Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the use of informal hierarchies of animal sentience by the Animals in Science Regulation Unit in discharging its duties under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.

The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA) does not operate through informal hierarchies of sentience. Instead, it statutorily requires that, wherever possible, animals with the lowest capacity to experience pain, suffering, distress and lasting harm are used, consistent with achieving the scientific purpose.

This requirement is reflected in the principle of refinement in, standard condition 4 of project licences, and the guidance for project licence applicants. Applications are considered on a case-by-case basis, and applicants must justify the choice of species, including why no suitable alternative with a lower capacity to experience harm can be used.

Decisions are informed by the best available scientific evidence, including relevant evidence on neurobiology and behaviour, rather than by any informal ranking system. Additionally, certain species, such as non-human primates, dogs and cats, are subject to additional statutory safeguards under ASPA.

All project licence applications must demonstrate how the principle of refinement along with replacement and reduction (the 3Rs) have been fully considered and applied. Applicants are required to justify the use of animals, explain why no suitable non-animal alternatives are available, minimise the number of animals used, and adopt refined methods to reduce suffering. These considerations are subject to scrutiny by Animal Welfare and Ethical Review Bodies and Home Office Inspectors before any licence is granted.