Asked by: Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government when they plan to enforce the commitment made in the Animal welfare strategy for England, published on 22 December 2025, to end the culling of male chicks in the egg industry.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
As set out in the Animal Welfare Strategy, this Government would like to see an end to the practice of culling male chicks. The Government is monitoring the rapid progress currently being made with in-ovo sexing and has funded research into the use of dual breed chickens that remove the need to kill male chicks.
Asked by: Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government what recent discussions they have had with the UK egg industry about implementing a trial of in-ovo sexing technology to prevent the culling of male chicks; and when they anticipate such a trial to take place.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
A commercial in-ovo sexing system was trialed at a UK hatchery last year to help the egg industry understand the logistics of in-ovo sexing. This Government will engage with the egg industry and technology companies on this issue.
Asked by: Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they are providing support to assist the implementation of Colombia's National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security and, if so, whether funding for this reaches local organisations.
Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington
The UK is firmly committed to the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda. Following the launch of Colombia's WPS National Action Plan, which the UK supported, we continue to work with the Colombian Government and civil society to support its implementation. UK funding has helped advance accountability and support for thousands of survivors of conflict-related sexual violence in Colombia over the last ten years. The UK continues to advocate for women's full and equal participation in peace negotiations in Colombia and on a global scale, which we made clear during the statement delivered by the UK's Chargé d'Affaires to the UN Security Council on 17 June.
Asked by: Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hanson of Flint on 1 July (HL1346), when an application for a project licence under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 was last rejected on the grounds that it would involve unacceptable levels of harm beyond the lawful category of severe.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
Under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, project licences cannot authorise procedures that may cause the animal severe pain, suffering or distress that is likely to be long-lasting and cannot be alleviated. The earliest project licence application data currently available to the Home Office Regulator on the current e-licensing system dates from late 2021. No project licences have been refused on the grounds that a proposal would involve unacceptable levels of harm beyond the lawful category of severe since that date.
The number of formal refusals is not, however, a meaningful indicator of regulatory rigour. All applications go through multiple review stages before reaching the Home Office Regulator, and guidance is available to assist applicants in preparing submissions that meet all legal requirements. Applicants may also revise or withdraw an application in response to feedback. Only applications that fully meet the requirements of the legislation may be considered for licensing authorisation.
Home Office Inspectors assess the likely pain, suffering, distress and lasting harm that animals may experience using the information provided in project licence applications. They consider factors including the nature, severity, duration and frequency of adverse effects, the number and proportion of animals likely to be affected, and the measures proposed to minimise those harms.
Each planned procedure, or series of procedures, is assigned a prospective severity classification (non-recovery, mild, moderate or severe) which reflects the greatest level of pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm likely to be experienced by any animal after all appropriate refinement measures have been applied. As part of the statutory harm-benefit analysis, a Home Office Inspector considers the expected harms and the anticipated benefits of the programme of work. A licence will not be granted unless the Inspector is satisfied that the likely harms are justified by the expected benefits, and that the requirements of the 3Rs — Replacement, Reduction and Refinement — have been met.
Asked by: Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hanson of Flint on 1 July (HL1346), how the level of pain expected to be experienced by animals is measured within the harm-benefit analysis.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
Under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, project licences cannot authorise procedures that may cause the animal severe pain, suffering or distress that is likely to be long-lasting and cannot be alleviated. The earliest project licence application data currently available to the Home Office Regulator on the current e-licensing system dates from late 2021. No project licences have been refused on the grounds that a proposal would involve unacceptable levels of harm beyond the lawful category of severe since that date.
The number of formal refusals is not, however, a meaningful indicator of regulatory rigour. All applications go through multiple review stages before reaching the Home Office Regulator, and guidance is available to assist applicants in preparing submissions that meet all legal requirements. Applicants may also revise or withdraw an application in response to feedback. Only applications that fully meet the requirements of the legislation may be considered for licensing authorisation.
Home Office Inspectors assess the likely pain, suffering, distress and lasting harm that animals may experience using the information provided in project licence applications. They consider factors including the nature, severity, duration and frequency of adverse effects, the number and proportion of animals likely to be affected, and the measures proposed to minimise those harms.
Each planned procedure, or series of procedures, is assigned a prospective severity classification (non-recovery, mild, moderate or severe) which reflects the greatest level of pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm likely to be experienced by any animal after all appropriate refinement measures have been applied. As part of the statutory harm-benefit analysis, a Home Office Inspector considers the expected harms and the anticipated benefits of the programme of work. A licence will not be granted unless the Inspector is satisfied that the likely harms are justified by the expected benefits, and that the requirements of the 3Rs — Replacement, Reduction and Refinement — have been met.
Asked by: Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many badgers were culled in 2024 and 2025 in an effort to prevent the spread of tuberculosis in cattle; and of those badgers, how many were subsequently confirmed to have had tuberculosis.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The number of badgers culled under licence for bovine TB control purposes is published annually on GOV. UK. In 2024, the published total was 17,150.
