Trail-hunting

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Wednesday 18th March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

I commend the noble Lord on his earlier fitness—I do not know if he still carries it out. It is important to stress that there are no plans to include other activities, such as drag hunting and clean boot hunting, in the ban on trail-hunting. The noble Lord makes a really important point about enforcement. I have asked for a meeting with Home Office Ministers to discuss exactly that, in not just this area but others within Defra, as we feel that we need to work much more closely with the Home Office to ensure the enforcement of the laws that we bring in.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, will the Minister undertake to ensure that any future decision in this area, particularly on trail-hunting, is evidence-led as much as possible and based on assessing whether it causes harm to animal welfare, biodiversity and public confidence in law? The economies of so many rural communities are extremely diverse, with many more people in the countryside participating in, for instance, rambling and orienteering than trail-hunting.

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

I reassure the noble Baroness and all noble Lords that, when I look at future policy and legislation as part of my role as a Minister, it is incredibly important that everything is evidence-led and, where scientific evidence is needed, that we take the most up-to-date scientific evidence into account.

Sustainable Farming Incentive: Small Farms

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

We believe that it is important to encourage smaller farms and those without existing agreements to come forward to access the grants that are available to make their farms more sustainable. It is a little sweeping to say that they are not economic. All farms are different, and it often depends on how they are managed. As the noble Lord said, there is a second window opening in September to which all farms will be able to apply. We are looking to support all farms in increasing food production. Food productivity is an important part of the Batters review. Much of what we are doing in the new offer and in the farming road map is in response to the Batters review’s recommendations.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, how will the Government ensure that the definition of a small farm within the SFI recognises the contribution of smaller, diversified family farms to nature recovery and local food production? How will the Government avoid favouring larger land holdings that may find it easier to access the 71 requirements—admittedly down from over 100—of the still complex scheme?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

We have tried to reduce the complexity of the scheme. We want to make it more straightforward for more farms and different types of farms to access. There are opportunities for horticultural growers, which are often smaller farms as well. We are looking to better support tenant farmers and, importantly, are doing more to support people who farm on moorland and in upland areas. If we are to support sustainable farming, we need to encourage all farms to feel that they are part of what the Government are trying to achieve.

PFAS

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Thursday 5th March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

The water White Paper and the Bill that will follow it are a central part of the Government’s programme and a priority for Defra. We are looking at the Cunliffe report extremely carefully; it is an important piece of work.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, can the Minister explain why, when PFAS contamination of marine life and wildlife is already so widespread and understood, the Government are choosing what looks like a pathway of delay and of more research, more information and consumer choice, and considering only limited change to products such as waterproof clothing and period products rather than pursuing a more aggressive approach attempting to ban PFAS now?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

Clearly, we want to move forward as quickly as we can. The noble Baroness and others will be aware that we are working with the EU at the moment. There are negotiations. We know that the EU is looking at its own approach and, clearly, we need to take that into consideration and to work alongside it. It is important to remind noble Lords that PFAS is a large and complex group of over 15,000 chemicals. There are significant differences in chemical structure and toxicity, so it is important that we work alongside the EU to tackle this effectively and efficiently for the long term.

British Farming: Competitiveness

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

We have been very clear when working on our trading agreements with other countries that our standards are sacrosanct. We will not allow deals that undermine the standards that we have in this country. We are investing £11.8 billion in the farming budget over this Parliament, so we are absolutely serious about building our farming road map and responding positively to the Farming Profitability Review from the noble Baroness, Lady Batters. It is really important that any products that are produced to different environmental or animal welfare standards can be placed on the UK market only if they comply with the strict requirements that we put in place.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, the way to help with this significant issue would be the Government achieving their own manifesto promise of getting at least 50% of food supply to the public sector produced by British food producers. Can the Minister share with us what is preventing the Government achieving that with some urgency?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

The noble Baroness is absolutely correct that we talked in our manifesto about the importance of public procurement in supporting our food industry. The Procurement Act allows contracts for certain value thresholds also to be reserved for smaller UK suppliers. We want to look at the big suppliers and the smaller suppliers in order that we can deliver that manifesto commitment as best we can, because 50% is a large amount of our food procurement. Last year, we had a new national procurement policy statement, which puts emphasis on weighting environmental and social outcomes in government contracts. British farmers and local suppliers will be very well placed to meet those outcomes.

Forest-Risk Commodities

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Monday 2nd March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

We have ambitious tree-planting proposals, including planting three new national forests—one has already begun and two are well on the way—because it is important that we increase tree coverage. We are also looking at how we can better protect the forests we already have, particularly our ancient woodlands. The environmental improvement plan the Government have recently published addresses many of those issues.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, what projections have the Government made of the impact on regional GDP and jobs if UK food and retail businesses lose market share because overseas competitors can show that they are stronger on deforestation-free credentials? Will the Minister commit to publishing any economic modelling behind their current chosen timetable and the scope for these due diligence regulations?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

Due diligence, particularly around trade and standards, is incredibly important. We want, as I am sure the noble Baroness is aware, to grow our economy in this country, but at the same time we must support business and ensure that we are doing so in a way that is sustainable—whether it is to do with the environment or human rights and so on. We discussed the issues she talks about with the Department of Trade, and we will continue to have very close discussions with it on how we continue to grow sustainable businesses in this country.

Yorkshire: Sustainable Water Management Solutions

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Wednesday 28th January 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

Protecting homes is clearly very important. The national assessment of flood and coastal erosion risk, published in January last year, shows that around 6.3 million properties in England are at risk of flooding. With climate change, we believe that this could increase to 8 million. So this is a really important point, and I assure the right reverend Prelate that it is a government priority. If we are going to solve these problems, this is about not just Defra but us working with the MHCLG and more broadly across government. We are putting forward the largest flood and coastal erosion programme in history, with £2.65 billion to better protect properties by March this year. We have started completing those schemes, and we will keep investing in this. It is a priority.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, does the Minister agree—

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

My Lords, I pay tribute—

[Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms and Chief Whip (Lord Kennedy of Southwark) (Lab Co-op)]

We have plenty of time. We will have the Lib Dems first, then the Conservatives.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, does the Minister agree that Yorkshire Water, and others, are effectively exploiting loopholes in the Water (Special Measures) Act? How will they urgently be prevented from rewarding themselves for a polluting and failing service—whether it is called a bonus, a retention payment or, in the case of Yorkshire Water, so-called “fixed fees” of over £1 million, on top of a large salary for the chief executive? Should this money not be returned?

Water White Paper

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Monday 26th January 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for the Statement repeat this evening. Some proposals in this White paper are indeed most welcome, including the scrapping of Ofwat—something we have long called for—but it falls short of the fundamental reforms water customers are so desperately in need of. True reform demands root-and-branch change within the water companies themselves, because until profit is no longer their driving force, shareholder payouts will continue to be prioritised over investment and the urgent need to end the scandal of sewage in our rivers and seas. We therefore advocate a move towards mutuality, not the costly nationalisation that others propose but a shift to public benefit companies, a model that has proved so successful elsewhere, particularly in the United States.

I have a few questions. How can the Government claim there will be nowhere to hide when the White Paper rules out structural reform, including changes to ownership and profit extraction? What action is being taken to stop water companies evading the bonus ban, given evidence to the Public Accounts Committee only recently that they have reclassified such payments as “retention incentives”, even in the past year?

If this is truly the biggest overhaul since privatisation, why does it fail to confront the broken ownership model which has enabled pollution, underinvestment and profiteering for decades? Did the Government consider alternative models, such as mutuality, and, if not, why not at this stage, when the current funding system so clearly prioritises shareholders over customers, in turn using huge debts to fund dividends?

