Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what process the Regulator follows when determining that no scientifically satisfactory non-animal alternative exists for a proposed project involving dogs; and whether independent scientific advice forms part of that determination.

The Home Office regulates the use of animals in science under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA). Under ASPA, applicants must demonstrate that they have fully applied the principles of Replacement, Reduction and Refinement (the 3Rs), including showing that no scientifically satisfactory non‑animal alternative exists for the proposed work. Before submission to the Regulator for consideration, all project licence applications must be signed off by the Establishment’s Animal Welfare and Ethical Review Body, that will make an assessment of the application of the 3Rs, and also the Establishment Licence Holder, whom has a legal obligation to the application of the 3Rs.

In assessing project licence applications, Home Office Inspectors rigorously examine whether the applicant has carried out an appropriate and comprehensive search for non‑animal alternatives and has provided evidence that any available alternatives have been considered. Inspectors are specifically trained to evaluate 3Rs implementation and the scientific justification provided in applications, supported by specialist training delivered by the National Centre for Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs).

Where necessary, Inspectors may seek additional assurance, including referring proposals for independent expert advice, or to the independent non-departmental expert advisory body - the Animals in Science Committee. This ensures that decisions are robust, evidence‑based and consistent with the requirements of ASPA.