Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill - Clause 1, Amendments 1-6

I appreciate the work of Mark Tami on this issue. I believe that clause 1(2) already closes the loophole he aims to address with amendments, as it would be difficult for traps intended for other animals to be set without rodent risk. However, I share his concern about licensing and enforcement.

The current Bill already addresses the issue of non-rodents being caught in glue traps by making it an offence regardless of intent. The wording also ensures that only qualified pest controllers receive licenses, and future discussions will further refine licensing requirements.

Moves to ban glue traps, citing distressing cases where individuals find live animals stuck in their homes. Highlights that these traps cause torn skin and broken limbs for trapped animals. Emphasises the importance of humane treatment and prevention of suffering.

Raises concerns about availability online, urging to ensure traps cannot be accessed via internet after the ban. Acknowledges need for education on illegal sale.

Supports the Bill, stressing the importance of working together with Welsh and Scottish Parliaments to move at a similar pace. Highlights availability online for as low as 99 pence and the need for education on illegal sale.

Congratulates my hon. Friend on the Bill, stressing the importance of respecting and protecting sentient beings in a humane way. Acknowledges the intelligence of rodents and raises concerns about their impact on public health while advocating for better waste management to reduce rodent infestations.

Supports the Bill, emphasising its alignment with government policies and the manifesto pledge on high standards of animal welfare. He highlights the cruel nature of glue traps and their unintended consequences such as harming pets and wildlife. Advocates for cleaner urban environments and mentions successful initiatives to reduce plastic bag usage.

Mayhew supports the Bill almost entirely but expresses concerns about clause 1(5), which he believes could lead to unintended consequences for passers-by. He argues that the current drafting may put innocent people at risk of committing an offence by requiring them to know legal requirements and disabling glue traps.

Vickers endorses the Bill, calling it a significant step in maintaining high animal welfare standards. He emphasises that while rodents are important pests to control, the suffering caused by glue traps is unnecessary and unjustifiable. He cites evidence from the British Veterinary Association and RSPCA about the harm these devices cause.

Clarke-Smith shares his personal experience with rodent control, noting that he was initially unaware of glue traps. After researching them, he found them shocking and inhumane. He supports the Bill as a humane approach to pest control.

The hon. Member for Montgomeryshire interjected respectfully in support of Ruth Jones's speech, clarifying his stance on legislative consent motions and devolution.

Victoria Prentis expressed gratitude towards Jane Stevenson for her work on the Bill and acknowledged contributions from other MPs. She highlighted the necessity of licensing provisions in specific sectors, such as aviation where glue traps might be essential due to layout constraints. She also discussed the history and adaptability of rodents, emphasising the need for humane control methods while supporting the Bill's aim of banning glue traps with exceptions for licensed use.

MP Jane Stevenson thanked her colleagues and animal charities for their support during the debate. She emphasised the need for humane options like pressure pads under glue traps to alert pest controllers quickly when an animal is caught, stressing that it would be rare but crucial for humane treatment.

MP Lia Nici raised concerns about inhumane deaths of animals caught on glue traps, questioning whether professional pest control organisations would be required to act immediately upon laying a trap.