Proceeding contribution from James Paice (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 11 October 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill.
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill
I repeat the point that the new clause provisions are directly lifted from the Minister’s own Department’s draft animal welfare Bill. Precisely the same warning, which the Minister is now criticising, would apply to someone who is torturing their dog at the very time of torturing, unlike with the bird of prey, which is already dead. If the provision makes sense in one DEFRA Bill, why does it not make sense in another?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 437 c196
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Access Countryside Departmental responsibilities Enforcement Environment protection Motor vehicles Nuisance Public footpaths Nature conservation Pesticides National parks Rights of way Wildlife Rural areas Cycleways Commission for Rural Communities Natural England
- Legislation
- Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 13:44:18 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264900
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264900
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264900