Data on the numbers culled under licence in 2025 will be published in due course.
Badgers removed through intensive culling in the High Risk Area and Edge Area are not routinely submitted for M. bovis testing. No badgers were tested in these areas in 2024. Although some badgers were tested in 2025, the results are not yet known, as the study has not yet been completed.
Subject to capacity, badgers removed through culling operations in the Low Risk Area are sent to APHA laboratories for M. bovis testing. Not every badger removed through Low Risk Area operations may be tested for M. bovis.
Area name (year) | Number of badgers removed | Number of badgers tested | Number of positive badgers |
Area 54 – Lincolnshire (2024) | 54 | 46 | 3 |
Area 73 – Cumbria (2024) | 576 | 449 | 24 |
Area 73 – Cumbria (2025) | 175 | 173 | 1 |
Table 1: Number of badgers removed and tested for M. bovis in the Low Risk Area.
Asked by: Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they are (1) developing, or (2) supporting the development of, a vaccine to prevent tuberculosis in cattle; and if not, why not.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
This Government is actively supporting the development of a CattleBCG vaccine to help protect cattle against bovine TB. Government-funded field trials of the CattleBCG vaccine and companion Detect Infected amongst Vaccinated Animals (DIVA) skin test have been running since 2021, with the final planned phase now underway and due to complete by 2027. Evidence from these trials is supporting the regulatory process needed for future deployment. This Government remains committed to progressing cattle vaccination as an important component of long-term bovine TB control.
The recently published recommended Bovine TB Control Strategy for England (https://tbhub.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/2026-Recommended-Bovine-TB-Strategy.pdf) (see attached) sets a clear ambition to deploy a cattle vaccine and DIVA test by 2030. This Government will now carefully consider the recommendations in the proposed strategy.
Asked by: Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many cattle were slaughtered because of suspected bovine tuberculosis in 2024 and 2025; and of those cattle, how many were subsequently confirmed to have had tuberculosis.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The number of cattle slaughtered for TB control purposes in Great Britain in 2024 and 2025 were as follows:
Year | England | Scotland | Wales | TOTAL |
2024 | 21,586 | 13,033 | 246 | 34,865 |
2025 | 20,494 | 11,257 | 290 | 32,041 |
The comparative format of the tuberculin skin test used in the UK is very specific (99.98% at the standard interpretation), so the probability of a false positive result is roughly 1 in 5,000 to 6,000 uninfected cattle tested. This means the department can be confident that the vast majority of skin test-positive cattle (i.e. test reactors) are truly infected with TB, irrespective of post-mortem and laboratory findings.
Bovine TB statistics are published on GOV.UK and can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/bovine-tb.
Asked by: Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what emergency humanitarian response plans they have to prevent the worsening of humanitarian needs and mass displacement in El Obeid, Sudan.
Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington
Further to the answers provided in the Private Notice Question debate on 24 June, the UK is continuing to use its role as UN Security Council penholder to urge an immediate end to the violence in El Obeid, in concert with our fellow members of the Coalition for Atrocity Prevention for Sudan, and other international partners.
On 3 July, the UK convened an Urgent Debate at the UN Human Rights Council on the situation in El Obeid, and on 6 July, we secured the adoption by consensus of a UK-led resolution, condemning - and calling for an urgent inquiry by the UN Fact-Finding Mission into - recently reported atrocities.
We will continue using every lever available over the coming days and weeks to try and prevent the mass civilian casualties in El Obeid that we all fear.
Asked by: Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to prevent further sexual violence in Sudan; whether they are collecting evidence of those who have suffered sexual violence; and what plans they have to hold perpetrators to account.
Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington
The UK remains determined to tackle the abhorrent levels of conflict related sexual violence (CRSV) against women and girls in Sudan, including the widespread use of rape as a weapon of war.
Since the start of the conflict, we have prioritised work on protection, prevention and care services, providing access to vital medical and psychological care, supporting survivors' families, and supporting women-led organisations to deliver essential services on-the-ground. Earlier this year, the Foreign Secretary announced a further £20 million of funding for these activities after meeting survivors in the border town of Adré.
Alongside our atrocity prevention work, the UK is also committed to gathering evidence of atrocities to support future prosecutions. We led efforts to establish the UN Fact-Finding Mission and have secured its mandate extension for two successive years. We also supported the deployment of a specialist sexual and gender-based violence investigator last year, and through our Sudan Witness programme, we are supporting Sudanese human rights defenders to document violations and abuses, including evidence of CRSV, to ensure Sudanese civil society can build a foundation for justice. We have also earmarked funding for development of a women-led investigations network.
We need urgent action from across the international community now, including international criminal investigations into the atrocities committed to date, to ensure accountability for the perpetrators, justice for victims, and an end to the systematic campaign of sexual violence against Sudanese women and girls.