What guarantees can Ministers give that a new regulator, potentially more than a year from being operational, will be able to deliver immediate improvements, rather than the risk of extended regulatory failure? What assessment has been made of the cumulative impact of historic underinvestment and excessive dividends in today’s water bills, and how will this White Paper address that inequity? How will the Government work with farmers to tackle agricultural pollution in genuine partnership with them, rather than the slight blame culture that currently exists? Will Ministers commit to ending the sewage cover-up by requiring full publication of sewage volume data, not just the spill duration, as is the current system and the one we had under the last Government? Given record sewage dumping and rising bills, what measurable standards will define this White Paper as a success if river and coastal water quality, for instance, continues to decline?

Finally, and no great surprise from me, when will we see the necessary legislation on our precious chalk streams, which have a very welcome inclusion in this White Paper but which were promised urgent action when we were discussing the Planning and Infrastructure Bill? There continues to be a danger that it will be too late for the chalk streams.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Baroness Hayman of Ullock) (Lab)]

My Lords, I thank noble Lords for their interest and their questions on the water White Paper, which we published and laid in Parliament on 20 January. The White Paper outlines how we will work together with water companies, investors, communities and the environment to transform our water system for good, because we need to ensure a sustainable water system for future generations.

The noble Earl, Lord Courtown, asked why it had taken so long and when we were going to see change. As noble Lords know, we have already taken action. We brought in the Water (Special Measures) Act and took action to ring-fence water company investment. The transition plan will be published later this year, which will provide a road map for implementing the changes. We will bring forward a new water reform Bill during this Parliament, alongside which we will make progress with reforms that do not require primary legislation. That will include a shift to a supervisory approach to regulation, with dedicated teams with an understanding of how each company operates. There will be the piloting of regional planning approaches across the country. The water reform Bill will be a priority for the department going forward.

The noble Earl, Lord Courtown, mentioned the extension of environmental permitting to cattle. As the White Paper sets out, we are considering extending environmental permitting beyond pig and poultry to cattle, because cattle are a significant source of water pollution. However, we are working closely with the NFU and others, because we need to take a balanced approach to that issue.

The noble Baroness, Lady Grender, and the noble Earl, Lord Courtown, mentioned Ofwat and regulation. We have already done something on this, with the Water (Special Measures) Act, which shifted the burden of proof from the regulators to the water companies in order to enable automatic fines. The new regulator that will be set up will require us to change legislation. We feel it is really important to make sure that we get this right. The existing regulators will in the interim retain the powers they have until we have the new regulator in place.

The Environment Agency is carrying out record levels of funding and inspections, and is currently on track to deliver 10,000 inspections in the year 2025-26. We are going to issue interim strategic policy statements to the regulator as part of the transition plan, which will provide legally binding instructions on what the regulator’s priorities should be and how they should act during the transition period. We will reform the approach to the strategic policy statements and issue wider strategic guidance to provide long-term direction to the entire water system, alongside specific, measurable directions to the new water regulator.

The noble Earl asked when we are going to make appointments to the regulator and when it will be set up. We intend to make formal appointments to the board of the new water regulator at the earliest opportunity. We believe that providing early leadership will help the new regulator begin to develop its internal strategy, to build a new culture, which is very important, and to deliver the industry-wide approach from the start. As I said, during that transition the existing regulators will retain their full powers and responsibilities. We are considering the funding arrangements that will be needed. The new regulator will have the power to deliver its responsibilities in full and will balance the interests of customers, investors and the environment.

The noble Earl asked about accountability. Clear oversight and accountability will be an important design principle of the new regulator, and we anticipate that the regulator will be accountable to Ministers, and by extension to Parliament, in the way that it carries out its functions. We will consider how parliamentary accountability is handled through the legislation, any sponsorship arrangements and the framework agreement. We recognise the importance of appropriate independence, particularly for economic regulation, in supporting the credibility of the new regime and investor confidence, so we will ensure that there are mechanisms in place, including within the legislation itself, to protect regulatory independence. We will look at other relevant public bodies as we draw that up.

The noble Earl asked specifically about the water restoration fund. We are doubling our funding for catchment partnerships in order to bring together farmers and stakeholders to tackle agricultural problems. I am not in a position yet to say whether we will be continuing with the water restoration fund.

The noble Baroness, Lady Grender, asked about bonuses, which I think everyone feels strongly about, particularly in the light of what has been happening recently with South East Water. We introduced criminality for water bosses who cover up illegal sewage spills and the power to ban unfair bonuses. Some £4 million in bonuses for 10 water bosses was blocked last summer. We absolutely expect water companies to follow both the letter and the spirit of the law, and Ofwat is considering what further action can be taken to ensure that companies are held to account. The water White Paper goes further in order to ensure that water companies have nowhere to hide on poor performance. That includes a new supervisory scheme, which will ensure that the regulator has a stronger grip on exactly what is going on in each company.

The noble Baroness, Lady Grender, asked about mutuality and models of ownership. Mutual or co-operative ownership is not something that we are opposed to in principle. The White Paper says that, if a company’s owners propose changes to the ownership model, the new regulator will assess any proposals carefully against transparent criteria. But to take a company into mutual or co-operative ownership, either the current owners would need to propose this or the company would need to be bought first. We would therefore need to think carefully about how that transition would actually take place. We are not opposed to it in principle, but any mandatory changes in ownership would be costly and complicated, and would not deliver the material benefit. That is why it is important that it is the company’s owners who are proposing any such changes.

The noble Baroness also asked how the White Paper was addressing pollution; we talked about a number of issues there. As we have set out in the White Paper, there are several measures that we are taking to tackle pollution. Importantly, we are looking to strengthen collaboration in planning at catchment and regional level. This will help to identify lower-cost, higher-impact solutions to tackle pollution and include opportunities for farmers—which the noble Earl, Lord Courtown, was asking about—water companies and other stakeholders to work in partnership to ensure that the action taken is effective. We are also developing a new and strengthened approach to monitoring, because we do not want companies marking their own homework, as they have been doing for years. We are looking at how we can strengthen that.

We are shifting the emphasis towards tackling the root causes of sewage pollution by reducing the volume of rainwater and pollutants that enter the sewerage system in the first place and freeing up sewerage capacity for development and growth. I will give some examples of how we are doing that. We are building on the ban on wet wipes, which contain plastic, to stop sewers from getting clogged up so much. We have introduced a national standard for sustainable drainage systems which will help to improve drainage quality. That will be a requirement for all new developments and will have drainage implications beyond that through the National Planning Policy Framework. We are also committed to ensuring that funding looks at how to improve nature and the environment more broadly. This was mentioned when we talked about the PIB.

Overall, we need to improve transparency and ensure that the public can see what is happening in their local waters. That is important if we are to get back consumer confidence and boost protection for customers. We want people to see that this is serious action that we are taking to improve the water systems.

Environmental Improvement Plan 2025

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Thursday 8th January 2026 Grand Committee

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Krebs, and all other noble Lords for this timely debate on precisely how the Environmental Improvement Plan 2025 intends to deliver the legally binding targets set out in the Environment Act 2021. Given the alarming trajectory of nature decline in this country, such scrutiny is critical. In the Liberal Democrats, we acknowledge that the revised EIP offers structural improvements compared to its predecessor, showing clearer responsibility for some actions and providing delivery plans. Yet, as we have heard from so many other speakers, if we are honest about the scale of the climate and nature crisis, the EIP 25 remains profoundly underwhelming and fundamentally lacking the necessary ambition, pace and long-term funding certainty required to haul the Government back on track to meet their 2030 legal obligations.

As we have heard, the Office for Environmental Protection has repeatedly cautioned that the Government are largely off track to achieve their environmental commitments, stressing that

“the window of opportunity is closing fast”.

This plan, presented late last year, should have been a transformative response to that warning. Instead, in too many critical areas, we see weakness, delay and backsliding on previous commitments, when what is needed is urgent delivery and real-world change.

