---

Home Office

Answer

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what infringement action has been taken under section 6(6) of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 against (a) named day-to-day care persons and (b) named veterinary surgeons employed by Huntingdon Life Sciences, in respect of failures to make arrangements for the care or destruction of primates in Imutran xenotransplantation procedures where breaches of the moderate severity limit occurred as identified at paragraph 5.14 of the Chief Inspector's compliance review. [199985] Caroline Flint: None. The infringement described in paragraph 5.14 of the then Chief Inspector's review of compliance with the project licence authorities granted to Imutran Limited staff for its xenotransplantation research related to a delay in implementing the agreed humane endpoint for a procedure applied to protected animals. Responsibility for this was considered to rest with the project license holder and with the personal licensees, who were also clinicians. In mitigation, the licensees' decisions were based upon clinical judgment, rather than undisputed or unambiguous facts and the Chief Inspector's view was that they did not indicate any fundamental disregard for the welfare of the animals. The infringement was dealt with by means of letters of admonishment to those responsible.

Secondary information

Type

Written question

Reference

199985; 428 c624W;428 c624-5W

Session

2004-05

Subjects

Animal welfare Animal experiments Primates Xenotransplantation Imutran

Link

View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk