Proceeding contribution from Lord Evans of Temple Guiting (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 5 December 2006. It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 (Consequential Provisions) (England and Wales) Order 2006.
Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 (Consequential Provisions) (England and Wales) Order 2006
I thank the noble Lord, Lord Steel, for supporting these orders. As he said, devolution is a process and not an event. Orders were always anticipated as part of the sensible management of Scotland’s devolution settlement and the provisions in the Scotland Act recognised this. I am most grateful to the noble Lord for his support and interesting comments. I hope to answer all the questions that I have been asked. If I miss any, I will write. I am also grateful to the noble Duke, the Duke of Montrose, for the care and attention that he has obviously given to the order. He asked about the banning of docking tails of puppies and whether an owner moving from England to Scotland would be banned. At the moment, I believe that the answer is ““no””, but I understand that the Scottish Executive are considering this. I will provide clarity in writing once the consideration has finished, if it would be helpful, as I am sure that it would. The noble Duke asked about the climate change elements of the Section 63 order. This will do away with and will replace the previous executive devolution order. He also asked why the penalties are lower for Scotland than for England. The Scotland Act requires them to belower. The power to make orders under Section 104 of the Scotland Act only allows imprisonment of up to three months on summary conviction or a fine not exceeding level 5. The noble Lord, Lord Teverson, asked whether there have been any cases of people with disqualification orders moving to England between the passing of the Scotland Act and this order. The Scottish Executive have advised that no one with this problem has moved from Scotland to England. The noble Lord also asked: if a review takes place of foods covered, will a review also take place in Scotland? The power to specify the foods covered will be a matter for Scottish Ministers, but we would expect co-operation between the UK Government and the Scottish Ministers. I again thank Members of the Committee for their comments on these orders. On Question, Motion agreed to.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 687 c41-2GC
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Animal housing Animal welfare Devolved matters Accountability Courts Animals Dogs Disqualification Electricity generation Functions Infectious diseases Food Nutrition Ministers Scotland Renewable energy Welfare foods Healthy start scheme
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-07-13 10:57:10 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_363023
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_363023
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_363023