House of Commons · Bill Debate
19 November 2021 · 12 other contributors
Opened by Cherilyn Mackrory Con South Cornwall
Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.
Cherilyn Mackrory raised concerns about prohibition of glue traps bill - clause 1 in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
Key points
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.
Opened the debate
I move to ban the use of glue traps for rodent control, except in exceptional circumstances. Glue traps cause immense suffering and death to animals caught in them. They are not humane or necessary given alternatives such as snap traps and live capture methods. Statistics show that many users do not know how to humanely end an animal's suffering when it is trapped. Other countries have successfully restricted glue trap use without affecting rodent control.
Asked Cherilyn Mackrory why the Bill focuses only on rodents and not other small wild animals that can also suffer from glue traps.
Expressed concern about rodent infestations in housing estates, questioning whether the ban on glue traps would hinder effective rodent control efforts.
Asked how Cherilyn Mackrory could ensure that proposed restrictions on glue traps would not lead to rodent control problems.
Questioned whether banning glue traps would negatively affect overall pest control effectiveness and rodent population management.
Supports the Bill for its humane approach, emphasising that glue traps should be used only by professionals to prevent inhumane consequences. She highlights that there is no hierarchy of animals when it comes to suffering and argues for reducing the risk of inhumane treatment through professional use.
Congratulates the Bill's introduction, although with reservations about its scope. Supports banning glue traps due to their cruelty and indiscriminate nature. Raises concerns about licensing arrangements and training requirements for those who might use these devices.
Mr Mayhew supports the prohibition of glue traps due to their inhumane nature. He cited historical context, noting that public attitudes towards animal suffering have evolved over centuries. The British Veterinary Association and RSPCA have raised concerns about the suffering caused by glue traps, emphasising potential for slow and painful deaths of non-target species such as birds and hedgehogs. Mr Mayhew supports the licensing regime but has reservations regarding clause 1(5) which criminalizes passers-by who do not remove illegal glue traps.
Mr Chope opposes the Bill, arguing that it is ineffective in addressing public health risks posed by rodents. He highlighted the rapid breeding rates of rats and their potential to carry diseases such as Weil’s disease. Mr Chope expressed concern over the lack of licensing requirements for pest control professionals, which he believes undermines the effectiveness of the proposed measures.
Ms Mackrory intervened to clarify that the Bill is not about protecting rats but addressing humane methods for rodent control. She noted that licensed pest controllers can effectively manage rat populations without relying on glue traps.
Argues for a licensing regime that allows glue traps to be used only in exceptional circumstances by professionals, ensuring humane rodent control while safeguarding animal welfare and public health. Mentions New Zealand's ban on glue traps as an example of effective regulation.
[INTERVENTION] Asks about the Department’s policy on reducing rat populations, highlighting the threat rats pose to public health.
Responded to concerns about 12 hours of suffering for rodents, citing modern technology that alerts pest controllers quicker. Argued the Bill's focus on rodents is justified since glue traps are primarily used against them, not birds. Emphasised education and public awareness efforts before licences are introduced in two years. Reassured members that the bill does not protect rats but removes a method the public uses daily, while alternatives exist.