Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West and Islwyn)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what consideration she has given to the potential merits of making the adoption of validated alternatives to animal methods a binding requirement rather than a discretionary aid under Section 2A of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 already provides a binding statutory requirement to use a non-animal method where a scientifically satisfactory method or testing strategy that does not involve protected animals is reasonably and practicably available. Compliance with this requirement is considered as part of the assessment and authorisation of project licences. The Government therefore does not consider that alternatives are merely a discretionary aid, or that a further statutory mechanism is required to make their use mandatory.
Formal validation can support confidence in and regulatory acceptance of a non-animal method, but validation alone does not determine whether that method is scientifically satisfactory for every proposed use. That assessment must take account of the method’s relevance, reliability and practical availability for the particular scientific purpose.
The Government is committed to accelerating the development, validation and uptake of non-animal methods. Its November 2025 strategy, led by the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade and backed by £75 million, sets out measures to strengthen validation, regulatory confidence and adoption, while maintaining robust standards of scientific quality and human, animal and environmental protection
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West and Islwyn)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment has her Department made of the potential merits of introducing a statutory mechanism to ensure that validated non-animal models replace animal procedures under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 already provides a binding statutory requirement to use a non-animal method where a scientifically satisfactory method or testing strategy that does not involve protected animals is reasonably and practicably available. Compliance with this requirement is considered as part of the assessment and authorisation of project licences. The Government therefore does not consider that alternatives are merely a discretionary aid, or that a further statutory mechanism is required to make their use mandatory.
Formal validation can support confidence in and regulatory acceptance of a non-animal method, but validation alone does not determine whether that method is scientifically satisfactory for every proposed use. That assessment must take account of the method’s relevance, reliability and practical availability for the particular scientific purpose.
The Government is committed to accelerating the development, validation and uptake of non-animal methods. Its November 2025 strategy, led by the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade and backed by £75 million, sets out measures to strengthen validation, regulatory confidence and adoption, while maintaining robust standards of scientific quality and human, animal and environmental protection
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West and Islwyn)
Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of using the UK - Faroe Islands free trade agreement to encourage his Faroese counterparts to ban dolphin hunting.
Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The UK-Faroe Islands Free Trade Agreement provides an important framework for the UK Government to engage with the Faroese Government. UK officials have and will continue to raise the UK's opposition to cetacean hunting at meetings of the Joint Committee established under the Agreement, which provides a valuable forum for discussions on issues of concern. The Faroese Government is in no doubt as to the strength of feeling and opposition in the UK to cetacean hunting.
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West and Islwyn)
Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, whether he has plans to introduce a standing agenda item on dolphin hunting at future meetings of the Joint Committee established under the UK - Faeroe Island Free Trade Agreement.
Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The UK-Faroe Islands Free Trade Agreement provides an important framework for the UK Government to engage with the Faroese Government. UK officials have and will continue to raise the UK's opposition to cetacean hunting at meetings of the Joint Committee established under the Agreement, which provides a valuable forum for discussions on issues of concern, and for which the agenda is mutually agreed in advance. The Faroese Government is in no doubt as to the strength of feeling and opposition in the UK to cetacean hunting.
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West and Islwyn)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to Project 4 entitled Image Guided Therapy for Cardiovascular Disease in the Non-technical summaries for project licences granted April – June 2026 that require a retrospective assessment, published in June 2026, what assessment she has made of the adequacy of the information provided by the applicant on the expected severity of procedures in informing the licensing decision; and what is meant by the classification of mice and rats as under severe in that project.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office keeps the quality and consistency of non-technical summaries published under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA) under review. In May 2026, the Government accepted recommendations from the Animals in Science Committee to improve the transparency, clarity and consistency of non-technical summaries and retrospective assessments. The Government response and delivery plan are available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/non-technical-summaries-and-retrospective-assessments-response-from-lord-hanson.
For Project 4, Image Guided Therapy for Cardiovascular Disease, the Home Office Regulator was satisfied that the application contained sufficient information to undertake the statutory harm-benefit analysis and inform the licensing decision. This assessment considered not only the prospective severity classification, but also the nature, duration and likelihood of the potential harms, the numbers and proportion of animals likely to be affected, the expected benefits, and the measures in place to minimise suffering.
The expected severity classifications indicate the maximum level of harm that an animal could reasonably be expected to experience under the authorised procedures; it does not mean that every mouse or rat in the procedures will experience suffering at that level. The application also sets out refinements, monitoring arrangements and humane end-points intended to prevent or minimise such harms.
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West and Islwyn)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps she is taking to ensure that future Non-technical Summaries for project licences granted under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 provide consistent information on expected severity; and what assessment she has made of the adequacy of the level of detail published on expected severity to explain the harms considered during the harm-benefit analysis.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office keeps the quality and consistency of non-technical summaries published under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA) under review. In May 2026, the Government accepted recommendations from the Animals in Science Committee to improve the transparency, clarity and consistency of non-technical summaries and retrospective assessments. The Government response and delivery plan are available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/non-technical-summaries-and-retrospective-assessments-response-from-lord-hanson.