Nowhere is this inertia more evident than in the marine environment and I thank the Marine Conservation Society for its briefing, as mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb. The plan risks entrenching managed decline, instead of enabling genuine recovery. The commitment to achieve good environmental status for our seas, originally targeted for 2020 under the marine strategy framework, has seen its date pushed back and effectively faded from view. This is despite the UK previously meeting only a fraction of the indicators for healthy seas. Targets for marine protected areas are now effectively folded into a broader 30% by 2030 headline, while the conspicuous absence of the promised marine net gain framework means we have removed a vital mechanism to catalyse and encourage private investment into marine restoration and recovery.

I turn to land. The core statutory target to halt the decline of species abundance by 2030 is, as other speakers have mentioned, under immense pressure. While we welcome the target to restore or create 250,000 hectares of habitat outside protected sites by 2030, rising to 500,000 hectares by 2042, this cumulative target does not account for nature lost or degraded in the meantime. To deliver the scale of habitat creation needed, we must empower and properly fund our farmers, who are the true stewards of our land and are already grappling with climate impacts and volatile markets. Can the Minister say, in modelling for the farmland wildlife delivery plan, what assumptions are made of the proportion of ELM funds dedicated to Countryside Stewardship and landscape recovery?

The Government’s current approach to funding leaves too many farmers unsure whether they can commit to long-term schemes. We note the headline announcement of £500 million for landscape recovery projects over the coming decades, but this averages a relatively modest annual sum set against the scale of change being asked of land managers. There is genuine concern that without a clearer vision and greater certainty, this will not be enough to shift the dial for the many farmers being asked to do more.

That is why we made the case in our own manifesto for an extra £1 billion a year for the farming budget, focused on nature-friendly farming schemes that support both sustainable food security and nature recovery, particularly for smaller family farms and tenanted holdings. Fundamental reforms are needed, including establishing upland reward schemes to remunerate those who cultivate some of our toughest landscapes—that point will be no stranger to the Minister, given where she lives—for their public good outputs, from carbon and biodiversity to flood mitigation and access.

The revised EIP claims to be a flagship delivery plan, yet it often defers definitive actions through consultations and sometimes vague commitments. We must move beyond this cycle of promised and not delivered, particularly when communities are already living with polluted rivers, depleted soils and declining local wildlife. That is why we call for decisive action: urgent implementation of a truly comprehensive national food strategy; the creation of a new, strengthened water regulator to enforce the clean-up of our waterways; and a renewed commitment to fund and quantify the actions needed now to meet the 2030 deadlines. As others have mentioned, we were promised a White Paper by Ministers on water by the end of last year—with a clear understanding of the urgency, for instance, about chalk streams—when we discussed this on the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. Where is that urgency now? We really need to see that White Paper.

If the EIP 2025 is genuinely intended to deliver the targets of the Environment Act it requires immediate, quantifiable and bold action.

Flooding Interventions

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Tuesday 6th January 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

The noble Baroness is right that sustainable drainage is an important factor in managing flood risk. I am sure she is aware that I am personally supportive of this measure. The department is looking at it and is working with MHCLG, which, as the planning department, also has a particular interest in this. I will keep the noble Baroness up to date as we progress.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, does the Minister agree that farmers remain a critical partner to government in the fight against flooding? Will the Government therefore consider the EFRA Select Committee’s recommendation of a more comprehensive compensation strategy for farmers who store floodwater on their land to serve and protect downstream communities?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

The noble Baroness is right. As someone who lives in a rural area that floods regularly, I am aware of the important role farmers play in managing flood risk and storing water on their land. Farmers can access payments in a number of ways, as I am sure the noble Baroness is aware. One is the farm recovery fund, in cases where damage has occurred and farmers need to recover costs. It pays up to £25,000 and can be important to farmers when they have suffered flooding. We are looking very carefully at the Environment Audit Committee’s recommendations in this area. Farmers storing water on their land is an important way of moving forward, and it is certainly something we are looking at.

Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill

Baroness Grender Excerpts

3rd reading
Friday 21st November 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Trees (CB)]

My Lords, it has been a great privilege to bring forward this Bill, which seeks to prevent the illegal and low-welfare movement of pets into the UK. At Second Reading I remarked that I hoped it would be third time lucky for this Bill, and today I am thrilled to present it for its third and last reading before it makes its way on to the statute book.

It has been a privilege to play a part in advancing this legislation, which will strengthen protection for animals so dear to so many of us. However, the milestone is not mine alone, of course. The progress of the Bill has been a truly collaborative endeavour, and I express my sincere gratitude to those who have contributed to its journey. It is a particular pleasure to thank Dr Danny Chambers from the other place, because I had the pleasure and privilege of teaching him when he was a veterinary undergraduate at the University of Liverpool. You know you are getting old when your former students become MPs.

I thank the Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Hayman, and her team at Defra for the great work they have done in supporting the Bill. I am very grateful to fellow Peers who supported us so well at Second Reading; I am assured that the points they made then will be considered by the Government in developing the Bill further through secondary legislation. Finally, I thank various organisations, including the British Veterinary Association, the RSPCA, the Dogs Trust, Battersea and others, which have long lobbied for the measures encompassed in this legislation.

When quarantine was replaced by rabies vaccinations in 2000, there were fewer than 8,000 dogs moving non-commercially into the UK; by 2024, there were 368,000 dogs moving. Many of them were not day trippers but one-way trippers: illegally imported dogs that were poorly bred, poorly kept, unsocialised and vulnerable to ill health. In 2025, the PDSA estimated that 21,000 dogs were imported with cropped ears, a mutilation that is illegal in this country. In 2023, Cats Protection estimated that 65,000 cats had been imported, many of which had been declawed—another illegal process in the UK.

This Bill will bring these practices to an end. It closes a loophole in pet travel rules that have been exploited for profit and introduces a proportionate limit on the number of pets that can be brought in during a single non-commercial movement. It makes it harder for unscrupulous individuals to abuse the system. The Bill also grants the Government powers to introduce secondary legislation to restrict low-welfare imports, by prohibiting the import of puppies and kittens under six months of age and restricting the import of heavily pregnant animals and of pets that have been subject to mutilation, such as ear cropping in dogs and declawing in cats.

I welcome the Government’s assurances that they intend to work with stakeholders to consider appropriate exemptions to these restrictions as these regulations are further developed. I echo the Government’s words of caution that any exemptions must be extremely selective and must not allow the creation of loopholes that could be exploited.

The Bill is a testament to what we can achieve when we work together across this House. I know that noble Lords will support its passage and help us take this important step forward to ending pet smuggling and improving the welfare of pets brought into the United Kingdom. I beg to move.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, today we can be proud that we are a nation that truly loves our pets and legislates for them too. Dogs, cats and—yes—ferrets will be protected in the future by this new law. That is a tribute to all the vets, owners and rescue charities who have dealt with these terrible cruelties and campaigned for change.

I congratulate my Liberal Democrat colleague and vet, Dr Danny Chambers, who has made this a law so soon after becoming an MP. My heartfelt thanks also go to the noble Lord, Lord Trees, and the Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Hayman, for all the work they have done to deliver this. My thanks also go to every parliamentarian—it is wonderful to see so many here today to mark this moment—who has fought for and delivered this excellent and long-overdue change in the law.

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, please allow me to congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Trees, former president of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, on his success in guiding this important Bill to its Third Reading in your Lordships’ House. Today we see a Private Member’s Bill sail through both Houses of Parliament to become law. It is a rare feat and a testament to the relentless focus and determination of the noble Lord, Lord Trees.

As the noble Lord, Lord Blencathra, highlighted at Second Reading, His Majesty’s loyal Opposition are fully supportive of the Bill and we are most pleased to see it go on to the next stage. We believe it will play a key role in reducing the cruelty that cats, dogs and ferrets currently suffer through the smuggling trade. A great many animal lovers across the whole United Kingdom will today be incredibly grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Trees, and we thank him for pursuing this with a laser focus that will now be enshrined in law.