we are a nation of animal lovers. We love our pets, we look after our farm animals and we want to ensure that we protect the nation’s wildlife. We have a long and proud history of supporting animal welfare.

Animals are at the heart of British culture and identity and our relationship with them runs deep. Protecting them matters to this Government. We published our new animal welfare strategy for England in December, setting out a clear long-term plan to safeguard standards and deliver the most ambitious reforms to animal welfare in a generation. This is a comprehensive package of reforms, which will improve the lives of millions of animals across the UK.

There were questions, not least from my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol East (Kerry McCarthy), about timings. This is a comprehensive strategy, although I note other contributors wanted more to be included. We clearly cannot implement it all in one go and we have begun with some early consultations to bring in the first steps. Some issues in the strategy will require primary legislation; others require consultation and tweaks. It is a progressive approach to introducing it across the piece, as we go through this Parliament. There will not be one great big Bill; there will be a range of things to get on with before the primary legislation that will be necessary to deal with some issues, as many contributors to the debate know.

People across the country already do exceptional work to improve the lives of our animals, including farmers, vets, volunteers at rescue centres and many more. The strategy is about backing that work with support from Government, clear standards and practical action. This Labour Government want a strategic approach rather than the piecemeal interventions we have seen in the past. We are not worried about having primary legislation to which people can attach amendments that we can argue about and discuss as the Bill goes through the House.

We will take a more strategic approach that targets action where it is most needed. We will strengthen enforcement and will support animal keepers and owners to do the right thing. Legislation alone is not always enough to change behaviour. That is why we must continue to work with scientists, industry and civil society to ensure that the reforms lead to better outcomes for all animals.

The animal welfare strategy builds on the Government’s proven track record in delivering reforms, ranging from introducing new world-leading standards for zoos to tightening the laws around livestock worrying. In November, we also published a strategy on replacing the use of animals in science, which set out how we would partner with scientists to phase out animal testing.

Our strategy sets out the priorities we will address, focusing on the changes and improvements we aim to achieve by 2030 and the steps we will take to deliver our manifesto pledges to ban trail hunting and the use of snare traps, and to end puppy farming and smuggling. Pets play an important role in many people’s lives, providing companionship and joy to millions of people, but we know that loopholes in the current system can mean some animals are bred in and sourced from low-welfare settings.

We will end puppy smuggling by consulting on reforming dog-breeding practices, improving their health and welfare and moving away from practices that lead to poor welfare and unwell animals. The brachycephalic issues spoken about by our in-house vet, the hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers), are obviously included when dealing with some of these concerns. We will take steps to implement the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Act 2025, closing loopholes in pet travel rules that have been exploited by unscrupulous traders. We will use the powers to prohibit dogs and cats being brought into the country with non-exempted mutilations, such as docked tails and cropped ears.

We will also consider new licensing requirements for domestic rescue and rehoming organisations, to ensure that rescue centres have the right checks in place to protect the welfare of the animals they care for. We will consult on a ban on the use of electric-shock collars due to the possible harm those devices cause to our pets. I hear what hon. Gentlemen and hon. Ladies on both sides of the House have said about that ban, and the firm view that we should have one. We just want to check through the consultation that nothing significant has changed since the last one was done in 2018, and we will act on the results. Alongside that, we will continue to promote responsible dog ownership to protect public safety and we are looking forward to seeing the recommendations from the reconvened dog ownership taskforce.

Let me mention cats, as they came up in several contributions, not least from my hon. Friend the Member for South Derbyshire and from my hon. Friend the Member for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles). We do not plan to regulate cat breeding as a separate activity at the current time. Anyone in the business of selling cats as pets should already have a pet selling licence, and we will work with the sector to improve take-up. We will also work with the sector to build an evidence base to see whether there is an increasing need to go further. We have our eyes on it, but there are no current plans to include cats in some of the other regulations for dogs.

[Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Clapham and Brixton Hill) (Lab)]

A quick question on road traffic accidents, only because it would involve simple secondary legislation that inserts the word “cat” to give cats the same protection as dogs. Are there any plans for that?

[Dame Angela Eagle]

There are no current plans for that, but I am happy to consider it given my hon. Friend has raised it.

I now turn to how we protect our precious wildlife. As our understanding of animal welfare continues to evolve, the law must keep pace with the latest evidence to prevent wild animals from suffering cruelty, pain or distress. Therefore, we will ban trail hunting. The nature of trail hunting makes it difficult to ensure that wild mammals are not put at risk, and we intend to launch a consultation very soon. We will end the use of snare traps because they are indiscriminate, can catch pets and protected wildlife, and cause terrible suffering.

We are also among the only European countries without a closed season for hares, which means that young hares can be left motherless and vulnerable. We will therefore consider introducing a closed season, which should reduce the number of adult hares shot during the breeding season.

We are giving farm animals greater freedom and dignity. The Government value the excellent work of British farmers who produce high-quality food to some of the highest welfare standards in the world, which we are rightly proud of. Ending the use of intensive confinement systems such as cages and crates is a key priority. We have launched a consultation on phasing out colony cages for laying hens and plan to consult on transitioning away from farrowing crates for pigs, but we will do that in conjunction with the industry, because we understand the nature of the costs and the transition time required to move to higher welfare standards. We have already launched a consultation on improving the welfare of lambs during castration and tail docking, and I will continue to work with the industry to support voluntary efforts to move away from the use of fast-growing meat chicken breeds.

We also want to improve welfare throughout an animal’s life, so we are taking action at the time of killing. Following advice from the Animal Welfare Committee’s report last year, we propose to consult on banning the use of carbon dioxide gas stunning for pigs. We will introduce humane slaughter requirements for farmed fish into legislation and publish guidance on humane methods of killing decapods. We are committed to working together with the farming community to maintain and enhance our world-class animal health and welfare standards. I will sit down so that my hon. Friend the Member for South Derbyshire can wind up.

10:59

[Samantha Niblett]

I thank everybody for their contributions, and I encourage them to listen to the most recent brilliant New Scientist podcast, “The World, the Universe and Us”, in which the historian Rutger Bregman, who wrote “Moral Ambition”, asks what, in the future, we will look back on and be ashamed of. The way we treat animals is probably one of those things. I am reminded today that the animal welfare strategy is not an end game, but animal welfare is a moving goal.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the animal welfare strategy for England.