For Project 4, Image Guided Therapy for Cardiovascular Disease, the Home Office Regulator was satisfied that the application contained sufficient information to undertake the statutory harm-benefit analysis and inform the licensing decision. This assessment considered not only the prospective severity classification, but also the nature, duration and likelihood of the potential harms, the numbers and proportion of animals likely to be affected, the expected benefits, and the measures in place to minimise suffering.
The expected severity classifications indicate the maximum level of harm that an animal could reasonably be expected to experience under the authorised procedures; it does not mean that every mouse or rat in the procedures will experience suffering at that level. The application also sets out refinements, monitoring arrangements and humane end-points intended to prevent or minimise such harms.
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West and Islwyn)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps her Department is taking to ensure that public health advice on air pollution is (a) accessible and (b) clinically relevant for (i) people with cystic fibrosis and (ii) other vulnerable groups.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
I refer the Hon Member to the Government’s information on air pollution, available at the links below, which examine these and other issues in detail. For further information on the impacts of poor air quality on health, see the following three links:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/heat-summary-chapter-4-outdoor-air-pollution-and-health
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/respiratory-conditions-caused-by-airborne-allergens
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chief-medical-officers-annual-report-2022-air-pollution
And for further information on the public health advice on air pollution, see the following two links:
https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/research/aq-system-review/publications
The UK Health Security Agency’s (UKHSA) Cleaner Air Programme supports research and evidence gathering on the health impacts of air pollution and works alongside the independent Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants, which advises the Government on these issues. Further information can be found at the following two links:
The UKHSA submitted written evidence to the Environmental Audit Committee, reference AIR005, on an inquiry about outdoor and indoor air quality targets, with further information available at the following link:
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/121559/pdf/
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West and Islwyn)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of poor air quality on clinical outcomes for people with (a) cystic fibrosis and (b) other chronic respiratory conditions.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
I refer the Hon Member to the Government’s information on air pollution, available at the links below, which examine these and other issues in detail. For further information on the impacts of poor air quality on health, see the following three links:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/heat-summary-chapter-4-outdoor-air-pollution-and-health
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/respiratory-conditions-caused-by-airborne-allergens
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chief-medical-officers-annual-report-2022-air-pollution
And for further information on the public health advice on air pollution, see the following two links:
https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/research/aq-system-review/publications
The UK Health Security Agency’s (UKHSA) Cleaner Air Programme supports research and evidence gathering on the health impacts of air pollution and works alongside the independent Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants, which advises the Government on these issues. Further information can be found at the following two links:
The UKHSA submitted written evidence to the Environmental Audit Committee, reference AIR005, on an inquiry about outdoor and indoor air quality targets, with further information available at the following link:
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/121559/pdf/
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West and Islwyn)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps her Department is taking to support research into interventions to protect people with (a) cystic fibrosis and (b) other respiratory conditions from the effects of poor air quality.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
I refer the Hon Member to the Government’s information on air pollution, available at the links below, which examine these and other issues in detail. For further information on the impacts of poor air quality on health, see the following three links:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/heat-summary-chapter-4-outdoor-air-pollution-and-health
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/respiratory-conditions-caused-by-airborne-allergens
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chief-medical-officers-annual-report-2022-air-pollution
And for further information on the public health advice on air pollution, see the following two links:
https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/research/aq-system-review/publications
The UK Health Security Agency’s (UKHSA) Cleaner Air Programme supports research and evidence gathering on the health impacts of air pollution and works alongside the independent Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants, which advises the Government on these issues. Further information can be found at the following two links:
The UKHSA submitted written evidence to the Environmental Audit Committee, reference AIR005, on an inquiry about outdoor and indoor air quality targets, with further information available at the following link:
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/121559/pdf/
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West and Islwyn)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment has she made of the adequacy of parliamentary oversight of the operation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986; and whether she has considered the potential merits of holding parliamentary inquiry into the operation of the Act.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government considers that there are established and proportionate arrangements for oversight of the operation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. The Animals in Science Committee provides independent, statutory advice to Ministers on matters relating to the Act, including the protection of animals and the sharing of good practice. Parliamentary oversight is exercised through Parliamentary Questions, debates, ministerial correspondence and scrutiny by relevant parliamentary committees, supported by the publication of annual statistics and reports from the Animals in Science Regulation Unit.
These arrangements have been strengthened through the establishment of the Animals in Science Regulation Governance Board. Operational later this year, the Board will provide external scrutiny, advice and challenge to the Home Office on the Regulator’s performance, strategy and risk. Its role is distinct from that of the Animals in Science Committee: the Committee provides independent advice on policy and the operation of the Act, while the Governance Board supports effective regulatory delivery.